what is sin?

[cacian]

I am looking for a good definition of sin without refering to the bible.
Since the bible was written before Jesus then sin must have existed before the birth of Jesus.
In principle man did sin without being aware and so when religion came about the faithful made a note of it and based their religious scripts around it. In other words take SIN out of the equation ie its malade milieu and religion is bare.
It is a bit like saying no dilemma no story.

[YesNo]

Sin would be a failure to do act appropriately. The word is usually used in a religious context, but outside of that context it is still a failure to keep social contracts or live up to others' and our own expectations of what good behavior is.

Religion is a relationship between a human and some God (theistic religions) or some non-personal ultimate (atheistic religions). Then sin would be like a failure to live up to a marriage contract with this God or ultimate. For those who claim such Gods or ultimates don't exist, there are still relationships with the people around them that they can mess up.

I don't see sin as something peculiar to Christianity. That is just one religious way of handling human failings. Sin, or failings, go back to the beginning of our species. The problem is how do you live a good life, and having failed, how do you get back on track. For some religions, the only way to get back on track is by one's own efforts. For theistic religions, there is often a God or avatar that can just put one back on track through a love relationship.

[cacian]

Sin would be a failure to do act appropriately. The word is usually used in a religious context, but outside of that context it is still a failure to keep social contracts or live up to others' and our own expectations of what good behavior is.


sure. but how do we measure one wrong from another? Imagine there was no bible to dictate what wrong is. How does one know that one thing is wrong and another is a sin and anothe is ok?


Religion is a relationship between a human and some God (theistic religions) or some non-personal ultimate (atheistic religions).
A relationship as far as I understand when it is reciprocated. Ie I have a relationship with somoene on the groud of shared reciprocated interest.
The question about this statement is this: how do I know is reciprocated my relationship to him/her?


Then sin would be like a failure to live up to a marriage contract with this God or ultimate.
God forbid haha YesNo I do not consider myself married to god and I am not even married to man:)
I mean I do find the idea that Jesus marrying the church rather daunting. One is married to a person according to the definition of presen day marriage.


For those who claim such Gods or ultimates don't exist, there are still relationships with the people around them that they can mess up.
I think it is understandable that people would have doubts that god does not exist. I consider it healthy . I personally do not believe gods expect us to believe in them if you or I or others do not see them. I would say it is a fair response from those who has no belief because they could not see. Good luck to them.

I don't see sin as something peculiar to Christianity.
I find the word SIN heavy handed. What always confused me about it is the idea of confessions. The priest sits and listen to a faithful telling them in secrecy what they had done wrong rather creepy. In a church where choirs and words of god are deemed to be of the highest divination and then enters words of sin within that same enclosure is rather disturbing.
Isn't the church supposed to be a place of prayers and spirituality free from sound of sin?
The idea of confessions seem to play on the idea of words gods prayers priesthoods being mingled with sins stories of badness thrown for good measure. I wonder so much badness comes out of that same church. It is ironic. They do say what comes around turns around.


That is just one religious way of handling human failings.
It depends how you define failings. I think for me to fail is to give up entirely.


Sin, or failings, go back to the beginning of our species.
Humans are not perfect and the reasons why they make mistakes is to learn from them. That is the only reason why we wrong the way we do. One learns from one's error. There is a reason to everything.

The problem is how do you live a good life, and having failed, how do you get back on track. For some religions, the only way to get back on track is by one's own efforts.
Keep calm and carry on haha. I think one gets back on track because has no other choice and because he or she driven to do better the next time round. Competition with oneself is well worthy. I do it all the time. I do not blame myself i take myself by hand and get up and go again with the aim to score a 10/10 because that is what i give myselg the second round.



For theistic religions, there is often a God or avatar that can just put one back on track through a love relationship.
I guess my theory in life is believe in yourself and god will believe in you if god is be. The rest is up to me and others that cross me. :)

[YesNo]

I generally agree with what you said, cacian, but here are a few comments.


sure. but how do we measure one wrong from another? Imagine there was no bible to dictate what wrong is. How does one know that one thing is wrong and another is a sin and anothe is ok?

People just feel uncomfortable about themselves morally. There is no need for a sacred text to generate that feeling. I suppose some people use priests or other religious experts to help them decide if what they are doing is right or not. I don't so I just go by these feelings.



God forbid haha YesNo I do not consider myself married to god and I am not even married to man:)
I mean I do find the idea that Jesus marrying the church rather daunting. One is married to a person according to the definition of presen day marriage.

