To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-01-2017, 12:35 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(06-01-2017 02:03 AM)theBorg Wrote:  I am asking the opinion of theists, not the nonsense of the false atheists.

If you are the "atheist", please, play here the theist.

If you are angry (or else-way unfriendly), please go away, do not garbage mine thread!

Angry

Your second sentence seems to be asking us to pretend to be theists. Is this what you meant to say? Why ask us to do this? You seem to be desperate to get us to assume your god is real, even if only as a pretense to answer a question. I won't join you in your irrationality. You're like a drug pusher. Just try a little irrationality to see how you like it, atheists. No. Not for you. Not for anyone. The whole notion of sin, as it is defined by Christianity, only obtains if your god exists. You've nowhere established that it does. So why should anyone entertain such a fallaciously complex question?

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like true scotsman's post
06-01-2017, 01:22 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
You rudely created a thread on an atheist forum where a great majority of the users are atheist and tell them not to comment and if they do, don't be rude....ummmm ok you're the one being rude and also we can do whatever we want.

I just gotta point out how you said not to "garbage" this thread and as much it's actually awesome to see someone use the word garbage as a verb the thread itself was already garbage, we can't do anything to make it any worse.

We simply don't have enough theists on the forum to create an interesting poll or to get a real discussion going since atheists would have to get involved and then we have to be nice about it even though you already started out being antagonistic toward us and it's such bullying behavior you can't be surprised when we respond and it's not very nice.

Also you want us to pretend to be theists? We're mostly atheists and if you wanted to have a discussion from a theist point of view, GO TO A THEIST FORUM AND ASK THEM.

I'm sure they'd love to discuss this topic with you and also it's totally reasonable for a theist to sin since apparently that's exactly the reason Jesus died for, if you don't sin he died for nothing. Also according to your bible it's man's very nature to sin, they will do it without actually doing anything, just "thinking" of a sin is bad enough so yeah it's reasonable because it's not in your control, it's in your nature and it was already "paid" for by a human blood sacrifice so it doesn't even matter. So there, I answered your stupid question that makes no sense since the answer is obvious and since your God has so many confusing rules regarding what is and isn't a sin to begin with.

[Image: sagansig_zps6vhbql6m.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like SitaSky's post
06-01-2017, 02:23 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(06-01-2017 04:52 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  They mean you are annoying and incoherent.

They mean we cannot figure out why you think you have the right to control a thread, or think that because you started it that you own it.

They mean we wonder how you can be so arrogant and presumptuous.

They mean we wish you'd stop annoying us with your incoherent ramblings and presumptuous arrogance.

In the words of another annoying theist...

"Peace!" (In America, that can mean many things, but in this case I'm using it in the sense of "get lost".)

Being a Xian can e be anything less than arrogant?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2017, 02:55 PM (This post was last modified: 06-01-2017 03:14 PM by Reltzik.)
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
You know what? Fine. I'll play along.

Let's suppose, hypothetically, that I was a theist and believed that one or more gods existed.

That doesn't automatically imply the sort of supernatural morality implied by the word "sin". Nor is it required for such a concept of supernatural morality, as Taoism shows. Nor would it automatically grant me knowledge of WHICH proposed supernatural morality was correctly laying out sins and which ones were false ones.

Let's assume for the sake of argument that the underlying theism is itself reasonable. (A highly dubious assumption, but that's the nature of a hypothetical.) Given all the ways it's easy to be mistaken about these things, there are plenty of reasonable assumptions that could lead into something that is actually a sin. For example, assuming (as part of our hypothetical) that we'd made the assumption that Christianity was correct (or at least most of its denominations) and that Jesus had abolished most of the dietary restrictions, we might think it's okay to have a ham and cheese sandwich. That would be reasonable enough to do. But the Muslims or Orthodox Jews have the right of it, it's a sin. Done in ignorance, due to an honest misunderstanding, and reasonable enough, but a sin. Similarly, a Hindu theist is most likely worshiping gods other than Yahweh, so if the Christians are right that theist is also sinning... but it's a reasonable sin, GIVEN the assumptions of her theism.

