• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Questions about 'SIN'?

Kumar said:
Just forget about everything, just find out what is good & what is bad for you?
Click to expand...
Why forget about everything? You asked what the true meaning of the word "sin" is. In my experience it is a transgression of religious morals. It has nothing to do with personal preferences, nature, balance or anything else.

Just try to translated the languages. It may be said in 'Latin' but we may be reading in 'English'.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, I honestly do not understand this comment.
 
zaayrdragon said:
Atheists, for example, cannot by definition sin.
Click to expand...
Atheists may not be able to sin in respect of their own beliefs. It seems difficult, though, to say with complete certainty that atheists cannot sin, because that presumes knowledge that no divine law objectively exists which could unknowingly be transgressed by an atheist. Ignorantia juris neminem excusat, and so forth.
 
I was, of course, speaking from the individual viewpoint of the atheist.

And until someone proves there are demonstrable objective morals and religious rules, it is best to act as if they do not exist.
 
ceo_esq said:
Atheists may not be able to sin in respect of their own beliefs. It seems difficult, though, to say with complete certainty that atheists cannot sin, because that presumes knowledge that no divine law objectively exists which could unknowingly be transgressed by an atheist. Ignorantia juris neminem excusat, and so forth.
Click to expand...
Well, I'm not waiting up for God to uphold his law. I'll take that risk.
 
H'ethetheth said:
Why forget about everything? You asked what the true meaning of the word "sin" is. In my experience it is a transgression of religious morals. It has nothing to do with personal preferences, nature, balance or anything else.

I'm sorry, I honestly do not understand this comment.
Click to expand...

I mentioned the meanings. But I want to understand the reality. There sould be some physiological/scientific effect of 'Sin' on us individually or on a community as a whole keeping individual's interests, intact. Religious morals should have been defined on this basis only. Now let us try to find science of 'SIN'. How this can effect us ap per science?

To try understand so defined 'God' or 'Goddess' at prime/basic/micro level & then at secondary/gross/macro level can help in understanding these concepts.
 
Kumar said:
I mentioned the meanings. But I want to understand the reality. There sould be some physiological/scientific effect of 'Sin' on us individually or on a community as a whole keeping individual's interests, intact. Religious morals should have been defined on this basis only. Now let us try to find science of 'SIN'. How this can effect us ap per science?

To try understand so defined 'God' or 'Goddess' at prime/basic/micro level & then at secondary/gross/macro level can help in understanding these concepts.
Click to expand...

Oh, well, that's easy enough -

There is no physiological/scientific effect of 'Sin', only psychological effects.

There is no prime/basic/micro, nor secondayr/gross/macro level of God or Goddess in science.

Sin and Gods are not scientific; no evidence exists to support either, objectively.

Since sin is an entirely subjective concept, science cannot analyze it. Easy.
 
Taking excess minerals/substances in case of excesses/accumulations in body due to any physiological disorder or addiction eg; sugar & salt in case diabetes & hypertention or alcohol by an alcoholic person or excess sex without purpose of reproduction or taking outside unnatural goods or creating imbalanced environments....all can be related to SIN or physiological effects of SIN(doing anything wrong). It it not so??
 
Kumar said:
Taking excess minerals/substances in case of excesses/accumulations in body due to any physiological disorder or addiction eg; sugar & salt in case diabetes & hypertention or alcohol by an alcoholic person or excess sex without purpose of reproduction or taking outside unnatural goods or creating imbalanced environments....all can be related to SIN or physiological effects of SIN(doing anything wrong). It it not so??
Click to expand...

No, it is not so. These are only related to SIN if your religion defines such as SIN.

Otherwise, these are not sins.

I don't know if you're failing to understand because of the language barrier, or if you're just that stupid, but sin is an entirely psychological and religious concept, which does not apply to physiology or environments, except as defined by the religion in question.
 
SIN = Ships Inertial Navigation

What has that to do with "excess minerals/substances", Kumar?
 
"Things we do that fall short of God's standard of perfection and holiness. We sin by disobeying God's commands. We sin by ignoring God. We sin by doing things contrary to the nature and character of God"

What we can think about God's standard of perfection, nature & character?

It is also said 'God is in everyone' or "HE" is 'omniptresent'. But, It may be a differance that either HE is active/awakened or inactive/slept. So whatever makes HIM or our body, perfectly in Homeostatis state can be thought as "HIS active/awakened state" & vice-versa.

Zep, so any imbalance can be thought as making HIM to be inactive or slept.
 