I thought Christians used the idea of Jesus being married to the Christian community in some way to illustrate the relationship with Jesus as an incarnation of God.



I find the word SIN heavy handed. What always confused me about it is the idea of confessions. The priest sits and listen to a faithful telling them in secrecy what they had done wrong rather creepy. In a church where choirs and words of god are deemed to be of the highest divination and then enters words of sin within that same enclosure is rather disturbing.
Isn't the church supposed to be a place of prayers and spirituality free from sound of sin?

A Catholic confession sounds like a ritual to insure the person making the confession that they are forgiven. The sin comes in because one feels inadequate and wants to feel better. I'm not a member of this religion, so I'm just guessing.



It depends how you define failings. I think for me to fail is to give up entirely.

Failure and suffering do seem to make one give up. If there is a God behind all this, that may be what they are for. Rather than intellectual "belief", a kind of emotional "surrender" to a God who "loves" them seems to be what theistic religious people value.

[cacian]

I think failure need not be linked to suffering. Failure can mean not knowing something or getting something confused not clear with another. That is when stereotypes come in. They are to disperse the mind from thinking logically.Cliches are there to make one feel inadequate guilty and wrong about themselves. One must learn to separate what is them and what others are saying to them. One is not the same as another and therefore one must rely on others views to compare themselves with. One must look for the answers themselves. I do.
Failure does not rely on guilt to be. It simply means that one has done it a different way and the reason for this is to go back and do it again.
This may mean to find others ways instead that might be suitable for the type of person/feelings.
Suffering however is linked is physical and mental pain and is not necessarily linked to failure. Suffering is because people do not understand how to be and therefore engage in taking it out on anything. Once the 'notknowhowtobe' is removed then there is room for improvement. There is never an end to hope.

[cafolini]

Make the priest inside de confessional shake with it. LOL Invent something you know not even infinite pater nosters and ave mary's could redeem you. Then ask for reduction in price to a finite amount of the silly thing. Make the beads of the rosary hit the frame of the confessional. Be bad, chew the waffer, ask for wine. If they just give you Ripple to get you out of the way, make the loudest scandal you are capable of. You need Navarro Correa at least, don't forget. Take a hammer with you to break the fence to the alter if necessary. ROFLMAO!

[YesNo]

Suffering would be broader than sin, but contains it. I would look at sin in the sense of having made a mistake and feeling responsible for it. How does one get past all the karma associated with it?

I think you believe that the core of religion is sin and if sin were eliminated then there would be no need for religion. I would look at religion as a core part of our species, we could even call ourselves "homo spiritualis". Sin is not as basic. It's just another way we suffer. When I refer to religion I refer to something broader than any specific religion we might practice today.

[cafolini]

Don't kill anyone that's not already dead. Beat the dead horse with all your might. ROFLMAO

[cacian]

Suffering would be broader than sin, but contains it. I would look at sin in the sense of having made a mistake and feeling responsible for it. How does one get past all the karma associated with it?

well the whole idea of sinning is that one gets a kick out of it whether be it painful or joyful. Regret does not enter the equation. The whole idea of temptation is sinning. Lure lust temptation is all linked to wanting to feel pain because that would be the purpose served behind sin. Take the bite out of it the guilt trip the synonym of sin naughtiness and you have taken the soul of it. Humans are like this tempt them by telling them not and they will. That is the nature of sin. One sins for eternity as long as he or she gets the kick. Saddism saddomasochism is another form for sin . I guess I call it the other extreme of sin. To ask for forgiveness by asking for sin to sin even more is sinning. Very pyschologically troubling and makes no sense but as long as it is related to religion and god/jesus it is worth the pain. Remember the symbol of Jesus dying on the cross for people on this earth. That is the symbol of sin. Saddism and saddomasochis is its form. Jesus pained and so they will. Tragic.


I think you believe that the core of religion is sin and if sin were eliminated then there would be no need for religion.
religion is a ritual and the sin its compass. Remove the compass and religion is lost.


I would look at religion as a core part of our species, we could even call ourselves "homo spiritualis".
I do not believe in spirits and neither do I believe in a religion that is all common to all and to a small group. I do not believe in people gatherings in a name of any god or being to symbolise faith. I believe faith is singular not shared. Faith is not a symbol a ritual or a belief. It is simply down to what a person feels like towards something else that is not on earth. It is very particular to that individual. Faith is like dna. Particular not popular. That is how I see faith. It is also not necessary to have one. One can live and be content without having to address faith as some kind of guidance. It is a choice a something not a preference or a way of life.