But okay, that's not what you're really asking. I'm pretty sure that it's your PARTICULAR religion, Eastern Orthodoxy, its deity, and its concepts of sin that you're talking about when you're talking about theism. So I'll continue forward assuming that.

Let's talk about the Raskol.

In the 17th century, the Russian church realized that a gap had opened up between its own liturgy and rituals and those of the Greek church. The Patriarch deemed that the Russian church was in error and had to make changes to correct itself, but many thought it was the Greeks who were in error and that for the Russian church to change would be to follow the Greeks into blasphemy. This caused a schism, called the Raskol, between the Russian Orthodox Church (who wanted to become more Greek) and the Old Ritualists, who wanted to preserve Russian Orthodoxy as it had been. Obviously, one or both of these groups was engaging in some sort of blasphemy. Yet both were doing so in a completely reasonable manner, because both had a basis for believing that this is what their religion required of them. Both believed they were acting in the only correct way of honoring God and Christ, and that to abandon their position was to betray their faith. They may have sinned, but they had every reason to believe that they were NOT sinning. (The Patriarch mostly won that fight, with the Old Ritualists surviving only in exile in Eastern Russia. Later archeological and historical examination of how the liturgy and rituals changed over the years suggests that the Old Ritualists were right that it was the Greek church that had deviated from tradition in the 15th and 16th centuries.)

Let's consider a more modern example. In 2003, Deanna Laney killed her three children. She believed that she had been commanded to do so by God, and was later found to have been insane, having mistaken her delusions for a divine command. Let's leave aside for a moment that she wasn't Eastern Orthodox, or assume a similar case with a woman who subscribes to Eastern Orthodoxy. In this particular case, would it have been reasonable for her to do as she believed God had commanded her? If so, then her sins were reasonable... and remember, for the purposes of this post, I'm assuming that her theism is reasonable. Or perhaps it would be more reasonable for her to defy what she believes to be God's command, and not kill her children?

Now let's imagine that another woman, perhaps living next door, ALSO hears God commanding her to kill her children... only this time it really is a divine command from God. Maybe He's testing her faith like with Abraham and will stop her at the last second, or something like that. Suppose that she doubts the voice that she's hearing, thinks she might be going insane, and resolves to ignore it, just like the insane woman next door to her should have. Is defying a command from God like that a sin? Is it reasonable? Is one course of action reasonable for one woman and not reasonable for another, when both have exactly the same evidence for their belief that they've been divinely commanded to kill their children, and both have exactly the same cause to doubt the voice in their heads?

But okay, maybe that's not what you're asking. Maybe you're not talking about honest mistakes and doubts. Maybe you're looking for an example of a willful sin, something done BELIEVING that it's a sin. To which, I'll offer the example of the woman taken in adultery. The Old Testament commands that she is to be put to death. It's not optional. To fail to see her stoned to death is a sin. Yet when Jesus says let he who is without sin cast the first stone... note that's not a command. That is simply giving permission to do something that is not only already permitted, but required. Was it reasonable, in that context, knowing that it was a sin, to let the stones fall and walk away? Of course, you might say that defying Jesus's intent in this respect was also a sin... in which case there was no option going forward that was NOT believed to be a sin. Sinning in such a situation is not only reasonable, but inescapable.

tl;dr: There are a great many ways in which a theist might reasonably sin.

"If I ignore the alternatives, the only option is God; I ignore them; therefore God." -- The Syllogism of Fail
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Reltzik's post
06-01-2017, 02:56 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(06-01-2017 02:03 AM)theBorg Wrote:  I am asking the opinion of theists, not the nonsense of the false atheists.

If you are the "atheist", please, play here the theist.

If you are angry (or else-way unfriendly), please go away, do not garbage mine thread!

Angry

┌∩┐(◣_◢)┌∩┐
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Fireball's post
06-01-2017, 03:09 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
I am coming more and more to the conclusion that atheists don't sin much but theists do so a lot, and with impunity.

Theists can do whatever they like and be forgiven and guilt free.

Me, if I treat another person badly, I feel badly and there is no sky daddy to make it all ok, I am responsible.

