The arrogance of small thinking.

[Amanda Claire]

Sin" is a made up idea by religions so that their followers need a reason to keep coming back.

Sin, in a very simple, elementary definition, is just the wrong things that we do. If you're telling me you don't do anything wrong (sin), then you're probably lying (and therefore sinning). So if doing wrong exists, then sin does exist, whether you use the word "sin" or not.

*my bold*
You do not need to try and educate me.  I grew up being as brainwashed as you are now.

I have the capability to have morals and values, just so you know.I don't steal things because it's rude not because an imaginary god says not to.
I don't lie often because I want to be seen as trustworthy and honest, not because an imagainary, man-made god says not to.
I don't cheat on my boyfriend because I love and respect him, not because an imagainary god says not to.
I don't kill people because it's a dick thing to do, not because an imagainary god says not to.

I have the ability to live a good life and be a good person just because I want to.

[Ambassador Pony]

So, stealing being wrong is relative. Gotcha.

Well obviously if Spartans didn't think it was wrong then it is... Sarcastic statements with no thought won't help you here 

Sarcasm is just a bonus for you. You're welcome.

The subject of my focus was your statement about theft. A simple retraction is what's called for. Some find it beneath them. Ho hum. 

[Ambassador Pony]

We have the ability to distinguish between right and wrong, even if we choose to suppress those feelings.

Plausable loophole.

A: *Evidence cited of a proposed moral "law" being more tied to culture, than magic.

B: Oh they were just supressing, they knew it was wrong in their hearts.

A: ???

[Ambassador Pony]

I hate the triple-tap post, but I claim divine moderator discretion this one time.

My Oxford study bible tells me something entirely different about how ancient hebrews perceived "sin". In the OT it's more like "coodies". Not surprisingly, mostly you get it from something girl-related. Icky!

[JT812]

don't think you understood what I was saying. I pointed out examples where "right and wrong" don't really make sense. If stealing is always wrong, then stealing to feed a starving child is always wrong and worthy of a 10 year jail sentence

I never claimed stealing is always wrong. I was saying we all have a moral law that tells us when things are wrong.

I don't kill people because it's a dick thing to do, not because an imagainary god says not to.

This just confirms the idea of a moral law. You don't do it because of religion or God, you do it because there is something inside you that allows you to know what the right or wrong thing to do is. You don't need a book to tell you that. That's already part of the moral law you have. And if we all have a moral law it must have been put there by something or someone, namely, God.

A: *Evidence cited of a proposed moral "law" being more tied to culture, than magic.

B: Oh they were just supressing, they knew it was wrong in their hearts.

My point is most culture groups across the world, even if they have never met, have the same basic morals. Of course they will change a little bit, but overall there is a sense of right and wrong in our world.

[ParkingPlaces]

Just a couple of notes. God made Adam and Eve adults because he couldn't find a sitter...

And JT812, I known you mean well when you call all of us a bunch of no good wretches with evil in our hearts, but our alternative view allows for imperfection without instantly condemning every single person on the planet. We're much sweeter. Your god is helpless against sweet. Because he hasn't the slightest idea in the world what that is.

[JT812]

God made Adam and Eve adults because he couldn't find a sitter...

Haha 

And JT812, I known you mean well when you call all of us a bunch of no good wretches with evil in our hearts, but our alternative view allows for imperfection without instantly condemning every single person on the planet. We're much sweeter. Your god is helpless against sweet. Because he hasn't the slightest idea in the world what that is.

I'm definitely not condemning you, I have no room to! I would be a giant hypocrite if I tried to condemn you for anything that you ever do! I make mistakes just like anybody else. And Jesus doesn't condemn you either. Sin does. John 3:17-18 says, "God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already". Our sin separates us from God because he is holy and perfect. But he wanted us to have a way for us to reconnect with him so he sent Jesus. Not to condemn us, but to save us. That's pretty sweet if you ask me.

[MadBunny]

Sin" is a made up idea by religions so that their followers need a reason to keep coming back.

Sin, in a very simple, elementary definition, is just the wrong things that we do. If you're telling me you don't do anything wrong (sin), then you're probably lying (and therefore sinning). So if doing wrong exists, then sin does exist, whether you use the word "sin" or not.

Eh?  No.  Sin should really only be used in a religious context[1], it is primarily an offence against god (or gods).  I am, for example completely sinless.  No gods, no sin.  That isn't to say that morals and crime are don't exist, they obviously do within a social context, they are however relative to various cultures and societies.

1.	http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sin

[Amanda Claire]

Well, MadBunny, I was going to reply, but you did it better.