Sin is not as basic. It's just another way we suffer. When I refer to religion I refer to something broader than any specific religion we might practice today.
Sin has no place amongst humans because it means detriment. We are not to suffer forever. Sufferance has its limits and one day it shall pack up and go.

[cacian]

Don't kill anyone that's not already dead. Beat the dead horse with all your might. ROFLMAO
it all comes down to killing and beating then is it?. Sin does not get better then that.

[YesNo]

Sin has no place amongst humans because it means detriment. We are not to suffer forever. Sufferance has its limits and one day it shall pack up and go.

I don't believe in eternal hell-fire either.

[Hawg Horse]

Sin seems subjective to one's perspective. One Lady's guilty pleasure (sin) ... is another's God-sent reward (blessing). In the end, who writes the moral story, spins the thematics of the tale.

I think the definition of sin should be simply acting against your own conscience, which usually means your actions, on balance, will unfairly harm someone, or even some thing, to a greater degree than it will aid yourself, or others.

Perhaps any act ... that violates the “Golden Rule?”

New respect for those who write dictionaries :)

[chrisiacovetti]

I'm not sure if this is the sort of answer you're looking for, but here's how I understand it:

This world has some natural, perfect order - the Jewish idea of "Shalom." Everything has a proper place to fit in. Humans care for animals, plants take care of humans, etc.

Whatever disrupts shalom is "sin." Anything that breaks things out of their perfect place in the universe.

[cacian]

I'm not sure if this is the sort of answer you're looking for, but here's how I understand it:

This world has some natural, perfect order - the Jewish idea of "Shalom." Everything has a proper place to fit in. Humans care for animals, plants take care of humans, etc.

Whatever disrupts shalom is "sin." Anything that breaks things out of their perfect place in the universe.

An interesting idea. I did use the word 'Shalom' in one of my poem.
Everything has its place apart from humans who do tend to sway from position to sedition and then to deletion.

[cafolini]

Suffering would be broader than sin, but contains it. I would look at sin in the sense of having made a mistake and feeling responsible for it. How does one get past all the karma associated with it?

I think you believe that the core of religion is sin and if sin were eliminated then there would be no need for religion. I would look at religion as a core part of our species, we could even call ourselves "homo spiritualis". Sin is not as basic. It's just another way we suffer. When I refer to religion I refer to something broader than any specific religion we might practice today.

The only way to break away from karma is to enter Nirvana, to be a Buddha. No need to live and no need to die. No need to reincarnate to learn more lessons. Enough was enough.

[cacian]

The only way to break away from karma is to enter Nirvana, to be a Buddha. No need to live and no need to die. No need to reincarnate to learn more lessons. Enough was enough.

and what if you do not care for budha? what then?

[cafolini]

Buddha's a nihilist of BS. Not so the Buddh-ist.
Then, well...then fart all day long your circular karma. ROFLMAO

[cacian]

Buddha's a nihilist of BS. Not so the Buddh-ist.
Then, well...then fart all day long your circular karma. ROFLMAO

circular oh well that is not too bad for it keeps coming around around which for me to do I guess.

[YALASH]

Peace be on everyone.
I found this quotation useful. (This is copy-paste with proper credit.)

"..................

Prof. Raig: There are two things I wish to find out - one is, what is sin? A person in one country may consider some act to be a sin while the same act may not be considered sinful in another country. Man progressed from a small insect to a human being and then he learned to discern between truth and falsehood, he distinguishes truth from lies, good from bad, gained knowledge of sin and goodness and after all this there is the difference - what is sin for one person is not sin for another who indulges in it?


The other thing I wish to find out is about Satan. What is Satan? How is it that God being the master and having power over such knowledge, Satan got to have so much sway that God had to come to this world himself to reform the world. What is meant by this?


Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad: I usually speak having in mind people who believe in the existence of God. God's being is a source of eternal happiness and pleasure for man's life. Whoever separates from Him or leaves Him in one way or another, about such a state of a person it is said that he has sinned. Furthermore, keeping in view the nature of man, God has further defined as 'sin' those acts which through their finer implications, prove to be harmful for man himself, even though a person sometimes may not be able to appreciate such harmfulness. For example, theft and harming others by taking away their rights, harms the purity of ones own life. An adulterer's act of adultery and his taking what may belong to someone else, destroys his own piety and engulfs him in various physical and spiritual difficulties. Similarly, those acts which are against the nature of man's purity and piety are also referred to as 'sin', as are all the related acts, whether related closely or distantly - these are also considered as types of sin.


God Almighty is greater than all else, He has the most knowledge, He is the true creator of man and every particle which exists. It is he who is also the creator of their nature and He is wise. If, with his complete wisdom and complete knowledge, he suggests that something is harmful for you, that indulging in it would not benefit you at all, rather it is totally harmful then it is not the action of a wholesome person to go against this. We see that when a doctor advises a patient to abstain from something, the patient acts on that advice without any argument. Why does he act in this way? He does this because he considers the doctor as being in possession of much greater knowledge than himself. Similarly, there are some things which are harmful for man's body or spirit whether man himself understands that or not. There are some things which would he harmful even if God had not given a ruling about them. In medicine also there are some things which are considered 'sins' and lack of medical knowledge is no excuse for the person who goes against the medical principles. If someone does not believe this they can check with doctors and physicians .


The point to remember is simply this that the root of sin is those actions which lead man far away from purity and righteousness. The true love of God and union with Him is the true pleasure and real comfort. Thus moving away from God and being distant from Him is also sin and is the source of pain, sorrow and difficulty. Those things which God dislikes due to His own sanctity, that is sin. There are some matters on which people may not agree but, on the other hand, the greater part of the world is jointly agreed that lying, stealing, adultery and cruelty are such acts that all nations and religions jointly consider them to be sins. But remember that the root of sin is precisely those acts which distance man from God, which are against His sanctity, against His wishes and against man's nature - it is such acts which constitute sin.


Every person senses sin. If someone slaps an innocent person and knows that he had no right to do so, he will at some later time, when he looks at his action with a cool head, himself feel ashamed and will sense that he has done a bad deed. Conversely, if someone feeds a hungry person, gives a drink of water to a thirsty person, and clothes someone lacking clothes, such a person will have an inner sense of having been good, and having done a blessed deed. a person's heart and conscience and the light of belief remind him whether his various actions were a good act or a sinful act.



With regard to Satan, it should be remembered that in man's nature and composition there have been included two forces and they are both opposed to each other and it is so in order for a person to be tried and tested and, with a successful outcome, to become deserving of God 's nearness . Of the two forces, one pulls man towards goodness and the other invites man towards evil. The force that pulls towards goodness is called 'malk' or 'angel' and the force which invites towards evil is called 'Satan'. In other words, you can understand it like this, that there are two forces which work on a person, one calls towards good (dc'i khair) , and the other towards bad (dc'i shar) . Someone may not like the use of the terms 'angel ' and 'Satan', but he wouldn't be able to deny the existence of these two types of forces within man. God never intended any evil. God only does what is good.


You see, if sin did not exist in the world there would be no goodness. Goodness develops from sin. The concept of goodness is formed by the concept of sin. If someone has the opportunity to commit adultery and he possesses the ability to do so but then he abstains from this sin, this action is called goodness. If someone has the opportunity to steel, or to be cruel, and he is capable of doing these acts, but he does not do so and positively abstains from them, then he is doing a good deed. To have the opportunity and capability of sinning and then not indulging in sin, that is a good and blessed deed............"

http://www.alislam.org/library/pm694.html

[cacian]

Sin is a three letter word and so by this short notice its meaning is short lived or so I like to think.

[hypatia_]

I think there's 2 types:

Religious institutional sin: acts that are deemed immoral, usually based on scripture

Personal sin: acting against one's own values/morals.

Sometimes they are one in the same, depending on the person's religious fervor.

[cafolini]

I think there's 2 types:

Religious institutional sin: acts that are deemed immoral, usually based on scripture

Personal sin: acting against one's own values/morals.

Sometimes they are one in the same, depending on the person's religious fervor.

And then there is the actual sin against the nervous system; purely biological.

[hypatia_]

And then there is the actual sin against the nervous system; purely biological.

Do you mean self-mutilation, or can you provide some other examples?

[cafolini]

Do you mean self-mutilation, or can you provide some other examples?

Overeating, undereating, drug addiction, etc.

[hypatia_]

I wonder what is worse, personal sin (morals/values) or actual sin (biological).

[cafolini]

I wonder what is worse, personal sin (morals/values) or actual sin (biological).

They are both personal. Good luck.

[Grit]

Trying to define sin without referencing the bible is like looking for clouds without sky.

There is no sin without men of power declaring it so.

