I have something I hope you can clarify for me.
Q)-What do you call it when you do something wrong? Do you call it a mistake, an error in judgment, or do you call it sin? (Do you even acknowledge that you COULD be a sinner)? Is it just a little "oopsy" to be swept under the rug, soon forgotten, or is there accountability involved?
If there is no accountability, how do you handle your children when they do wrong? If you don't believe in punishment for your own wrongdoings should you punish them for theirs? Shouldn't they be allowed to do as they please and run amok by your own standards if that's what you truly believe?
If you can at least ENTERTAIN the idea that you could possibly be a sinner, then how does that sin get reconciled?
2006-12-06
11:16:33
·
23 answers
·
asked by
lookn2cjc
6
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
scarlettewitch39
what do you CALL your "wrongdoing" was my question. An error in judgment, a mistake, or sin?
Eleveneleven,
you're exactly right, that's just what Christians do, we come to Jesus with our sins!
2006-12-06
11:25:46 ·
update #1
Gary F
I see nowhere in my question where I came anywhere close to implying the things you said in your response. I suggest you reread my question which was merely asking what you call your mistakes? Error in judgment, mistake, or sin.
2006-12-06
11:43:35 ·
update #2
y doncha
I honestly don't think atheists are any more immoral than anyone else. It's just that we call it sin as Christians, and I wanted to know how an atheist would "term" their wrongdoing. I appreciate that you tried to understand my question, and am saddened that everyone else seemed to think I was judging them when I truly am trying to get inside your heads to understand how you perceive this. I used the exaggeration of not punishing your children and letting them run amok, not because I'm saying atheists DO this, but because we as Christians believe that God is our Heavenly Father, and we are accountable to Him, and obviously atheists don't, so I used that as the closest relating relationship I could think of without mentioning God which I thought would be more offensive to you. I apologize for any implications that I may have seemingly given that I don't think that atheists raise their children with proper standards!
2006-12-06
12:18:17 ·
update #3
I can answer this Q. from an islamic point of view: Islam believes that humans are good in nature, they tend to do the right thing. sometimes they make mistakes on purpose or unintentionally. those mistakes could involve other human beings, or simply not complying with orders of Allah without causing any harm to other people.
now islam does not deny the fact that people make mistakes. and when they do it opens the door for repentance. which involves sincere regret for your mistake, a great determination not to make mistakes again. and doing good deeds. if your mistake caused harm to anyone you have to aske that person for forgiveness and then give him/her whatever rights you have taken away from them. Allah is all forgiving and merciful. to sum up, islam deems humans as good natured creatures who might make mistakes and can be forgiven if they truely repent and do good deeds.
i hope this answers your question. and good luck.
2006-12-06 11:36:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by Truth bearer 3
·
4⤊
1⤋
I can make a mistake, I can make en error in judgement, I can also do something wrong. I don't call it sinning, "sin" is not a concept to me.
Whatever I do, I am accountable for my deeds. If I do something good, I can feel good about myself, If I screw up, I have to fix it. I'm responsible for my own deeds.
I don't really believe in punishment, if it has no educational value. If it has no forgiveness in it. If it has no new beginning. Without education, forgiveness and a new beginning -- punishment becomes useless. Without those, punishment is simply to make the punisher feel better.
So, when I screw up, I fix it. I apologize if it's a minor error, I ask forgiveness to the one I hurted if it's a bigger error.
If a person commits a crime (a major error) then that person should be punished. But in his jail time he should also get a proper education, a lesson on the value of life and the offer of a fresh start after the punishment is over.
Hell, for example, is a punishment without a future, without a chance of forgiveness and without the ability to learn from what the person has done wrong. Therefor it's a useless punishment.
In punishing my future children will always be a part of a lesson, an education and a part of forgiveness. How else should they learn from it?
Maybe this will make you understand a little that it's really a complete misunderstanding that a non-believer can 'do as they please'.
2006-12-06 19:33:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by Thinx 5
·
4⤊
0⤋
I call it what it is - a mistake or a **** up. Depends on the situation. A **** up is worse than a mistake.
Of course there is accountability! When you make a mistake or screw something up big time - not only do you have to answer to those people you wronged (we still feel guilt and remorse you know - it's hardwired into the human), the law (if what you did was illegal), and yourself. If you think we need God to punish us - you're sadly mistaken. Others will punish us emotionally, we punish ourselves emotionally, and the law is just.
Since there is accountability (most non-believers are strong believers in self-responsibility and accountability!), your question about handling children is moot. Obviously they need to learn there are consequences to their actions. So they will be punished just as we are punished for our own screw ups.
I personally just don't call it sin because my God knows I know right from wrong. It's hardwired into us. Otherwise - why do we cry when we see someone else in pain? Why do we feel bad when we hurt another person emotionally or physically? Why do we all still seek to make someone we love happy and feel good? It's all hardwired into our human nature, my dear. Sure - there are people out there who have no compassion or guilt whatsoever, but that just means their wiring is screwed up. And that's likely a physical defect of some kind. Not all atheists and non-Christians are defective as you're suggesting.
Personally - I think running to your deity when you screw up is the coward's way out. It means you can't face yourself or take responsability for your own actions. Not only that - but you're also suggesting that Christians would be terrible people without the threat of God's wrath. I disagree. I think morals are the hallmark of a civilized human society. Not necessarily religion.