Assuming HE exists - and there is no proof of this, as of yet.

The attempt to relate sin to imbalance within the body or in the environment is ludicrous. I suggest sticking to your precious tissue salts. Or homeo-water. At least there you don't embarrass yourself by dragging religion into the fray.
 
Just think about all the suggestions in religious sayings about reducing your SINS. Are these all related to improving your health or imbalances due to accumulations of body substances. Holy dips in rivers etc. may lead to reduce mineral imbalances in body. Every substance can effect us by its physical apperance by its reflected colours on its exposure to light. We burn candles, lamps etc. in front of holy idols. Mantras can cause discharges, exposure to light & re-absorption of relevant minerals to mantras. We shouls study every holy suggestion in science. We may just find "sins" somewhat as imbalances in our health & holy indications just somewhat as correcting those imbalances.
 
H'ethetheth said:
Too much sand in you gyros will eventually get you off course.
Click to expand...
I suspect Kumar's gyros have already rusted stopped. The good ship Kumar is now sailing in erratic circles somewhere off Sri Lanka... :)
 
In view of imbalances can be thought as 'SINS' not just bad or good, marrying/relating two similarily imbalanced person can also be thought somewhat as SIN. Is it not so?
 
Kumar said:
In view of imbalances can be thought as 'SINS' not just bad or good, marrying/relating two similarily imbalanced person can also be thought somewhat as SIN. Is it not so?
Click to expand...
No.

Unpractical maybe. Not a sin.
 
Months ago I had the same discussion with Kumar at some other thread.

I said that the concept of sin is based on and strongly dependant on cultural background. Human sacrifices would be nowdays considered as a sin by most religions. However, many cultures and religions considered it as essential or acceptable in the past.

IF "the concept of sin" had a "natural basis", THEN the vast majority of cultures and religions in the world would have very similar sins.

Why not all religions declare a sin the consume of pig meat?
Why some religions consider sex a sin while for others it is part of sacred rites?

The concepts of sin have strong cultural basis. Most seem to have been created to avoid desintegration of social fabric and maintain the identity of a given population.

Kumar´s proposal also has a major issue- the concept of sin requires not only the existance of a god (something unproven at best), but also of a god who cares about sins. And providing there is such god, which acts will truly be sins among the long list provided by the religions are the true ones? Eating pig meat, eating cow meat or eating meat?

Without religions, there are no sins. You may have, however, crimes. And what is considered as crime is also dependent on the culture.
 
This whole thread is crap.

"Holy dips in rivers'? What other metaphysical nonsense is Kumar going to push? Marrying imbalanced people? MINERAL BALANCES???

Kumar - get your head out of your 4th pt. of contact, and go to a real school and learn some real science. Put down the 'Tissue Salts for Dummies' and pick up 'Causes of Disease for Dummies'.

Oh, and get a frickin' life.

I put up with a lot of nonsense out of a lot of the guys here - but they generally have one brand of nonsense they're peddling. You seem to be trying to sell us the package deal, sin included.

And if you're not going to listen to the answers to questions, why ask them?

Oh, and what 'tissue imbalances' does the so-called 'sin' of polyamory cause? Some sects consider it a sin, others a blessing. In neither case does it affect health any more or less than monogamy.

...

To everyone else - sorry, I have a headache, and Kumar is about three IQ points below 'tree stump'.
 
Since "god" is wholly imaginary, the "law of god" is likewise imaginary, thus the act of "transgressing" this law is itself an impossible act. As is being "estranged" from god.

Thus, in the religious sense, no one has ever sinned. Ever.

Such an act that is both impossible and wholly conceptual, cannot therefore have any consequence upon the material world. The placebo effect may lower stress levels, thus contributing to the alleviation of stress related symptoms, but that's just psychology and self-delusion.
 
We can consider nature's system & progression in balanced manner instead of 'God's work, if we dislike or couldn't yet understood this concept/entity, entirely.

Some differances in religious suggestions can be due to cultural & regional/environmental differances BUT basic indications should be somewat similar. If differant religions suggest use of holy water from differance sources/rivers--can mean regional existance of that source. Few may suggest taking non-veg as SIN, whereas other may not. In real sense, both can be thought as 'killing of livings & interfering in progression of nature'(unless fruits are only used)--so we should try understand its science i.e. whether any of these food or type of taking these foods by humans is somewhat 'health related & harmful'. It is possible that religious indications may be 'just our health related' & so we must find there science to really understand those--if we can't do 'blind faith' due to effect of modern lifestyle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom