Is "sin" specific to Christianity? Non-Christians please answer!

[Guest Katia]

Some of my friends are having a philosophical discussion about sin. Those that are atheists say that sin is a myth. It is my opinion, that ethics and moral codes come from a person's belief system, no matter what that belief system is......but do non-Christian faiths use the word 'sin'? I really don't know; for example Buddhists, Islams, Jews, Pagans, etc. If not, what do they call a wrongful act? Is it a judgment call? Or is there no 'sins' in other belief systems?

 

All help appreciated.

[Guest Katia]

Does no one have any thought on this?

[sheryl]

I'm up late tonight...hard to sleep.

 

As a Believer in the Bible, God says that "all sin and fall short".... so, that means every single person past, present and future.

[Jean in Newcastle]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin

[Guest Katia]

Thanks, Jean. That helps! Off to post on my other discussion with this information.

[Peela]

I think the big, patriarchal God based religions- Christianity, Judaism, Islam- have sin as a central concept.

 

I dont think Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Shintoism etc do.

The concept of karma is quite different from the one of sin. Sin denotes an ultimate code by which one should live- as given by some authority- (in my mind, anyway), wheras other religions, while encouraging moral behaviour, allow it to be more directed from within and from being in touch with ones own naturally moral nature, rather than an objective concept of "sin".

[NanceXToo]

I don't know what's "standard" but as a not-particularly-religious Jew I don't use the word "sin" or think in terms of "sin," although I do have my own "moral code" and views of right and wrong. Some of them happen to correspond with some of the "Commandments" as listed in the bible and some don't.

[Negin]

I think the big, patriarchal God based religions- Christianity, Judaism, Islam- have sin as a central concept.

I dont think Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Shintoism etc do.

 

Although the Baha'i Faith is a God-based monotheistic religion, it does not view sin as a central concept.

 

According to Bahá'u'lláh, pride or self-centeredness is one of the greatest hindrances to spiritual progress. Pride represents an exaggerated sense of one's own importance in the universe and leads to an attitude of superiority over others ...

In the Bahá'í notion of spiritual progress, whatever is conducive to spiritual progress is good, and whatever tends to hinder spiritual progress is bad. This doctrine reminds one of the Buddhist perspective. From the Bahá'í viewpoint, learning "right" from "wrong" means attaining a degree of self-knowledge that permits us to know when something is helpful to our spiritual growth and when it is not. And this knowledge can only be obtained through the teachings of the Manifestations (the Prophets of the great religions).

Bahá'u'lláh repeatedly stressed that only revealed religion can save us from our imperfections. It is because God has sent his Manifestations to show us the path to spiritual development and to touch our hearts with the spirit of God's love that we are able to realize our true potential and make the effort to be united with God. This is the "salvation" that religion brings.

Bahai's do not think of salvation in terms of salvation from the stain of "original sin," nor does it protect us from some external evil force or devil. Rather, it delivers people from the captivity to their own lower nature, a captivity that breeds private despair and threatens social destruction. Salvation means drawing nearer to God and progressing on the path to a deep and satisfying happiness.

 

http://www.religionfacts.com/bahai/beliefs/salvation.htm

[Barry Goldwater]

Does no one have any thought on this?

 

...well, you said non-Christians please answer, so I moved on! :)

[mommymilkies]

I was raised Jewish and though I knew what sin was, it was not really anything we were concerned with or focused on. I have a Catholic step-father and all of my friends were Christian, and sin was heavily focused on by them. To us as liberal Jews, it was really a non-issue. Sorry if that's clear as mud!

[BlsdMama]

A little to the left of the topic. ;)

 

This is like the little sister of the topic you're discussing.

 

Essentially, don't you think, that the 3 Bible based religions - Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, all believe the concept that man is basically NOT good and his natural tendency is to sin.

 

Whereas the other religions who embrace good qualities but don't actually embrace sin, view men as basically good with an ability to behave less than desirabley.