2006-12-06 19:26:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by swordarkeereon 6
·
5⤊
0⤋
I understand the question - but you cannot compare raising children in the real world to a mythical idea of sinning and God....
Typically, I dont do wrong - thats part of being an Atheist. I dont rob from people, I dont rape and I dont murder. Yeah, Im engaged to be married - and my mind wanders...I "covet" girls on BART, etc. But this is NORMAL HUMAN EMOTION, and not truly WRONG - as Im certain my fiance does the same thing. What matters is that we do not react upon it...
Just going off the Ten Commandments alone, the first four concern worshipping other Gods. Being an Atheist, I dont have to worry about these "sins".... the rest are things that I do not allow myself to engage in. Murder, rape, stealing, etc.
If my child was caught doing any of those things, I would expect the full punishment of the law of the land I live in to be brought upon them.
What you need to do is let go of your beleif that Atheists are immoral, indecent humans that are mucking up the world... Because you couldnt be further from the truth with that kind of thinking....
2006-12-06 19:23:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by YDoncha_Blowme 6
·
4⤊
0⤋
We must each hold our selves accountable for our mistakes. This question implies that if you have no religion, you have no morals, and that is not true. The bible sets a great example for how we should live our lives, but I disagree with a lot of what the bible teaches, and I cannot bring myself to follow something I do not believe in. I try to be the best person I can be, I do not run amok, and do not allow my child to. In the end I want to be a good person, and I want people to remember me that way. I want the same for my child and that is the goal I work toward.
2006-12-06 19:27:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by Amanda D 3
·
4⤊
0⤋
It's a mistake. Of course there is accountability involved. To even assume that because one doesn't see wrongdoings in the same way as you that it means they don't see it as wrong is really silly. I take responsibility for my actions. There is no rug to sweep it under.
As I said, when I do something wrong, I take responsibility for it. If I can correct it, I do. If I can't, I at least show I am remorseful for what I've done and watch myself to keep from doing it again. And I teach my child the same.
2006-12-06 21:30:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by Kithy 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Are you really this dellusional?
Do you really think we "unbelievers" are running around living lives of evil and depravity? Fornicating with anything that moves, murdering, raping and destroying cvilization?
Get a clue!
The only difference between how we live, how we are held accountable, and how we raise our children is the lack of belief in an invisible friend.
To be a productive and respected member of society you must obey the laws and live well by respecting and helping others. When you do something wrong YOU are accountable, not some imaginary boogey man. When you break a law YOU are responsible for the pain and suffering caused.
Atheist, agnostics, etc. understand the concept of responsibility and accountability FAR better then christians ever could BECAUSE WE HAVE NO ONE ELSE TO BLAME BUT OURSELVES!
2006-12-06 19:23:54
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
Grow up. Non-believers aren't running amok now, or hadn't you noticed? There are laws that everyone must abide by as well as the idea that I don't want certain things done to me so I don't do those things to others.
Not everyone needs a "good book" to know how to be a good person, and I will not even entertain the thought that I am a "sinner" because that is christian dogma.
Peace )O(
2006-12-06 19:26:13
·
answer #8
·
answered by DontPanic 7
·
6⤊
1⤋
I call the "sin", whatever it was, you don't have to believe in god to know right and wrong or to experience guilt.
Example if I lied, I would call it a lie, not a sin, and I would have regretted lying, because it is wrong to lie to ppl and if you lie enough ppl won't trust you, anymore.
I am accountable to myself and others, like anyone else I learn from my mistakes and although the guilt could still haunt me, I resolve not to make that mistake again.
2006-12-06 19:23:46
·
answer #9
·
answered by lilith 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
I’ll ignore the infantile logic implying that life provides no consequences for human actions outside the bounds of pre-scientific and marginally-literate mythological fairy tales from some quasi historic semi-nomadic Semitic tribes.
Those among us who seem to be running amok committing all manner of sin, including pedophilia and immoral violent acts of aggression resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people (and the destruction of an even greater number of lives) are the ‘believers’.
In addition to their good looks, Atheists are born with superior intelligence and pure souls. They do not require 2000 year old make-believe folk tales of wandering mammal managers to know right from wrong and they do not need to be threatened by punishment from imaginary supreme beings who cannot even shave themselves in order to behave properly.
-----------------------------------------------
lookn2cjc –
Yeah, right, your question was just an honest and objective query into the philosophy of human behavior and psycholinguistics. Not. Do you think it is a coincidence that almost everyone zeroed in on the same interpretation? Face it, you are not that clever and you do not command the language well enough to manipulate people with it.
------------------------------------------------------
lookn2cjc –
Words are powerful things, even, and especially, if they mean something different to each person. Reagan was expert at exploiting the emotional qualities of words and expressions. When he said he was for the ‘family’ and ‘home’, who can disagree with that?
Almost everyone is FOR their own home and family. However, everyone’s home and family is different. The rich and the poor both love their home. What about broken homes, gay homes, homes with no children, or homes with a dozen children? Everyone interprets it on their own emotional and intellectual level, and everyone agrees that ‘their’ home and family are good things.
If you question things that go to the core of people, you have to know that you are potentially throwing water on a hornets nest. It has been said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Be careful where you step.
2006-12-06 19:34:05
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