Right and Wrong

As Jerry Macguire once said, "Help me,... help you!"

I'm trying to avoid the downward spiral we always seem to go through when we talk about sin. One of the things you always say is that it is a concept and not a fact. I don't know what you mean by that because some concepts are facts in my mind, such as the golden rule. Could you better define your objection to concepts as being real or true?

Quote: FrGamble

Could you better define your objection to concepts as being real or true?

I simply need for you to prove sin is real. You
believe it is because those in charge of your
religion took a vote 1500 years ago or so, and
they all agreed it was real. They certainly didn't
prove it was real, that can't be done.

If you said Big Foot was real, I'd ask you to prove
that, and you wouldn't be able to. Yet tons of
people believe it. I'll accept sin and embrace it
as soon as I know for sure it exists.

"The other side of the coin is religious fundamentalists who consider that their religious knowledge includes scientific conclusions drawn from the Bible."

Sin is as real at the square root of -1.

Quote: TheCesspit

Sin is as real at the square root of -1.

At the square root of -1 lies an imaginary number. If sin is real "at" that number, well, I'm not sure what the point is.

Linguistic sins, like confusing "then" with "than" or "as" with "at," are quite real. They also really pervert the meaning one is trying to convey ;)

Quote: Nareed

At the square root of -1 lies an imaginary number. If sin is real "at" that number, well, I'm not sure what the point is.

This is my point entirely. I am fully aware what 'i' (or 'j' is).

You can think of sin as a concept or a definition. But it's one that has very real use. Asking if sin exists is like asking if the square root of minus one exists. It depends on whose asking, what answer they want and what 'exists' means.

Thus Bob will never agree with any proof the Good Friar may make. And vice versa. They won't agree on the axioms of the debate question, so all else is useless.

Quote: TheCesspit

Thus Bob will never agree with any proof the Good Friar may make. .

There is no proof, how could there be.
The whole premise is, sin exists because
I say so and so do others. The padre wants
to draw me into a semantics discussion,
but I won't go there. You can't even prove
good and evil are real. What's good to one
person can easily be evil to another.

Take something as simple as a peanut butter
sandwich. Good in your bagged school lunch,
evil if you have a peanut allergy. So is PB good
or evil? Like all things, it depends on your POV.

Quote: TheCesspit

Uou can think of sin as a concept or a definition. But it's one that has very real use. Asking if sin exists is like asking if the square root of minus one exists. It depends on whose asking, what answer they want and what 'exists' means.

Oh, you could hire two armies of pedantic sophists just to sort out this very true statement: Numbers have no physical existence, but they are real.

Enjoy :)

Quote: Nareed

Numbers have no physical existence, but they are real.

Just as there appears to be good and evil. Numbers
are only real and useful if we all agree on it. The
goal of the Church has always been to get everybody
to agree that sin is real. Once they do that, the rest
is easy.

Quote: Evenbob

Take something as simple as a peanut butter
sandwich. Good in your bagged school lunch,
evil if you have a peanut allergy. So is PB good
or evil? Like all things, it depends on your POV.

I'm trying very hard not to get upset, but this drivel above is the same stuff that got us in trouble in the other thread about Original Sin. You took something simple that is morally neutral like peanut butter. How ridiculous?!? Take something a little more difficult like rape and let me point blank ask you - can you possibly claim that the "goodness" or evil of that act depends on your POV!?! If you cannot admit that some things like the purposeful mass killing of innocent human beings is objectively evil no matter what your point of view may be, then how can we have an intelligent conversation?

Okay, I'm calm now. Evenbob, you might not call it sin, but do you at least acknowledge that all human beings struggle with something that maybe you would be more comfortable calling a developmental flaw, a psychological weakness, mistakes, or perhaps the necessary consequence of an inadequate social structure? Whatever you may call it; I believe there is no doubt that there is a disconnect between who we are and who in our heart of hearts or in our dreams we would like to be.

Proof? Ask yourself honestly if there are some things about yourself that you would like to change or be better at? Look at a newspaper; are we as human beings living up to even the most basic standards of morality, namely survival and protecting the common good? Finally, look at history and see that every society since the dawn of man has always had a type of cultural or religious ceremony/event/plan that was some kind of sacrifice, atonement, or scapegoating to appease a deity or ease tension in society caused by the brokenness of humanity.

Quote: FrGamble

but do you at least acknowledge that all human beings struggle with something that maybe you would be more comfortable calling a developmental flaw, a psychological weakness

Nope. Check out history, there are whole cultures
that had no moral compass about raping and
pillaging any peoples they came across. If you
weren't a member of their clan, you were fair
game. The more civilized we became, the more
time we had to curb our natural impulses to do
whatever the hell we wanted.

"You took something simple that is morally neutral like peanut butter. How ridiculous?!?"

I did it to make a point. Ever know a kid that
has a bad peanut allergy? Believe me, they
think peanuts are evil. They hate them, are
terrified of them. Good and evil depend on
your POV.