Saved to what end?

[Nimblewill]

Division is necessary. Its possible that we each hold our own knives however.

 

[Nooj]

I will not apologize, nor recognize, "sins" that harm no one. Were I a thief, a murderer, so on and so forth you might have a point. I would be hurting others. I'm not.

there are no sins that do not harm.

 

[Nimblewill]

there are innumerable ways we hurt others and ourselves. for me today, i sinned by turning away from the help-seeking eyes of a stranger person.

an aberration! one might say. but sin is not just a series of isolated actions that one may commit in one's life. sin is both the reason for the discontinuity in a person's life, and that discontinuity itself. like the weakness in a fabric and the tears in its weave that develop. to imagine that the weave of one's life is good, because it is missing some tears of the size and shape that other people have, is to miss the underlying fragility of all human fabric, and thus our underlying equality with the thief and the murderer. you may not have stolen or murdered today, but in another circumstance, growing up in another time or place, you might very well have. because it is within the human heart to be capable of such an act. and so to be relieved or proud or feel holy because you are not like 'them', those criminals, is a reaction to a false sense of distance that we impose. we are not far apart from the thief or the murderer at all where it counts, in our humanity.

That which is not of trust is sin.

 

[Nooj]

what is it that st paul said? whatever does not proceed from faith (trust) is sin? amen amen

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

i think that to acknowledge our own personal sins, the innumerable ways we hurt other people, is enough to take up all our time.

as it is, there is a life or death cut throat struggle within myself to live in the way of god, does god expect me to be my brother's keeper? should i burden myself with worry about the sins of my fathers and mothers, the sins of others, the sins of the past? who are they to me?

bur the past is never past, and always presents itself to us. and though it might feel safer to think that we are islands to ourselves, all creation is in a relationship of interdependance with itself and god. who we are depends on who went before. their deeds wove together the world. just like we will do for the next generation.

i need not know about the fall of the first man, when i know about the fall of all mankind in the timeless present. i need not know about an exile from eden, when i know for certain that i'm in exile from god in my life. even without any awareness of a historical or mythological exile from eden or a primordial fall, the reality of sin exists for me right now and right here.

today i am adam and eve and i'm falling from god. that is what the opening account of the book of genesis says to me.

If your struggle is personal (you don't project your concept of 'sinner' on any one else) and serves as a rudder to improving the here and now, then I think your concept is productive.

You start out by acknowledging the way we (you) hurt other people. You talk about being your brother's keeper. I can't find anything objectionable to spending your time and resources focusing on bettering the here and now.

 

[Nietzsche]

there are innumerable ways we hurt others and ourselves. for me today, i sinned by turning away from the help-seeking eyes of a stranger person.

an aberration! one might say. but sin is not just a series of isolated actions that one may commit in one's life. sin is both the reason for the discontinuity in a person's life, and that discontinuity itself. like the weakness in a fabric and the tears in its weave that develop. to imagine that the weave of one's life is good, because it is missing some tears of the size and shape that other people have, is to miss the underlying fragility of all human fabric, and thus our underlying equality with the thief and the murderer. you may not have stolen or murdered today, but in another circumstance, growing up in another time or place, you might very well have. because it is within the human heart to be capable of such an act. and so to be relieved or proud or feel holy because you are not like 'them', those criminals, is a reaction to a false sense of distance that we impose. we are not far apart from the thief or the murderer at all where it counts, in our humanity.

I was not referring to thieves & murderers as a "them", I was using them only as an example that I have done nothing wrong within reason to another person.

there are no sins that do not harm.

So you claim. My morality is not based on holding myself or others to an unobtainable goal, something that every individual ever born will fail to achieve. I do not believe in thought-crimes(Thou shalt not covet), I do not believe that two or more consenting adults can commit sexual 'crimes', I do not believe that holding different Gods in esteem is a crime, so on and so forth.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Claiming religion is dangerous has been used to justify destroying churches, imprisoning and killing priests and Christians and sending them to gulags in Soviet Russia. What's your point? Any old excuse can be used for anything, man will use anything to get his own selfish way.