 

This is a REALLY interesting topic for me with my friend who is non-Christian as she believes in the basic goodness of men and I believe men, at the base, are NOT good, but have the super-natural (through God) ability to be truly good. (Though never perfect of course.)

[sheryl]

Sorry for not reading your post title accurately. I was up late last night/early morning and wasn't focused, I guess.

 

I am a Jesus following woman saved by Grace and do not qualify as a non-Christian/religious person (although these 2 terms are different) b/c my salvation is in Christ.

[Nan in Mass]

Some UUers consider themselves Christian and some don't, but...

 

If, by sin, you mean that people are basically bad, then no. UUers believe that humans are basicly good. At least, most of them do. LOL It is very hard to make any sort of generalizations about UUers. It isn't specifically in the seven basic principles, but it is assumed.

 

 

 

 

The principles:

 

• The inherent worth and dignity of every person;
  
• Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
  
• Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
  
• A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;
  
• The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;
  
• The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;
  
• Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.
  

If, by sin, you mean the concept that all people have the potential to be lazy or selfish or uncompassionate and do bad things, then the answer is yes, most UUers believe in sin. They are unlikely to call it that, though, because in every congregation, there are people who consider themselves to have been damaged by other forms of Christianity and are now super sensitive and "allergic" to the terminology. The rest of us, who might find the term a useful shortcut, avoid using it so as not to hurt the allergic ones. It is rather like eveyone not being able to eat a peanut butter sandwich for lunch because somebody in the class's body overreacts to peanut butter. It makes things tricky at times.

 

My family is also involved with the Buddhist community. They talk about wrong thinking and wrong acts leading to suffering and about the eight-fold path and right thinking and right acting being a way to avoid suffering and they emphasize compassion, but I can't remember them actually using word sin to refer to a wrong act or wrong thought. They believe that humans are basically good, that every person contains a perfect person inside, and that none of us is really separate from other living things. Or at least, the ones I know do. Personally, I find that those concepts make it easier to feel compassion for other people, even when they are acting or thinking wrongly.

 

 

-Nan

Edited February 6, 2011 by Nan in Mass

[Audrey]

Some of my friends are having a philosophical discussion about sin. Those that are atheists say that sin is a myth. It is my opinion, that ethics and moral codes come from a person's belief system, no matter what that belief system is......but do non-Christian faiths use the word 'sin'? I really don't know; for example Buddhists, Islams, Jews, Pagans, etc. If not, what do they call a wrongful act? Is it a judgment call? Or is there no 'sins' in other belief systems?

 

All help appreciated.

 

 

I cannot speak for all Pagans, but sin in not a word in the lexicon of my ethics. The concept of sin necessitates that people are inherently bad. I wholly reject that concept as false.

[Firefly]

I cannot speak for all Pagans, but sin in not a word in the lexicon of my ethics. The concept of sin necessitates that people are inherently bad. I wholly reject that concept as false.

 

You spoke well enough for this Pagan ;) Agree 100%!

[Greta]

Some of my friends are having a philosophical discussion about sin. Those that are atheists say that sin is a myth. It is my opinion, that ethics and moral codes come from a person's belief system, no matter what that belief system is......but do non-Christian faiths use the word 'sin'? I really don't know; for example Buddhists, Islams, Jews, Pagans, etc. If not, what do they call a wrongful act? Is it a judgment call? Or is there no 'sins' in other belief systems?

 

All help appreciated.

 

I'm a Christian now, but used to be Buddhist. The word "sin" was never once used in all my years of studying and practicing Buddhism. But I would say that there is a similar concept. Actions were considered either negative, neutral, or positive based upon whether they brought harm or good (or neither) to oneself and others. In other words, they would generate either negative or positive karma. I think that such negative actions are basically analogous to the Christian view of sin -- sins are those actions which bring harm to ourselves or others. Obviously there will be differences in the particulars, and I'm not trying to say they are exactly the same. But I do think they are similar.

 

The concept of sin necessitates that people are inherently bad.

 

I respectfully disagree. The concept of sin necessitates that people have the capacity to do bad, but that is not the same as inherently bad.

 

I would like to explain what I mean, but I don't mean this to be argumentative at all, and I don't mean to get too far afield of the OP's question. I only hope to clear up a misconception, if possible. Unfortunately, that's not exactly my area of expertise. :lol: But I will try.

 

In the Biblical account of creation, after each thing that God creates, He declares it good. And when He creates humanity, He declares His creation "very good". Christians believe that humankind was created in the image and likeness of God - far from what could be considered "inherently bad".

 

But God also gave us free will - the ability to choose. It is when we choose to do bad rather than good that we sin. It is when we "miss the mark" that we sin. It is when we fail to be that which God created us to be, "very good", that we sin.

 

Does that make sense? I'm saying that Christians do not believe that people sin because we were created "bad" or are inherently "bad", but because we *choose* to be other than that which we were created to be.

 

I hope that helped . . . ? And I should probably note that as an Eastern Orthodox Christian, I have a different view of sin than most (all?) of Western Christianity. (Our doctrine is called "ancestral sin", but we do not accept "original sin".) But I *think* that most Christians would agree with the above.

[Matryoshka]

Essentially, don't you think, that the 3 Bible based religions - Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, all believe the concept that man is basically NOT good and his natural tendency is to sin.

 

I've been teaching World Religions to the middle schoolers at church, and I've learned a lot. Anyone who practices these religions, please tell me if I've got this wrong.

 

I think the Jewish faith has a concept of sin, but not original sin (so we're not born bad).

 

The materials I've been reading on Islam also says that Muslims believe human beings are not sinful by nature and that each person is responsible for avoiding or not avoiding sin - but also has the concept of sin.

 

Even the Mormons also believe that man is naturally good - also no original sin. They also have the concept of sin, but they are an individual's. Until 8, all children are without sin.

 

This surprised me when I learned it, as all those religions share the same creation story with Christianity, and I'd always thought "original sin" came from that story, but apparently that bit was added on later (so is the actual concept of "original sin" in the Bible, or is it extra-Biblical? or just in the New Testament but not the Old, even though it refers to events in the Old?)

 

All the Eastern religions I can think of have a concept of karma rather than sin, which is a different concept - I think Peela described it well earlier on in the thread.

 

The idea that man is born sinful, or sinful by nature, is pretty much Christian. (and although Mormons and some UUs consider themselves Christian, they don't believe that either).

[HRAAB]

I've been teaching World Religions to the middle schoolers at church, and I've learned a lot. Anyone who practices these religions, please tell me if I've got this wrong.

 

I think the Jewish faith has a concept of sin, but not original sin (so we're not born bad).

 

The materials I've been reading on Islam also says that Muslims believe human beings are not sinful by nature and that each person is responsible for avoiding or not avoiding sin - but also has the concept of sin.

 

Even the Mormons also believe that man is naturally good - also no original sin. They also have the concept of sin, but they are an individual's. Until 8, all children are without sin.

 

This surprised me when I learned it, as all those religions share the same creation story with Christianity, and I'd always thought "original sin" came from that story, but apparently that bit was added on later (so is the actual concept of "original sin" in the Bible, or is it extra-Biblical? or just in the New Testament but not the Old, even though it refers to events in the Old?)

 

All the Eastern religions I can think of have a concept of karma rather than sin, which is a different concept - I think Peela described it well earlier on in the thread.

 

The idea that man is born sinful, or sinful by nature, is pretty much Christian. (and although Mormons and some UUs consider themselves Christian, they don't believe that either).

 

I have always thought the West was very influenced by St. Augustine and his development of original sin whereas the East was not. Perhaps this is where the differences between original sin and ancestral sin come from? I had a very good friend, Jewish, who told me that Jews had no concept of original sin. This topic is very interesting to me.