So. yes, it's a lot more reasonable for a theist to sin. They don't actually have to be responsible for their conduct.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Dom's post
06-01-2017, 03:16 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(06-01-2017 03:09 PM)Dom Wrote:  I am coming more and more to the conclusion that atheists don't sin much but theists do so a lot, and with impunity.

Theists can do whatever they like and be forgiven and guilt free.

Me, if I treat another person badly, I feel badly and there is no sky daddy to make it all ok, I am responsible.

So. yes, it's a lot more reasonable for a theist to sin. They don't actually have to be responsible for their conduct.

Holy moly Dom, were you my camp counselor at a Baptist summer camp back in the day? Because we were told that due to Once Saved, Always Saved, that we shouldn't desire to sin, but could do so, knowing that it had been forgiven once we had accepted Christ. And to be ready to meet Hitler in Heaven, because he'd been a Christian.

Something else our Borgy friend needs to define beyond what is reasonable, is also what distinction is he making for venial and mortal sins, since Orthodoxy and Catholicism share them in common as an idea*. For instance, I'm personally in a state of mortal sin right now and will be going to Confession tomorrow afternoon. As a result, I'm further sinning by continuing to do the act that placed me in mortal sin; however, that act impacts no one but my own body and is not illegal under secular law. This is something else I'll confess to doing, and depending on the priest I get, the riot act will be read at me for doing so. I have a feeling that while the Borg may think that my initial fall to temptation would be reasonable, my continued actions would be unreasonable. But not sure if that's how he feels, or if he thinks he's perfect and without sin...in which case, he would be, by his own church's definition, a heretic.

*To an extent, they do share mortal, but then there's also "pardonable" and "of omission" I think in Orthodoxy.

Need to think of a witty signature.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Shai Hulud's post
06-01-2017, 05:31 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(06-01-2017 08:57 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(06-01-2017 08:24 AM)Rahn127 Wrote:  Your life has meaning, now that I have ignored you.
Oh wait, I'm replying in your thread, which means I'm not completely ignoring you. So that means my previous statement is wrong.

Your life has no meaning.

If you ignore his request to ignore him does that mean you are ignoring him and not ignoring him at the same time?

It is a superposition of ignoring all the way down to the quantum level of reality.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2017, 05:42 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
(06-01-2017 03:16 PM)Shai Hulud Wrote:  
(06-01-2017 03:09 PM)Dom Wrote:  I am coming more and more to the conclusion that atheists don't sin much but theists do so a lot, and with impunity.

Theists can do whatever they like and be forgiven and guilt free.

Me, if I treat another person badly, I feel badly and there is no sky daddy to make it all ok, I am responsible.

So. yes, it's a lot more reasonable for a theist to sin. They don't actually have to be responsible for their conduct.

Holy moly Dom, were you my camp counselor at a Baptist summer camp back in the day? Because we were told that due to Once Saved, Always Saved, that we shouldn't desire to sin, but could do so, knowing that it had been forgiven once we had accepted Christ. And to be ready to meet Hitler in Heaven, because he'd been a Christian.

Something else our Borgy friend needs to define beyond what is reasonable, is also what distinction is he making for venial and mortal sins, since Orthodoxy and Catholicism share them in common as an idea*. For instance, I'm personally in a state of mortal sin right now and will be going to Confession tomorrow afternoon. As a result, I'm further sinning by continuing to do the act that placed me in mortal sin; however, that act impacts no one but my own body and is not illegal under secular law. This is something else I'll confess to doing, and depending on the priest I get, the riot act will be read at me for doing so. I have a feeling that while the Borg may think that my initial fall to temptation would be reasonable, my continued actions would be unreasonable. But not sure if that's how he feels, or if he thinks he's perfect and without sin...in which case, he would be, by his own church's definition, a heretic.

*To an extent, they do share mortal, but then there's also "pardonable" and "of omission" I think in Orthodoxy.

Are you saying that masturbation is a mortal sin?

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2017, 05:46 PM
RE: To theists only: is it reasonable for a theist to sin?
That is the most coherent thread title I've seen from this guy.

Ignorance is not to be ignored.

Check out my DA gallery! http://oo-kiri-oo.deviantart.com/gallery/
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Loom's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: