Serious Question: For those who do no adhere to the concept of sin?

Question

by what standards do you evaluate your actions, motivates and feelings by

suppose to be "do not"

Answer 1

Conscience, which is a conscious interpretation of the instincts of altruism and empathy that are common to all social mammalian species.

Answer 2

A good question, and as an agnostic, one that I have wrestled with. A good thing about religion is that the morals are built in. Since humanity has existed with religion for so long, most of our morals are religious based. If religion, as the base, is removed, then how do we define our morals?

Since I do not know if god exists - I still adhere to the 10 commandments, since that is what the majority of people in the world has accepted as a basic moral code.

I do not have an issue with the basis of morality coming from a religious background - as it has generally been more helpful than hurtful during the development of humanity.

Answer 3

Humans apply their logic and intelligence to the matter, but there's more to it than that:

All social animals have an instinct to be fair and caring to their neighbours. Chimps do it; meerkats do it; crows do it. All of what we call morality flow from this simple Golden Rule, which has been around long before the Bible and any other holy book.

That instinct is vital, because without it no society can hold together.

CD

Answer 4

Moral standards derive from evolution, which applies to societies as well as to species: a society which adheres to a sound moral code will survive preferably to one that does not. It follows that the proper standard to apply is: how will the proposed action affect society as a whole? Religion has often claimed the role of moral arbiter, but such claims are without foundation.

Answer 5

Do you seriously believe that no culture in the world had any laws or sense of ethics until some burning bush in the Sinai Desert set us all straight?

You have a false and deeply flawed view of the history of the human race.

Answer 6

By what ultimately harms or hurts society. Some things may hurt individuals, but this isn't always necessarily bad. Some things may feel good, but this isn't necessarily right.

That which helps support the survival of a species or a group is generally good. That which harms is not.

Answer 7

My conscience. I do not need a book to tell me how to act. My morals come from myself. If you need something to tell you how to act, then you are probably not really a good person if you need that to supress yourself.

If I am not hurting anyone or myself, then what I am doing is most likely ok. If my actions were to harm someone who does not deserve it then my actions are most likely wrong.

Now, is that so hard to understand?

Answer 8

It is amazing that a 2 year old could ask such a question. If you were older than 2, then you would not ask such a stupid question, but your English is excellent for a baby.

Answer 9

Society and social ties, and just logic and compassion. I know what I want to be treated like and so I relate that to others. I don't let some 2,000 year old book that tells people to kill fornicators and idolaters, homosexuals, rebellious children, marry your rapist, sacrifice animals and your own son in order to reap forgiveness, etc...

The bible was ancient man's poor attempt to strike fear in the people's minds hoping to have them adhere to the absurd laws and 'morality'. Fortunately today most of us have strayed as far away from religious morals as possible. Even you so called 'Christians don't dare follow all the morals of the bible.

If the bible is your guideline for morals I sure don't want to be a friend of yours.

Answer 10

The universal truth that every action has an opposite and equal reaction.