And no, my simple statement does not imply that. We who are saved also realise we are deserving of Hell, there is nothing special about us that we did or contributed to, it is by God's grace alone, and we still sin. Your final question "How is non-belief the sin when the believer is holding the knife" is one based on the assumption that the believer is holding a knife in the first place, and I can find no good reason to think why true believers would be holding a knife to anyone.

My point is that you statement is illogical and inconsistent with human compassion, ethics, and morality. Your belief that 'sin = non-belief' is illogical and ignores all concepts of humanity, dignity, human rights and ethics, and is draconion. It can't stand in any fashion other than pure ignorant dogma.

It leads to no good, other than the justification of immoral and unethical behavior, the whole sale murder of completely innocent people who's only crime is non-beliefs in your god.

And this is 100% justifiable because you have defined sin = non-beleife. Follow your logic if you are able.

Sin = non-beliefe.

A human being, that does more good for his fellow man than any believer, refuses to believe. This person who sacrifices themselves is the sinner. While someone who gets on their knees, chants, waves their hands around, and does ablsoltly nothing to help anyone in this entire world; who spends all of their energy praying oh god please let your poor servant into heaven; this is the good guy?

What a joke! Now you don't like were your belief leads. You say I'm ignorant for pointing out that your belief is dangerous. Too bad. Don't blame me because you'd rather fold your hands than get them dirty.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Saved from this present evil age. I don't have to let it control who I am. I am not what you or society say I am. Think of it this way. Like a saved document. A document of truth. I can't be altered, edited or deleted. I am who God says I am. I don't have to struggle or fight to be anything. I am saved.

It sounds ok...but let me ask you..If you don't have to struggle or fight, then haven't you resigned to...not having to struggle or fight? Haven't you absolved yourself from the injustices of this world? Haven't you in fact ensured a net negative impact due to your absolution? I.e. if you accepted responsibility then presumable you would do at least as much to help here and now as if you absolved yourself? Isn't this basically punting the ball?

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

That would break quiiite a few commandments there. We cannot force people into belief, nothing we do can, only God can save them, not us. If people reject the Gospel we are preaching, then that is up to them, only God can save. We are called to love our neighbour... not skin them. Your accusation is a bit absurd.


We really will say anything to try and escape God and follow our own desires, it seems. In your caps rage accusation that the religious are ignorant, have you not just pointed out your own ignorance?

History would show that people can in fact be forced to believe. Two entire continents were converted by burning. You say you are not called to skin, in light of history, this seems absurd. You wish to hold up some idea of goodness and purity while ignoring the actuality.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Why does there need to be a knife to begin with??

Not sure. Why don't you have all the believers from them?

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

My point is that you statement is illogical and inconsistent with human compassion, ethics, and morality. Your belief that 'sin = non-belief' is illogical and ignores all concepts of humanity, dignity, human rights and ethics, and is draconion. It can't stand in any fashion other than pure ignorant dogma.

Thanks for my daily dose of the dogma of subjective modernism. And I didn't say sin = non-belief, rather that unbelief is the root of sin, whatever does not proceed from faith.

It leads to no good, other than the justification of immoral and unethical behavior, the whole sale murder of completely innocent people who's only crime is non-beliefs in your god.

You keep saying that, and I raised an example where your own claim, that religion was dangerous, was used for the wholesale murder of Christians by Soviet Russia. Does that make your claim wrong? No, it doesn't, because people will use any excuse for anything.

And this is 100% justifiable because you have defined sin = non-beleife. Follow your logic if you are able.

Sin = non-beliefe.

A human being, that does more good for his fellow man than any believer, refuses to believe. This person who sacrifices themselves is the sinner. While someone who gets on their knees, chants, waves their hands around, and does ablsoltly nothing to help anyone in this entire world; who spends all of their energy praying oh god please let your poor servant into heaven; this is the good guy?

What a joke! Now you don't like were your belief leads. You say I'm ignorant for pointing out that your belief is dangerous. Too bad. Don't blame me because you'd rather fold your hands than get them dirty.