[ParkingPlaces]

And JT812, I known you mean well when you call all of us a bunch of no good wretches with evil in our hearts, but our alternative view allows for imperfection without instantly condemning every single person on the planet. We're much sweeter. Your god is helpless against sweet. Because he hasn't the slightest idea in the world what that is.

I'm definitely not condemning you, I have no room to! I would be a giant hypocrite if I tried to condemn you for anything that you ever do! I make mistakes just like anybody else. And Jesus doesn't condemn you either. Sin does. John 3:17-18 says, "God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already". Our sin separates us from God because he is holy and perfect. But he wanted us to have a way for us to reconnect with him so he sent Jesus. Not to condemn us, but to save us. That's pretty sweet if you ask me.

You generically label us all sinners, and since we ain't one of you we're off to see the devil, the wonderful devil of hell (sung by Judy Garland). You guys have no ability to put things that are not right, or perhaps not right, or not right right now in any sort of perspective. A sin is a sin is a sin, whether it's stealing candy from a baby or stealing a baby from it's mom. None of us are perfect and whether it's a white lie to a dying child or all out perjury in a huge trial, the sin rule means it is all the same. Each person is supposed to ask for forgiveness. You have no ability to see that humans are human, and that our various imperfections stem not only from our flaws but from unrealistic expecatations folks like the christians have come up with. We used to live in trees and kill any critter from any other tribe on a moments notice. That most of us are nicer these days doesn't impress you one whit. Because all are sinners, made by a perfect god to have imperfect free will so that we could muck up and freely choose the option of roasting forever. At least that is the christian dream.

Nobody is roasting, nor is anyone going to heaven. In the meantime, well-meaning but insensitive folks such as yourself are condemning humanity en masse because that's what you've been taught. Your assumption that those teaching were correct causes you to get all huffy when anyone comes your way, because unless they know the secret handshake for jesus (I know it isn't secret, but it varies so much from version to version it might as well be) then you know they are doomed to be overdone beef forever.

That colors this world, gives you hope for the next and ruins the whole experience, because your icky assumptions have no basis in anything but christian imagination. For a guy who can drown the whole world one day, a bunch of egyptian soldiers another, instruct that entire towns be wiped out, men, women and children by his people, etc. to call me a sinner is a bunch of bull.

You can be as excited as you want about being righteous, just know that you're making it harder by using false criteria, and you're making folks miserable with your false and high-minded morality.

Is there right and wrong? Yep. The Chinese were able to define it for centuries without any knowledge whatsoever of jesus. The American Indians knew what was right and wrong for even more centuries without hearing of this jesus fella. Did everyone in those civilizations act perfectly without that knowledge? Nope. Did christians with that knowledge? Nope. It's a wash. Give it up. Go with the flow, not with the suck.

Edit: a bit of a spelllllllling problem. Fixed it.

[Tykster]

This just confirms the idea of a moral law. You don't do it because of religion or God, you do it because there is something inside you that allows you to know what the right or wrong thing to do is. You don't need a book to tell you that. That's already part of the moral law you have. And if we all have a moral law it must have been put there by something or someone, namely, God.

My emphasis.

You contradict yourself in the same paragraph. It's either God or it isn't.

Regardless.

The population as a whole, since the beginning of humankind, has had a vested interest in promoting good will toward each other. If this was out of balance by only a smidgen i.e. bad interactions were more dominant, up to and including killing, the species would soon be extinct.

Generally speaking it can be said that forthright morals have increased over time, for instance slave ownership today ain't what it used to be, ya know! Times change and the population collectively decides what are to be considered good morals and bad ones. So, if you claim that God is responsible for our moral well being and the laws that we follow, how come he's only improving slowly? Surely he would've instilled the ultimate moral code from the get go, or is it another test for his minions... ?

As we are both here involved in a discussion I can conclude that overall, it benefits the human race to be nice to one another. This is a simple evolutionary fact. No gods involved. That you immediately assume some divine intervention is a testament to your place of birth/your parent(s) religion and/or your gullibility. You are basically promoting an argument from incredulity or ignorance....


edit: noticed the contradiction and had to comment.

[JT812]

You can be as excited as you want about being righteous, just know that you're making it harder by using false criteria, and you're making folks miserable with your false and high-minded morality.

I've never seen a follower of Jesus miserable. And I'm not saying I've never seen someone go to church who is miserable, I've seen plenty of them miserable.

Eh?  No.  Sin should really only be used in a religious context[1], it is primarily an offence against god (or gods).  I am, for example completely sinless.  No gods, no sin. 

The word "sin" is irrelevant. The point of saying all people are sinful is to say that all people have messed up. We've all done wrong.

Is there right and wrong? Yep. The Chinese were able to define it for centuries without any knowledge whatsoever of jesus. The American Indians knew what was right and wrong for even more centuries without hearing of this jesus fella.

Thank you, whether you realized it or not you agreed with me. I'm stating that we all have a moral law.

ou contradict yourself in the same paragraph. It's either God or it isn't.

There is no contradiction. If God gave us a moral law that doesn't mean he has to be the reason we don't do things that are wrong. He gave it to us so we could realize that we do make mistakes.

So, if you claim that God is responsible for our moral well being and the laws that we follow, how come he's only improving slowly?

I would argue that we're as bad off as we've ever been. Maybe on the surface we look nicer, but people are just as selfish and self motivated as ever. Good things with bad intentions are still bad things. But God has nothing to do with that. He's not changing over time. He's already perfect.

[Larissa238]

I've never seen a follower of Jesus miserable. And I'm not saying I've never seen someone go to church who is miserable, I've seen plenty of them miserable.

FAIL. You just read my story in another thread where I was a True Believer, a disciple of Jesus Christ. I was also miserable and suicidal. You are saying that there are no followers of Jesus who have mental illnesses- depression, bipolar, schizophrenia, even anxiety and PTSD. Does your One True Church exclude the mentally ill, or are the mentally ill incapable of following Jesus?

[Amanda Claire]

I've never seen a follower of Jesus miserable. And I'm not saying I've never seen someone go to church who is miserable, I've seen plenty of them miserable.

Ever read the story of Job?  Pretty sure he wasn't happy.  He didn't curse god, but I don't think that he was happy about everything he owned destroyed and everything he cared about gone. 
Also, many people are miserable.  Depression, bipolar, schizophrenia, anxiety and PTSD don't care what religion you are. 

The word "sin" is irrelevant.

If the word sin is irrelevant, which you have pointed out, then stop using it. The word "sin" only applies in a religious context.

Is there right and wrong? Yep. The Chinese were able to define it for centuries without any knowledge whatsoever of jesus. The American Indians knew what was right and wrong for even more centuries without hearing of this jesus fella.

Thank you, whether you realized it or not you agreed with me. I'm stating that we all have a moral law.

*my bold*
We never said that we didn't have a moral law. We said that it did not come from your jesus fellow.

There is no contradiction. If God gave us a moral law that doesn't mean he has to be the reason we don't do things that are wrong. He gave it to us so we could realize that we do make mistakes.

*my bold*
And, again with the contradictions. Above, you just agreed that the Chinese and the Native Americans knew what was right and wrong before they ever heard of jesus.  Now you're saying that god gave us moral law so that we can realize our mistakes.  Obviously, there is no need for god to do this because we knew about morals before we knew about god.

[MadBunny]

I've never seen a follower of Jesus miserable. And I'm not saying I've never seen someone go to church who is miserable, I've seen plenty of them miserable.

FAIL. You just read my story in another thread where I was a True Believer, a disciple of Jesus Christ. I was also miserable and suicidal. You are saying that there are no followers of Jesus who have mental illnesses- depression, bipolar, schizophrenia, even anxiety and PTSD. Does your One True Church exclude the mentally ill, or are the mentally ill incapable of following Jesus?

To be fair I've never seen a True Follower of Sauron ^TM miserable either.
Considering that the criteria for 'true christian' is apparently so narrow and contradictory that not even their own Jesus can fit into it I'd say that they haven't seen any either.

[TopolX]

I've never seen a follower of Jesus miserable. And I'm not saying I've never seen someone go to church who is miserable, I've seen plenty of them miserable.

What about funerals? Followers seem pretty damn miserable then especially considering that their loved one is supposedly in a better place.

The word "sin" is irrelevant. The point of saying all people are sinful is to say that all people have messed up. We've all done wrong. 

Depends who's angle we're looking from. From my perspective I haven't as I was acting in my interests at all times which is therefore right in my opinion. You see right and wrong are all subjective.

Thank you, whether you realized it or not you agreed with me. I'm stating that we all have a moral law.

Yes but you're claiming it comes from following the bible whilst it clearly doesn't. It comes from species preservation instincts in the same way a lot of "bad" occurs from personal preservation instincts (ie raising your genes above all others)

There is no contradiction. If God gave us a moral law that doesn't mean he has to be the reason we don't do things that are wrong. He gave it to us so we could realize that we do make mistakes.

My dog realises it makes mistakes, it's called instinct and doesn't need woo factor to be real.

I would argue that we're as bad off as we've ever been. Maybe on the surface we look nicer, but people are just as selfish and self motivated as ever. Good things with bad intentions are still bad things. But God has nothing to do with that. He's not changing over time. He's already perfect.

In fact we're probably worse in your terms but to be honest the end justifies the means and reasons, if more live or live well even as a result of a completely heartless, self serving action it's the right one. We ended major warfare by becoming capable of destroying all life, we improved living standards by becoming materialistic (more so than ever anyway), we progressed in medicine by testing on animals and we have developed marvelous inventions with the original intent of using them to kill people or help us do so (ie the internet, jet aircraft, space exploration). None the less these have all had beneficial outcomes and are therefore right actions.

[JT812]

Sorry for the confusion everyone, I should have chosen my words more carefully. Christians are definitely miserable at times, but what I meant to say is I've never seen anybody become miserable because they were following Jesus.
"We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; 9persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; 10 always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be manifested in our bodies." -2 Corinthians 4:8-10 Paul recognizes that things will get hard because they will but in 2 Corinthians 7:4 he says, "In all our affliction, I am overflowing with joy." As Christians we find joy in following Jesus, not misery.

We never said that we didn't have a moral law. We said that it did not come from your jesus fellow.

Ok then where did the moral law come from? Do you honestly believe that this is inside people as a result of evolution?

And, again with the contradictions. Above, you just agreed that the Chinese and the Native Americans knew what was right and wrong before they ever heard of jesus.

I don't understand why everyone thinks this is a contradiction. If I show you a painting done by Leonardo Da'Vinci but you've never heard of him does that mean it wasn't painted by him? No. That just means you don't know the one responsible for it.

[jetson]

Ok then where did the moral law come from?

What is a moral law?  We have morals, but they are certainly not laws.  They are just morals, and they are subjective across cultures, societies, religions, etc.

[JT812]

What is a moral law?  We have morals, but they are certainly not laws.  They are just morals, and they are subjective across cultures, societies, religions, etc.

If they were completely subjective across cultures, societies, and religions then they would just be morals. My argument is that there are morals that extend across all of humanity as a whole. A sense of right and wrong that everyone has. This is the moral law

[Amanda Claire]

If they were completely subjective across cultures, societies, and religions then they would just be morals. My argument is that there are morals that extend across all of humanity as a whole. A sense of right and wrong that everyone has. This is the moral law

Sorry, I misunderstood you.  I don't believe we have "moral law" either.  I'm pretty sure that morals in Iraq are different than the ones I've seen in Canada. 

[MadBunny]

What is a moral law?  We have morals, but they are certainly not laws.  They are just morals, and they are subjective across cultures, societies, religions, etc.

If they were completely subjective across cultures, societies, and religions then they would just be morals. My argument is that there are morals that extend across all of humanity as a whole. A sense of right and wrong that everyone has. This is the moral law

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,17196.msg381425.html#msg381425

Aaaand full circle.

[jetson]

What is a moral law?  We have morals, but they are certainly not laws.  They are just morals, and they are subjective across cultures, societies, religions, etc.

If they were completely subjective across cultures, societies, and religions then they would just be morals. My argument is that there are morals that extend across all of humanity as a whole. A sense of right and wrong that everyone has. This is the moral law

That's what you think is possible, but can you show that to be true?  A "sense of right and wrong" might not actually cross all humans in all societies and cultures.  I think people in Western cultures are a bit de-sensitized to what the world is really like.  Although, I tend to want to believe that most humans want to stay alive, have children, and be happy.  but I could be wrong.

[jetson]

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,17196.msg381425.html#msg381425

Aaaand full circle.

Damn, that's what I get for not paying attention!

[TopolX]

If they were completely subjective across cultures, societies, and religions then they would just be morals. My argument is that there are morals that extend across all of humanity as a whole. A sense of right and wrong that everyone has. This is the moral law

I think you'll find no single issue (even major ones like murder, rape, child molestation etc) that every civilization has actually agreed (not to mention individuals). Lets take the Vikings who would murder and rape essentially for fun (and it was the backbone of their economy) or some Islamic countries where the man can rape their wife without any problems and if she fights back she's in the wrong. Also there's fluctuations in the percieved age of consent, some as low as 10-12 and some as high as 18 (there might be higher and lower but I'm not sure) and as such someone who's a child molester in one country is acting perfectly legally in another. If humans can't agree one these basic issues then I doubt that any lesser moral decisions are universal.

[ParkingPlaces]

And, again with the contradictions. Above, you just agreed that the Chinese and the Native Americans knew what was right and wrong before they ever heard of jesus.

I don't understand why everyone thinks this is a contradiction. If I show you a painting done by Leonardo Da'Vinci but you've never heard of him does that mean it wasn't painted by him? No. That just means you don't know the one responsible for it.

I've no idea what this means. Are you implying that the chinese and indians were moral people because they had gotten the word from god via some method not detailed by the bible? Or did they just guess pretty good?

[Amanda Claire]

And, again with the contradictions. Above, you just agreed that the Chinese and the Native Americans knew what was right and wrong before they ever heard of jesus.

I don't understand why everyone thinks this is a contradiction. If I show you a painting done by Leonardo Da'Vinci but you've never heard of him does that mean it wasn't painted by him? No. That just means you don't know the one responsible for it.

Did you even read my full sentence?
Allow me to repost it for you:

And, again with the contradictions. Above, you just agreed that the Chinese and the Native Americans knew what was right and wrong before they ever heard of jesus.  Now you're saying that god gave us moral law so that we can realize our mistakes.  Obviously, there is no need for god to do this because we knew about morals before we knew about god.

There, I have bolded, underlined, and italicized the part I think you missed.

[JeffPT]

If they were completely subjective across cultures, societies, and religions then they would just be morals.

Now you've got it.  Leave it at that. 

My argument is that there are morals that extend across all of humanity as a whole. A sense of right and wrong that everyone has. This is the moral law

That's a nice thought.  Now prove it.  I don't think you can. 

Name a few things that every single person in the world would agree with morally in every situation.  Hell, forget that, name just one.  And when you realize how hard that is, realize that we can name a million moral concepts that are different in different regions of the world.   So is there more support for your view (a moral law passed down from on high) or ours (the people who think morality is subjective)? 

People are people JT.  Everyone is different.  We are all individuals and everyone has a sense of right and wrong.  The thing is though, right and wrong is based on what the individual thinks.  It's in the eye of the person judging it.  And to back up the idea that it's cultural, just look at how similar morality is among individuals within a specific culture, but how different that might be from an individual in a completely different culture.   Evolution and experiences frame an individuals morality.  There have been a million threads about this on this site.  Go look for them if you really want to learn.  If you want to stay closed minded about the possibilities regarding morality, then don't bother.   

[Tykster]

ou contradict yourself in the same paragraph. It's either God or it isn't.

There is no contradiction. If God gave us a moral law that doesn't mean he has to be the reason we don't do things that are wrong. He gave it to us so we could realize that we do make mistakes.

This just confirms the idea of a moral law. You don't do it because of religion or God, you do it because there is something inside you that allows you to know what the right or wrong thing to do is. You don't need a book to tell you that. That's already part of the moral law you have. And if we all have a moral law it must have been put there by something or someone, namely, God.

You have demonstrated to me that you're simply dishonest. Anyone who has the mental faculties to know how to type on a computer and yet cannot see the blatant contradiction ( bolded), is displaying purposeful ignorance. You are not being presented with a complex puzzle to solve here, where there might be technical disagreements and gray areas, your words are in direct conflict with each other and you claim they aren't. Simply spouting the words, "There is no contradiction.", doesn't make it true, and repeating it ad infinitum won't either.

Is your god that important to you that you're prepared to compromise your personal integrity? How would you explain this behavior to a friend or  family, and would it be acceptable to you if they lied in the same way to you? Just because you're anonymous on an internet forum, doesn't mean that your personal standards of civil behavior should take a back seat.

It's sad, theists come to this forum, ostensibly to engage in an open dialogue, and it's quite common for said theists to revert to the exact tactics that you have used.

1. Present a pleasant demeanor
2. Make baseless assertion.
3. Avoid defending baseless assertion.
4. Lie
5. Repeat 2 thru 4, until
6. Leave, and report how badly you've been treated on the atheist forum.

If, as you claim ( and strangely don't claim in the same paragraph! ) that God is responsible for doling out morals, perhaps you should squeeze your eyes a little tighter, pray a little louder and hope that he visits you soon.

Unless, in future posts, you demonstrate a greater level of honesty I will not entertain further discourse, because by your actions you make it impossible for reasoned discussion.

You and your ilk are exactly what the problem is with blind faithed religion, it makes liars out of you, and you praise each other as if it's a virtue.

edit: syntax

[Azdgari]

If they were completely subjective across cultures, societies, and religions then they would just be morals. My argument is that there are morals that extend across all of humanity as a whole. A sense of right and wrong that everyone has. This is the moral law

How do you determine whether a moral law is right or wrong?