[hypatia_]

They are both personal. Good luck.

Great point, thanks.



Trying to define sin without referencing the bible is like looking for clouds without sky.

There is no sin without men of power declaring it so.

Do you believe that you can sin against your own values?

[Grit]

Do you believe that you can sin against your own values?

No, because my own values have nothing to do with divine law. I can break my own values, but I cannot sin against myself, because I'm not God and my values are no divine law.

[hypatia_]

So you would define sin as something strictly of divine properties. In your opinion, then, is an atheist incapable of sin?

[Grit]

So you would define sin as something strictly of divine properties. In your opinion, then, is an atheist incapable of sin?

Absolutely. When seen through the lens of dogma.

[cacian]

Trying to define sin without referencing the bible is like looking for clouds without sky.

There is no sin without men of power declaring it so.

do you mean to say no religion no sin?

[Grit]

Religion has a set of beliefs or tenants that it presents as good or righteous. Sin is the violation of those tenants, which are often to not do something. Don't have sex outside of marriage would be one of the tenants. That's a good rule, if you promise to be with one person you probably shouldn't sleep with all their friends. Still, I wouldn't call that sin because I'm unfamiliar with those rules. It is only sin when viewed through the eyes of those established rules for living a good, divine line.

I guess having no religion would mean the word sin would not exist, but it wouldn't take away the activities that are considered sins; gluttony, greed, e.t.c.

[cafolini]

Sin is the ruining of the nervous system. God forgives stupidity of any kind.

[hypatia_]

I guess having no religion would mean the word sin would not exist, but it wouldn't take away the activities that are considered sins; gluttony, greed, e.t.c.

Considered sins on what grounds, if not religion?

[cafolini]

If you want a second chance, and a third...and so on, take it. Don't die stupid.

[Shaman_Raman]

Considered sins on what grounds, if not religion?

I think that's Grits point. The activities wouldn't be called sins without religion, such a murder, theft, adultery, etc. But they would still happen, and in my opinion can logically be argued as wrong without the "sin" label.

That's not me saying all sins are by logic wrong. I see no logic that supports eating kosher food, not eating pork, not doing work on the Sabbath, etc.

[cafolini]

I think that's Grits point. The activities wouldn't be called sins without religion, such a murder, theft, adultery, etc. But they would still happen, and in my opinion can logically be argued as wrong without the "sin" label.

That's not me saying all sins are by logic wrong. I see no logic that supports eating kosher food, not eating pork, not doing work on the Sabbath, etc.

And I can imagine you, when that happens. changing your quote to


The activities wouldn't be called sins without religion, such a murder, theft, adultery, etc. But they would still happen, and in my opinion can logically be argued as wrong without the "wrong" label.

ROFLMAO

[hypatia_]

I think that's Grits point. The activities wouldn't be called sins without religion, such a murder, theft, adultery, etc. But they would still happen, and in my opinion can logically be argued as wrong without the "sin" label.

That's not me saying all sins are by logic wrong. I see no logic that supports eating kosher food, not eating pork, not doing work on the Sabbath, etc.

So logic rules the world of what is right and what is wrong. Is that perhaps based on individual perception?

The seven deadly sins are wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy, and gluttony. They are deeply rooted in Christianity.

Do you think a few of them could logically be argued as not a sin, in the context of a world without religion?

[Shaman_Raman]

And I can imagine you, when that happens. changing your quote to


The activities wouldn't be called sins without religion, such a murder, theft, adultery, etc. But they would still happen, and in my opinion can logically be argued as wrong without the "wrong" label.

ROFLMAO

I wish I lived in my own world where all my obscure statements and jokes were only found funny and conceivable to me...really, I bet it's f ucking nice.

[Shaman_Raman]

So logic rules the world of what is right and what is wrong. Is that perhaps based on individual perception?

The seven deadly sins are wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy, and gluttony. They are deeply rooted in Christianity.

Do you think a few of them could logically be argued as not a sin, in the context of a world without religion?



I'm not implying the answers of right and wrong come through peer logic. The fact that murder is wrong is more of an intuitive feeling than a justifiable fact. But being anti-murder doesn't mean one has to argue it from a religiously "sinful" action. The same with lust. Do you have to be a conservative christian to be against certain sexual deviance like pornography? Or laugh when Israel celebrates finally allowing Playboy?

No, logic alone can't fully argue for against something that is considered "sinful" by any religious belief. But I don't believe that means the only way of identifying what is wrong conduct is by learning a particular religion.