To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-01-2017, 08:50 PM (This post was last modified: 10-01-2017 08:55 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(08-01-2017 06:45 AM)Chas Wrote:  You have generalized 'sin' and 'worship' into meaninglessness. Good job. Dodgy

Actually I think it is precisely what needs to happen to them. Never should have been any meaning attached to them in the first pace.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like GirlyMan's post
10-01-2017, 08:57 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(08-01-2017 04:59 PM)Wallisddj Wrote:  And like I responded to the other "criitc": you have created yourself as your god.

You say that like it's a bad thing. It's a dirty job but someone's gotta do it.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like GirlyMan's post
10-01-2017, 08:59 PM (This post was last modified: 10-01-2017 09:12 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(10-01-2017 01:51 AM)Wallisddj Wrote:  But the biggest laugh of all is that you all think I am a theist!

I do? But we've only just met.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
10-01-2017, 09:32 PM (This post was last modified: 10-01-2017 09:36 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(07-01-2017 08:59 PM)Wallisddj Wrote:  Altruism died the moment it left the cranium and was uttered out of some fool's mouth.

I think that's wrong.

(07-01-2017 08:59 PM)Wallisddj Wrote:  We live in a "me-world," live a "me-existence," and worship a "me-personal God."

fixt.

I think that's right but I think most people live in a little me-world dominated by the ego while a relatively few live in the big ME-world of the superego. The royal ME as it were. I AM God and so are you. It would be a shame if only one of us realized it. Usually as a consequence of sustained use of pharmaceuticals although occasionally syphilis can also reportedly give you the ability to empathize with horses.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like GirlyMan's post
10-01-2017, 10:10 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(10-01-2017 01:51 AM)Wallisddj Wrote:  Apparently, I AM the only one who can see color in rhetorical discussions.

"That is why you fail."
Yoda.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Banjo's post
10-01-2017, 10:34 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(10-01-2017 01:51 AM)Wallisddj Wrote:  Apparently, I AM the only one who can see color in rhetorical discussions.

Hmm. I believe that is called synesthesia, though this instance seems a bit limited. Try bigger mushrooms, next time. Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Fireball's post
11-01-2017, 04:24 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(10-01-2017 08:57 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(08-01-2017 04:59 PM)Wallisddj Wrote:  And like I responded to the other "criitc": you have created yourself as your god.

You say that like it's a bad thing. It's a dirty job but someone's gotta do it.

I pressed the button for "like." I enjoyed your humor. Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-01-2017, 04:47 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(10-01-2017 11:50 AM)Impulse Wrote:  
(07-01-2017 08:59 PM)Wallisddj Wrote:  Is it reasonable for a theist to sin? Of course. Being human is a "sin," for the single reason that each and everyone of us thinks only of ourselves. Altruism died the moment it left the cranium and was uttered out of some fool's mouth. We live in a "ME-world," live a "ME-existence," and worship a "ME-personal God."

Having read all your posts in this thread now, I've concluded that since you obviously are "ME" oriented yourself, it's difficult for you now to see how others aren't the same and how others sometimes do things out of true altruism. I wonder, do you also consider it a sin to blind yourself to reality with your own arrogance? Consider

Years ago, I left the field of psychology largely because it was full of arrogant people who chose their pet theories, treated them as truth, and snubbed their noses at people believing in opposing theories. You sound very much like them. You have a little knowledge about some mythologies and present yourself as an authority. And you don't even do so politely. You really should try listening to yourself because, to those of us on the outside, you sound rather foolish. I'm not meaning that as an insult - it's just something you should be aware of.

Of course, I do practice a "ME-ism." It is the recognition of when I am doing it that I attempt to change.

I am not an authority on mythology. That someone walks away from my post with that impression to me is funny. I merely made a statement based on my synthesis of myths from around the world. People can do three things: agree, disagree, or just walk away. I don't really care.