[UmMusa]

As a practiciting Muslim, I can tell you that Allah gives us the halal (the permissible) and the haram (the forbidden). If you choose the haram way, then you are sinning. For example eating pork is haram. Therefore if I do eat pork I sinned. However, now that I'm reading this topic, I'm thinking really hard if there's a word in the Quran that equally translated to 'sin'. I'll get back to you :)

[Greta]

This surprised me when I learned it, as all those religions share the same creation story with Christianity, and I'd always thought "original sin" came from that story, but apparently that bit was added on later (so is the actual concept of "original sin" in the Bible, or is it extra-Biblical? or just in the New Testament but not the Old, even though it refers to events in the Old?)

 

I cannot say with certainty, but I remember reading that the doctrine of original sin came from Saint Augustine of Hippo. Though he is recognized as a saint by the Eastern Orthodox Church, this particular teaching of his was not accepted by the rest of the Church. The west, however, did accept his teaching on this matter. Hopefully those more knowledgeable than I on the topic of Christian history will jump in here.

 

ETA: Sorry, Janet, I did not see your post when I wrote mine!

Edited February 6, 2011 by GretaLynne

[UmMusa]

I'm back. We don't believe in 'original sin'. We believe all creatures are born in a state of submission to God (Islam). It is the upbringing that can change the person and his free will, too.

 

So, basically, yes we as Muslims want to avoid sinning at all costs in order to attain the pleasure of our Lord and to enter Paradise because we believe we are judged on our actions and intentions.

[Jenny in Florida]

sin, you mean the concept that all people have the potential to be lazy or selfish or uncompassionate and do bad things, then the answer is yes, most UUers believe in sin. They are unlikely to call it that, though, because in every congregation, there are people who consider themselves to have been damaged by other forms of Christianity and are now super sensitive and "allergic" to the terminology. The rest of us, who might find the term a useful shortcut, avoid using it so as not to hurt the allergic ones. It is rather like eveyone not being able to eat a peanut butter sandwich for lunch because somebody in the class's body overreacts to peanut butter. It makes things tricky at times.

 

Another UU-who-doesn't-identify-as-Christian speaking up here:

 

I believe in "sin" in such contexts as, "It's a sin to kill a mockingbird." In other words, I believe that there are some actions that are "sinful" because they are absolutely, undeniably bad or harmful to other beings.

 

What I don't believe is that there is a specific set of actions or thoughts or whatever that are "sinful" simply because an outside authority--God or whatever/whoever else--defines them as such.

 

I use the term sometimes, but it's not something that comes up much in my church.

[Nan in Mass]

I was trying to figure out how to explain what I think of as the two different ways this word is used, and failed. The closest I could come was sin-applied-to-people and sin-applied-to-an-act and that didn't really work. Good explanation.

[Greta]

I think the big, patriarchal God based religions- Christianity, Judaism, Islam- have sin as a central concept.

 

I dont think Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Shintoism etc do.

The concept of karma is quite different from the one of sin. Sin denotes an ultimate code by which one should live- as given by some authority- (in my mind, anyway), wheras other religions, while encouraging moral behaviour, allow it to be more directed from within and from being in touch with ones own naturally moral nature, rather than an objective concept of "sin".

 

Buddhism has a definite moral code by which one should live one's life. It's called the Eightfold Path, and while if you read articles about it online it may seem rather general, when you practice within a Buddhist community, it gets quite specific. Buddhism is very gentle, and meets people where they are, so people who are not following the path are certainly not condemned and banished as sinners. But the path IS the goal and the purpose and the raison d'etre of Buddhism. Buddhism is *not* morally neutral, and it does not leave one to decide for oneself what is moral and what isn't.

 

Buddha is definitely not an authority in an analogous way to God or Christ. But he is someone who discovered truths - absolute truths, called The Four Noble Truths - not just "his own truth".

 

I can't speak to the other faiths you mentioned, but I just wanted to say that in my experience, Buddhism is much more concrete than what you are describing here.

[Mejane]

I'm agnostic (atheist-leaning), and used to attend a UU church. I've never thought of wrong as "sin"; it's just wrong. Like some pp's, the word sin and the concept of sin, especially "original sin", is not in my reality.

[Jenny in Florida]

I'm agnostic (atheist-leaning), and used to attend a UU church. I've never thought of wrong as "sin"; it's just wrong. Like some pp's, the word sin and the concept of sin, especially "original sin", is not in my reality.

 

I totally agree about original sin. However, for me, there is a difference between something that is "wrong" and something that is a "sin."

 

But do remember this is a UU talking (or typing). So, I can speak only for myself.

[susankenny]

Well, I'm Christian. I do not see sin as a mere behavior. It is not simply about being bad or good. It is a state we are born into. Oswald Chambers has an excellent book that describes the essence of sin much better than I can. It is called "Conformed to His Image". I do believe most religions have a battle with "self", and although it is described differently and the root is not the same, we all share a common denominator to become selfless and more aware of of our Creator.

 

 

Susan

[Mejane]

I totally agree about original sin. However, for me, there is a difference between something that is "wrong" and something that is a "sin."

 

But do remember this is a UU talking (or typing). So, I can speak only for myself.

 

I understand. I think of heinous acts as just that. Imo, there are degrees of wrong, which is another reason I don't believe in the Christian concept of sin: it bugs me that all sin is equal. Can't get behind that one at. all.

 

One reason I loved the UU church was because there were as many viewpoints as there were members. :001_smile:

[Audrey]

 

 

I respectfully disagree. The concept of sin necessitates that people have the capacity to do bad, but that is not the same as inherently bad.

 

I would like to explain what I mean, but I don't mean this to be argumentative at all, and I don't mean to get too far afield of the OP's question. I only hope to clear up a misconception, if possible. Unfortunately, that's not exactly my area of expertise. :lol: But I will try.

 

In the Biblical account of creation, after each thing that God creates, He declares it good. And when He creates humanity, He declares His creation "very good". Christians believe that humankind was created in the image and likeness of God - far from what could be considered "inherently bad".

 

But God also gave us free will - the ability to choose. It is when we choose to do bad rather than good that we sin. It is when we "miss the mark" that we sin. It is when we fail to be that which God created us to be, "very good", that we sin.

 

Does that make sense? I'm saying that Christians do not believe that people sin because we were created "bad" or are inherently "bad", but because we *choose* to be other than that which we were created to be.

 

I hope that helped . . . ? And I should probably note that as an Eastern Orthodox Christian, I have a different view of sin than most (all?) of Western Christianity. (Our doctrine is called "ancestral sin", but we do not accept "original sin".) But I *think* that most Christians would agree with the above.

 

 

I'm sorry Greta, but respectfully meant or not, that did not help. I do not harbour a "misconception." Christians still say people are born sinners. That is my understanding after 20 years in Christianity and hearing it over and over and over again since then. That is equivalent to saying people are born bad. You may have a different opinion than me, but the OP did not ask for a Christian interpretation of sin. She asked for non-christians to speak, and I gave my interpretation. For you to come here and give me lecture on christian semantics is a bit presumptuous of you. You presume I do not know the christian interpretation. Quite the contrary, I know it very well. And, I reject it wholly.

[Audrey]

I'm back. We don't believe in 'original sin'. We believe all creatures are born in a state of submission to God (Islam). It is the upbringing that can change the person and his free will, too.

 

So, basically, yes we as Muslims want to avoid sinning at all costs in order to attain the pleasure of our Lord and to enter Paradise because we believe we are judged on our actions and intentions.

 

 

I was just going to ask you this. That is very different from the Christian idea. Does the word haram translate directly as sin, or is that a Westernized concept applied to the meaning of the word? In other words, does one substitute the word "sin" for "haram" for the sake of discussion, or is that the literal meaning of "haram?"

[HRAAB]

I understand. I think of heinous acts as just that. Imo, there are degrees of wrong, which is another reason I don't believe in the Christian concept of sin: it bugs me that all sin is equal. Can't get behind that one at. all.

 

One reason I loved the UU church was because there were as many viewpoints as there were members. :001_smile:

 

As to the bolded part: Catholicsm does not teach this. There are different degrees of sin - venial and mortal. Venial sin is a lesser sin, and grave sin is much more grevious. And for a sin to be mortal three are three criteria: the person must fully be aware it is indeed a grave, sinful act; the person must fully consent to the act; and the act itself must be defined as grave.

 

I'm not arguing or anything, just wanted to put that out there. I'm not even sure where I stand on the whole sin thing.

[Ravin]

Part of the problem I have here is that sin must first be clearly defined, before whether or not it's part of a particular belief system can be specified.

 

Now, if one uses Robert A. Heinlein's definition in Time Enough For Love, I'd say I subscribe to that. "Sin lies only in hurting other people unnecessarily. All other "sins" are invented nonsense. (Hurting yourself is not sinful--just stupid.)"

 

I find this definition personally useful in the practical application of ethics, but it's not really directly tied to religion. .

[Crimson Wife]

FWIW, I've never heard any Christian say that all sinful acts are equally bad. We are all sinners and therefore need Christ's forgiveness, and no sin is so bad that it is impossible for Christ to forgive us if we are truly penitent. But I've never heard anyone claim that cold-blooded murder is no worse than uttering a profanity. Christ sacrificed himself to atone for all our sins, serious or minor, but I haven't seen anything in the Bible to indicate that He considered them all to be equal.

[Rosie_0801]

The word "sin" makes it sound as though behaving badly isn't as completely normal as behaving well. Both are incredibly human, but one is more desirable than the other. But I'm trying to be a good human, not trying to become deity-like, which is impossible unless you have a deity that's as imperfect as you are anyway.

 

 

Rosie

[simka2]

 

 

I respectfully disagree. The concept of sin necessitates that people have the capacity to do bad, but that is not the same as inherently bad.

 

I would like to explain what I mean, but I don't mean this to be argumentative at all, and I don't mean to get too far afield of the OP's question. I only hope to clear up a misconception, if possible. Unfortunately, that's not exactly my area of expertise. :lol: But I will try.

 

In the Biblical account of creation, after each thing that God creates, He declares it good. And when He creates humanity, He declares His creation "very good". Christians believe that humankind was created in the image and likeness of God - far from what could be considered "inherently bad".

 

But God also gave us free will - the ability to choose. It is when we choose to do bad rather than good that we sin. It is when we "miss the mark" that we sin. It is when we fail to be that which God created us to be, "very good", that we sin.

 

Does that make sense? I'm saying that Christians do not believe that people sin because we were created "bad" or are inherently "bad", but because we *choose* to be other than that which we were created to be.

 

I hope that helped . . . ? And I should probably note that as an Eastern Orthodox Christian, I have a different view of sin than most (all?) of Western Christianity. (Our doctrine is called "ancestral sin", but we do not accept "original sin".) But I *think* that most Christians would agree with the above.

 

I'm sorry Greta, but respectfully meant or not, that did not help. I do not harbour a "misconception." Christians still say people are born sinners. That is my understanding after 20 years in Christianity and hearing it over and over and over again since then. That is equivalent to saying people are born bad. You may have a different opinion than me, but the OP did not ask for a Christian interpretation of sin. She asked for non-christians to speak, and I gave my interpretation. For you to come here and give me lecture on christian semantics is a bit presumptuous of you. You presume I do not know the christian interpretation. Quite the contrary, I know it very well. And, I reject it wholly.

I think the difference is betweem Western and Eastern Christianity. To my knowledge Eastern does not believe in, "Original Sin." :001_smile:

[Greta]

I'm sorry Greta, but respectfully meant or not, that did not help. I do not harbour a "misconception." Christians still say people are born sinners. That is my understanding after 20 years in Christianity and hearing it over and over and over again since then. That is equivalent to saying people are born bad. You may have a different opinion than me, but the OP did not ask for a Christian interpretation of sin. She asked for non-christians to speak, and I gave my interpretation. For you to come here and give me lecture on christian semantics is a bit presumptuous of you. You presume I do not know the christian interpretation. Quite the contrary, I know it very well. And, I reject it wholly.

 

Audrey, I sincerely apologize for causing offense. I believe in sin. But I do not believe that people are inherently bad. My only intention was to try to explain that. I meant no disrespect to you or to the OP.

[Ibbygirl]

I'm sorry Greta, but respectfully meant or not, that did not help. I do not harbour a "misconception." Christians still say people are born sinners. That is my understanding after 20 years in Christianity and hearing it over and over and over again since then. That is equivalent to saying people are born bad. You may have a different opinion than me, but the OP did not ask for a Christian interpretation of sin. She asked for non-christians to speak, and I gave my interpretation. For you to come here and give me lecture on christian semantics is a bit presumptuous of you. You presume I do not know the christian interpretation. Quite the contrary, I know it very well. And, I reject it wholly.

 

I thought she was offering her insights from her back-round in Buddhism? That seems relevant to this conversation to me.

[HRAAB]

FWIW, I've never heard any Christian say that all sinful acts are equally bad. We are all sinners and therefore need Christ's forgiveness, and no sin is so bad that it is impossible for Christ to forgive us if we are truly penitent. But I've never heard anyone claim that cold-blooded murder is no worse than uttering a profanity. Christ sacrificed himself to atone for all our sins, serious or minor, but I haven't seen anything in the Bible to indicate that He considered them all to be equal.

 

I have many times had Christians (not Catholic) tell me that all sin is the same to God. Whether this is believed by all Protestants or just some or where it comes from, I can't say. My bil and his wife most definitely believe this - we've had conversations on this very topic - they usually attend a Baptist Church. Now whether they distinguish between sinful acts here on earth as viewed by humans and how God sees sinful acts, I don't know. There might be a difference of understanding.

[Greta]

I thought she was offering her insights from her back-round in Buddhism? That seems relevant to this conversation to me.

 

Thank you. :001_smile: But I was doing both - sharing from my previous Buddhist perspective and my current Christian one. I hesitated before posting the Christian part, and maybe should have kept my mouth shut. But I didn't take the OP's request for non-Christian input to mean that Christians weren't welcome. And since I disagreed with Audrey's view of what sin means, I thought it would be okay to explain my beliefs. I am sorry to have caused unpleasantness, though. I really hate it when I do that, because if you knew me in real life, you would know I am about the least confrontational person in the world! Amazing how often I manage to get myself in trouble on these boards, though. :blush:

[Haiku]

My understanding as a non-Christian is that sin is something that puts you out of communion with god. Therefore, unless another religion has a concept of a god, there would be no sin.

 

There is no concept of sin in my religion.

 

Tara

[Guest Katia]

Thanks to all who have participated in this discussion thus far. I am learning so much and this is a truly fascinating topic. Please, anyone else who would like to join in, I'd love to hear from more of you.

[Audrey]

Audrey, I sincerely apologize for causing offense. I believe in sin. But I do not believe that people are inherently bad. My only intention was to try to explain that. I meant no disrespect to you or to the OP.

 

 

I should not be offended and I should not jump at you. I apologize for that. What you were doing came across as condescending to me because I've heard that before from people with superiority complexes. I should have taken a moment to remember that you, Greta, would not have meant it like that.

[HeathenMom]

My understanding as a non-Christian is that sin is something that puts you out of communion with god.

 

:iagree:

 

this has always been my understanding of sin as well.

 

not only does my religion not believe in sin, but we see no need for salvation or atonement, either.

[Greta]

I should not be offended and I should not jump at you. I apologize for that. What you were doing came across as condescending to me because I've heard that before from people with superiority complexes. I should have taken a moment to remember that you, Greta, would not have meant it like that.

 

Audrey, you just made my day. :001_smile: Thank you so much for your kindness. But I do need to remember that people have had some very hurtful experiences with Christianity (as I have, myself!) and that I should tread very lightly in these matters. I will try to be more careful in the future.

 

ETA: I'm also very guilty of newbie over-enthusiasm. It's like when I first started homeschooling and knew everything there was to know about homeschooling :tongue_smilie:and so had to share my knowledge with everyone. :lol: :blush:

Edited February 6, 2011 by GretaLynne