Sin is rebellion against God, unbelief is the root of sin, it isn't as simple as sin=non-belief. It's about rejection and rebellion. No one is good, no one does what is right, we seek our own desires and ways and righteousness, not God's.

And you're right about one thing, I need to do more as does everyone, but it's almost as if you paint the picture that non-believers are the ones who are out doing the hard work while the believers shut themselves in a room and pray, which is pretty ignorant of the work of Christian charities and churches throughout the world. We are commanded to love our neighbour, to help the poor, tend to the sick, that is quite clear in the Bible.

 

[Nooj]

I was not referring to thieves & murderers as a "them", I was using them only as an example that I have done nothing wrong within reason to another person.

we hurt so many people within the boundaries of our 'reason'. our reason betrays us when it is convenient. it is reasonable that i do not give this person or that person my time of the day. it is reasonable that i keep what i have for myself. it is reasonable to strike back when someone hits us. it is reasonable to seek revenge against the enemy. it is reasonable to favour my closest ones over the ones i don't know or like.

reason! how many crimes have been hidden under that word. probably as many as 'for the greater glory of god'! reason is a tool, and the one who uses that tool is a pretty shady individual: that person is you. how can we be certain that our selfish appetite is not perverting the course of reason to satisfy our self, just as the self perverts all that is good and holy in its unholy and evil quest to aggrandise itself? a person may talk of 'love' and whisper sweet nothings into the ears of a beloved, and they may even believe in the sincerity of what they say, but inside they are only thinking about what the beloved represents or signifies: a possession, an opportunity for pleasure. i speak not just of reason, but all our faculties. even our 'holiness', or especially our holiness, hides a multitude of ugly selfish reasons. how often do we feel a thin, secret flame of pride in our hearts when we refrain from evil and do good. how often does love of other turn into love of the praise and commendation of others...

why should you be reasonable when reason is a tool that may at any time fall under the service of the great enemy? sometimes it's better to be without reason, to be out of your wits: jesus must have been mad to have loved so deeply and so widely.

So you claim. My morality is not based on holding myself or others to an unobtainable goal, something that every individual ever born will fail to achieve. I do not believe in thought-crimes(Thou shalt not covet), I do not believe that two or more consenting adults can commit sexual 'crimes', I do not believe that holding different Gods in esteem is a crime, so on and so forth.

to be a good person may be an unobtainable goal. but it is the only thing i can think worth doing in my life.

to attain the goal is dangerous. because if you have attained it, you know you have not attained it. there is never a moment where the debt is paid, where one can rest at the end of the day, feeling satisfied by their efforts. any feeling of satisfaction is false. worse than false, it is dereliction of duty.

'oh i've helped a person today. that's my quota done for the day!'. every person helped is another person not helped. every person fed is food that has necessarily not gone to another person. we are always responsible. perfection is a process. not a goal.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

History would show that people can in fact be forced to believe. Two entire continents were converted by burning. You say you are not called to skin, in light of history, this seems absurd. You wish to hold up some idea of goodness and purity while ignoring the actuality.

If I list a bunch of atheists who have committed atrocities, would I be fair in then denouncing your own worldview because of that?

As I've already said, people will use worldviews and ideologies to further their own ways. In the light of history I am aware we are all sinners and false believers roam the church. I did not say we are good, or pure for that matter.

Also, could you give a source for this skinning that you speak of? I am aware that self-proclaimed Christians have done much wrongdoing in the past, but as I've already said, it goes against Scripture and these people are being disobedient, deceitful, selfish and probably not in the faith to begin with.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Thanks for my daily dose of the dogma of subjective modernism. And I didn't say sin = non-belief, rather that unbelief is the root of sin, whatever does not proceed from faith.


You keep saying that, and I raised an example where your own claim, that religion was dangerous, was used for the wholesale murder of Christians by Soviet Russia. Does that make your claim wrong? No, it doesn't, because people will use any excuse for anything.


Sin is rebellion against God, unbelief is the root of sin, it isn't as simple as sin=non-belief. It's about rejection and rebellion. No one is good, no one does what is right, we seek our own desires and ways and righteousness, not God's.

And you're right about one thing, I need to do more as does everyone, but it's almost as if you paint the picture that non-believers are the ones who are out doing the hard work while the believers shut themselves in a room and pray, which is pretty ignorant of the work of Christian charities and churches throughout the world. We are commanded to love our neighbour, to help the poor, tend to the sick, that is quite clear in the Bible.

No, not that non-believers have any monopoly on high-ground. Just that non-believers aren't deluding themselves that locking themselves in a room and praying is helping anything while someone outside is hungry. Well, yea, I guess actually non-belevers do have the high-ground. lol

Not that non-believers have the high-ground, but that they do not delude themselves into thinking that preaching to the needy might be more important than feeding them. Or that if they die of starvation that's ok because they finally said thanks' to god for that last meal.

Personally, I would say sin is anything that encourages us to look up, when we should be looking down. I.e. if you are praying when you could be doing something to help here and now, you are sinning. If you are preaching when you could be feeding someone, you are sinning. This is a bit dramatic, but in more realistic terms, when you are concentrating on getting into heaven, you are not heading that way.

Think about it! If there is a heaven (I don't think there is) the only way there would be to live in this life as if it's the only one.

 

[Sultan Of Swing]

No, not that non-believers have any monopoly on high-ground. Just that non-believers aren't deluding themselves that locking themselves in a room and praying is helping anything while someone outside is hungry. Well, yea, I guess actually non-belevers do have the high-ground. lol

Not that non-believers have the high-ground, but that they do not delude themselves into thinking that preaching to the needy might be more important than feeding them. Or that if they die of starvation that's ok because they finally said thanks' to god for that last meal.

Personally, I would say sin is anything that encourages us to look up, when we should be looking down. I.e. if you are praying when you could be doing something to help here and now, you are sinning. If you are preaching when you could be feeding someone, you are sinning. This is a bit dramatic, but in more realistic terms, when you are concentrating on getting into heaven, you are not heading that way.

Think about it! If there is a heaven (I don't think there is) the only way there would be to live in this life as if it's the only one.

Seeing as we love our own pleasures and desires, thinking this life is the only one usually results in a good dose of hedonism and selfishness. Your perception of what sin is is of course subjective and has no objective reality, which goes for all of morality from an atheistic perspective, it doesn't really exist for the atheist.

 

[Nietzsche]

we hurt so many people within the boundaries of our 'reason'. our reason betrays us when it is convenient. it is reasonable that i do not give this person or that person my time of the day. it is reasonable that i keep what i have for myself. it is reasonable to strike back when someone hits us. it is reasonable to seek revenge against the enemy. it is reasonable to favour my closest ones over the ones i don't know or like.

reason! how many crimes have been hidden under that word. probably as many as 'for the greater glory of god'! reason is a tool, and the one who uses that tool is a pretty shady individual: that person is you. how can we be certain that our selfish appetite is not perverting the course of reason to satisfy our self, just as the self perverts all that is good and holy in its unholy and evil quest to aggrandise itself? a person may talk of 'love' and whisper sweet nothings into the ears of a beloved, and they may even believe in the sincerity of what they say, but inside they are only thinking about what the beloved represents or signifies: a possession, an opportunity for pleasure. i speak not just of reason, but all our faculties. even our 'holiness', or especially our holiness, hides a multitude of ugly selfish reasons. how often do we feel a thin, secret flame of pride in our hearts when we refrain from evil and do good. how often does love of other turn into love of the praise and commendation of others...

why should you be reasonable when reason is a tool that may at any time fall under the service of the great enemy? sometimes it's better to be without reason, to be out of your wits: jesus must have been mad to have loved so deeply and so widely.

...

That's insane and more importantly, impossible to achieve. You cannot give me an impossible goal, a goal you know to be impossible, and then punish me for failing. That's like breaking my legs and telling me you'll break my ribs if I don't win a marathon.

to be a good person may be an unobtainable goal. but it is the only thing i can think worth doing in my life.

to attain the goal is dangerous. because if you have attained it, you know you have not attained it. there is never a moment where the debt is paid, where one can rest at the end of the day, feeling satisfied by their efforts. any feeling of satisfaction is false. worse than false, it is dereliction of duty.

'oh i've helped a person today. that's my quota done for the day!'. every person helped is another person not helped. every person fed is food that has necessarily not gone to another person. we are always responsible. perfection is a process. not a goal.

No, it is not unobtainable to be a good person. It is unobtainable to be perfect. We cannot inherently achieve that. It is not possible. And that is what makes it terrible. The bar is set knowingly too high, so that we are predestined to fail, and then are punished for it.

No thank you.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

If I list a bunch of atheists who have committed atrocities, would I be fair in then denouncing your own worldview because of that?

Of course not, that would be silly. On the other hand, if you listed a bunch of atheists who have committed atrocities based on fundamental tenets of their ideology, you would be 100% fair in denouncing their worldview. The fact that so-and-so (christian, atheist, muslim, whatever) did this-or-that must be answered for individually. But the fact that a group of people did this or that, based on fundamental tenants of their beliefs, does in fact justify the denouncing of those beliefs. Do you agree with this?

As I've already said, people will use worldviews and ideologies to further their own ways. In the light of history I am aware we are all sinners and false believers roam the church. I did not say we are good, or pure for that matter.

Also, could you give a source for this skinning that you speak of? I am aware that self-proclaimed Christians have done much wrongdoing in the past, but as I've already said, it goes against Scripture and these people are being disobedient, deceitful, selfish and probably not in the faith to begin with.

The inquisition, the conversion of the americas. But the bible itself commanded genocide. If un-belief is the root of sin, and god commands genocide, then committing genocide must be good? Yes?

God commanded the death of every first born in egypt? Yes?

Let me not list a 1000 examples, but let me try to make my point with the concept that sin is related to god's will. The argument will go like this, these Egyptians were deserving, or wicked, or against the will of god. Then I say, yes of course, that's how we are defining sin. If god doesn't like it it's sin.

Sin = rebellion to god.
God kills every first born.

Killing women, children, for no reason other than they were born first, is a higher moral position than being being a new born baby that was born first.

How is being a first born Egyptian inferior to being a jew. A jew that a few months later was crafting golden calves in the wilderness? Yet, by your understanding, this is what a person MUST beleive.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Seeing as we love our own pleasures and desires, thinking this life is the only one usually results in a good dose of hedonism and selfishness. Your perception of what sin is is of course subjective and has no objective reality, which goes for all of morality from an atheistic perspective, it doesn't really exist for the atheist.

I think your kidding yourself about the amount of hedonism focusing on here and now leads to. Must people I know like a good meal, a comfy home, etc. And most people I know live mostly productive lives. Let's take a look at the so called hedonist and selfish people. Most of the people I know that have been to prison, or addicted to drugs, are in fact believers. They don't really know what they believe, but they believe they'd better believe or else. 98% of the prison population are believers.

I'm not the one that is making the argument of believing leading to hedonism, so don't try to turn this around. I'm merely debunking your assertion that it's the here and now perspective that leads to this. But I could very easily point out that for many many believers, the idea that everything will be forgiven here and now and everything will be perfect in the hereafter leads to a lot of get what you can here and now attitude.

 

[Nooj]

if anything, it seems to me that people are eager to turn to anything in order to escape the here and now.

boredom, or silence, or being alone with oneself and with other people, might be the new deadly sin to people.

has it been 10 minutes since i've checked my social media providers? oh no much too long...

 

[Nimblewill]

It sounds ok...but let me ask you..If you don't have to struggle or fight, then haven't you resigned to...not having to struggle or fight? Haven't you absolved yourself from the injustices of this world? Haven't you in fact ensured a net negative impact due to your absolution? I.e. if you accepted responsibility then presumable you would do at least as much to help here and now as if you absolved yourself? Isn't this basically punting the ball?

I battle, but its not against flesh and blood. Only those who are saved from this present evil age can wage real war against it. Fighting, but fearless. Its like being on a sinking ship and you have on a life vest.