I agree with you regarding your comment on psychology. Many psychologists and psychiatrists are my favorite targets. I know a bit about psychology and love to use it against those who are the most obnoxious. But even given the foibles of practitioners, I still feel there is useful validity in examining and applying concepts and theories within a society.

Hitchhiking on psychology, I do not believe altruism exists. People might feel that they are being altruistic, but I support the idea that people do things that will make themselves feel good. Lines from Frasier (The Good Son):

Frasier: I'm just trying to do the right thing, here. I'm trying to be The Good Son.
Martin: Oh, don't worry, son. After I'm gone you can live guilt-free knowing you've done right by your papa.
Frasier: You think that's what this is about?
Guilt?
Martin: Isn't it?
Frasier: Of course it is! But the point is, I did it! I took you in! And I've got
news for you - I wanted to do it!

Or we do things out of a sense of obligation. I'll be the first one to pat someone on the back for sacrificing things in life so that they could help and support others. But the point is they either chose to do so because of some psychological impulse or societal impulse. That's just my opinion from observation over the 67 years. [shrug shoulders]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-01-2017, 04:56 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(09-01-2017 11:18 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(08-01-2017 10:20 PM)Wallisddj Wrote:  We are not agreeing to definitions because the participants here wanting to restrict the vocabulary within a religious context.

That is the context in which those words are used. Your broadening their definitions weakens them and confuses the meaning.

Quote:However, when adjoining atheism into the discussion, we have to use the broader denotations and definitions.

No, we don't. 'Sin' is a religious concept and not applicable in other settings except humorously or hyperbolically.

Quote:One can bandy about synonyms, but these tend to muddy the waters. It is better for the theist and the atheist to agree that "sin" is a transgression against a rule, law, ordinance, or even an accepted norm, irrespective of a deity.

It is your over-broad use of those terms that muddies the waters.

Quote:Worship, too, must be expanded beyond the religious norms of rites and traditions. Our English is peppered with expanded meanings, such as "He practices his weight lifting program religiously."

No, it mustn't. Mushing meanings together impoverishes the language and decreases clarity.

This is where we have to agree to disagree.

I could have easily used the word transgression. Or, the phrase "broke the rule." A line in the sand was crossed.

The word itself, "sin," can be used in the secular world. I grant you, it is rare and archaic. I fail to see, however, of trying to make a mountain out of molehill, simply because the relegation of the word must belong to the non-secular world and only in the non-secular world.

You have your opinion. You understand mine. And understanding one's opinion should not get in the way of dialogue. I understand your limited use of the word. Your insistence that I follow your definition does not move the dialogue forward but keeps it in eddying circles going nowhere.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-01-2017, 05:05 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(10-01-2017 02:31 AM)morondog Wrote:  Wallisddj, you got any reply to some of the people who did take time to answer you in detail (e.g. mordant, Chas, unfogged)? You seem to easily pass from long-winded bullshit to laughing at people but I haven't seen any answers to people's rebuttals.

We get 2 or 3 people per week who're convinced they're special snowflakes, another one isn't gonna be of interest unless you can actually back up your stuff. You said something about being retired in the Philippines and being a theologian in another thread if I recall correctly? And yet you're not a theist?

Yes, I am a theologian. Fifty years or so now.

I am beginning to form a picture of a number of posters here. Rightly or wrongly, my picture is that many have built a strawman out of what religion is, what theism is, and what a theologian is. It appears to me that few are willing to step out of that box and, at least for a moment, embrace what another person might say, even if it does not fit in that box.

By definition, theology breaks down into the study of God and religious beliefs. Let me take the latter half: religious beliefs. Not all religious beliefs center around a deity. Buddhism and Taoism are classic examples. I, myself, lean heavily towards Buddhist thought if push comes to shove.

Personally, I feel that all theistic religions consist mostly--95% at least--of silly nonsense. They have lost their salt and their purpose with me. Buddhism has clarified for me a much greater understanding of the world and all the silly nonsense we humans put into the world.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: