I don't particularly want to sin...

[Evangelicalhumanist]

This is, of course, in counterpoint the thread "I just want to sin!!"

I offer up this question to those believers who honestly think that, without God, everything is permitted. That is, if you really do believe that dictum ("without God, everything is permitted"), then you must also admit that if you did not believe in God, and follow what you believe to be God's commands, you would not know right from wrong.

Really? Is that really true?

Make a case for me, anyone who really thinks that.

 

[Revoltingest]

I want to sin....in the same way I want to meet Voldemort.
Id est, not at all....not even possible.

 

[Eyes to See]

The whole OP is convoluted it doesn't make much sense. I am thinking perhaps you mean "unbelievers?" I don't know of any believers who think that without God everything is permitted. If you're referring to unbelievers that would make more sense.

There are those who do think that morality is subjective. As they don't think there is a God who can dictate morality.

There is an interesting point in the Bible though about people who are alienated from God, who do not know of his moral code recorded for us in the Bible who of their own volition do the things of the law. It says these demonstrate that God's law is written in their hearts:

"For when people of the nations, who do not have law, do by nature the things of the law, these people, although not having law, are a law to themselves. They are the very ones who demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts, while their conscience is bearing witness with them, and by their own thoughts they are being accused or even excused."-Romans 2:14-15.

The heart referred to here is the figurative one, the hidden seat of desire and motivation of a person. It appears that God has given us a moral code and written it into our DNA. That is why we can see cultures all around the world, even backwards and primitive ones who have had no contact with society for hundreds of years, hold simple truths to be true. Such as murder is wrong, adultery is wrong, stealing is wrong, etc.

Of course that does not mean that society's values cannot be corrupted, or that a person cannot sear their conscience as with a branding iron so that it may become hardened to sin. Or that a person's conscience without the guide of God's word is going to be a reliable guide to what is right and wrong all the time.

ETA:

A Proverb came to mind that shows how backwards people alienated from God can become in their morality. It speaks of a generation that thinks it is pure in its own eyes (subjective morality) but has not been cleansed of its own filth (or excrement in some translations):

"There is a generation that is pure in its own eyes But has not been cleansed from its filth."-Proverbs 30:12.

I imagine societies such as the ones of Sodom and Gomorrah, or say Nineveh, or the days before the flood could be included in such generations considering themselves pure, but in God's eyes completely filthy.

I cannot but apply this Proverb to our modern-day society where all sorts of immorality and perversions are considered to be pure and good in society's eyes. As another prophecy tells us:

"Woe to those who say that good is bad and bad is good,
Those who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness,
Those who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
Woe to those wise in their own eyes
And discreet in their own sight!"
-Isaiah 5:20-21.

There is no doubt God's word talks to entire chunks of today's world in those words.

 

[F1fan]

The whole OP is convoluted it doesn't make much sense. I am thinking perhaps you mean "unbelievers?" I don't know of any believers who think that without God everything is permitted. If you're referring to unbelievers that would make more sense.

There are those who do think that morality is subjective. As they don't think there is a God who can dictate morality.

So the 9-11 hijackers were moral since they were following God's commands. The people who fought back on Flight 93 were sinners since they defied God's plan.

Of course that does not mean that societies values cannot be corrupted, or that a person cannot sear their conscience as with a branding iron so that it may become hardened to sin. Or that a person's conscience without the guide of God's word is going to be a reliable guide to what is right and wrong all the time.[/QUOTE]
How does a fallible human, like yourself, know when some idea is moral or not? And if their subjective interpretation of the bible is morally reliable? Give us the objective test in reality that you use.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

This is, of course, in counterpoint the thread "I just want to sin!!"

I offer up this question to those believers who honestly think that, without God, everything is permitted. That is, if you really do believe that dictum ("without God, everything is permitted"), then you must also admit that if you did not believe in God, and follow what you believe to be God's commands, you would not know right from wrong.

Really? Is that really true?

Make a case for me, anyone who really thinks that.

It actually does make sense when you know how they're thinking.
Christianity (and Judaism) is a big, long list of "thou shalt nots." Most of these things are minor, petty, trivial things that no one would really make a big deal out of. Like simply having lustful or angry thoughts. But Christianity expects such purity that yes, even thoughts can be sinful. So Christians abstain from much. They tell themselves no. They remind each other than even things that seem innocent can be an offense to god. Jesus does expect them to behave a certain way. And there are no lesser or greater sins. All sins are equal before Jehovah, and all sins deserve death and Hell.
They also believe one must have their god and religion to be a moral person. But others don't have this. Others, especially atheists, do not have the long list of "thou shalt nots." What's holding them back from doing the worst if they aren't worried about the eternal consequences? They are convinced they have the source of all morality and all things good, and without these things just are not possible.

 

[Kenny]

This is, of course, in counterpoint the thread "I just want to sin!!"

I offer up this question to those believers who honestly think that, without God, everything is permitted. That is, if you really do believe that dictum ("without God, everything is permitted"), then you must also admit that if you did not believe in God, and follow what you believe to be God's commands, you would not know right from wrong.

Really? Is that really true?

Make a case for me, anyone who really thinks that.

I wouldn't hold to that perspective... it is too global. And, certainly, with or without God people permit themselves to do things that others wouldn't.

But, if one holds that there is no God, couldn't we then say "My values are my values and you can't tell me I'm wrong?"

 

[SkepticThinker]

The whole OP is convoluted it doesn't make much sense. I am thinking perhaps you mean "unbelievers?" I don't know of any believers who think that without God everything is permitted. If you're referring to unbelievers that would make more sense.

Why does it make more sense to you that unbelievers would think that? Because that makes absolutely no sense to me. That would mean that unbelievers think they can do whatever they want, which from my experience, most don't actually believe.

There are those who do think that morality is subjective. As they don't think there is a God who can dictate morality.

I think morality is situationally-dependent.

There is an interesting point in the Bible though about people who are alienated from God, who do not know of his moral code recorded for us in the Bible who of their own volition do the things of the law. It says these demonstrate that God's law is written in their hearts:

"For when people of the nations, who do not have law, do by nature the things of the law, these people, although not having law, are a law to themselves. They are the very ones who demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts, while their conscience is bearing witness with them, and by their own thoughts they are being accused or even excused."-Romans 2:14-15.

The heart referred to here is the figurative one, the hidden seat of desire and motivation of a person. It appears that God has given us a moral code and written it into our DNA. That is why we can see cultures all around the world, even backwards and primitive ones who have had no contact with society for hundreds of years, hold simple truths to be true. Such as murder is wrong, adultery is wrong, stealing is wrong, etc.

Of course that does not mean that society's values cannot be corrupted, or that a person cannot sear their conscience as with a branding iron so that it may become hardened to sin. Or that a person's conscience without the guide of God's word is going to be a reliable guide to what is right and wrong all the time.

I guess God forgot to write this stuff on the hearts of sociopaths.

You mentioned the Bible, so we're talking about the God who advocates for slavery in that book, right?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I want to sin....in the same way I want to meet Voldemort.
Id est, not at all....not even possible.

Pigs will be happy to know you no longer want to eat them.

 

[Eyes to See]

Why does it make more sense to you that unbelievers would think that? Because that makes absolutely no sense to me. That would mean that unbelievers think they can do whatever they want, which from my experience, most don't actually believe.



I think morality is situationally-dependent.


I guess God forgot to write this stuff on the hearts of sociopaths.

Morality is not dictated by man. It is given by God. I added a little to my post above that explains a little about your sociopaths and pyscopaths. A lot of it has to do with the breakdown of morality of modern society so that people are so selfish and evil they think they are pure and good in their own eyes, discreet and wise in their own eyes, when from God's viewpoint of what is holy and clean they are filthy, unclean, and unrighteous.

I cannot prove this, but I cannot help but wonder if pyscopaths in society are demon-possessed, and that is why they are devoid of normal human emotion and empathy.

Whatever the case we have all been created with freewill. But that does not give us the right to dictate morality, or to abuse of it. Freewill was given to us by a God of love so that we may freely express love, especially to our Creator. For without freewill we would merely be robots, like the beasts of the field governed by instinct.

 

[Eyes to See]

So the 9-11 hijackers were moral since they were following God's commands. The people who fought back on Flight 93 were sinners since they defied God's plan.

Of course that does not mean that societies values cannot be corrupted, or that a person cannot sear their conscience as with a branding iron so that it may become hardened to sin. Or that a person's conscience without the guide of God's word is going to be a reliable guide to what is right and wrong all the time.

How does a fallible human, like yourself, know when some idea is moral or not? And if their subjective interpretation of the bible is morally reliable? Give us the objective test in reality that you use.[/QUOTE]

No of course not. Just because a person claims to be godly does not make them so. In fact atrocities committed by unholy and ungodly people in the name of God was foretold to happen. For example we are told in 2 Timothy 3:1-6 that in the last days people would have a form of godliness but prove false to its power.

As to your question about fallibility, I am, like you, very prone to error and mistakes. God's word is like a mirror that reflects to a person whom that person is, it reveals to us all our flaws, exposed in God's eyes. For God's word is alive and exerts power and is able to penetrate to the marrow, and discerns thoughts and intentions of the heart:


"For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, this one is like a man looking at his own face in a mirror. For he looks at himself, and he goes away and immediately forgets what sort of person he is. But the one who peers into the perfect law that belongs to freedom and continues in it has become, not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work; and he will be happy in what he does."-James 1:23-25.

"For the word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of joints from the marrow, and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart."-Hebrews 4:12.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Morality is not dictated by man. It is given by God.

So it is claimed.

From where I sit, it's human beings who dictate morality. I see no evidence of any God(s) doing so.

I added a little to my post above that explains a little about your sociopaths and pyscopaths. A lot of it has to do with the breakdown of morality of modern society so that people are so selfish and evil they think they are pure and good in their own eyes, discreet and wise in their own eyes, when from God's viewpoint of what is holy and clean they are filthy, unclean, and unrighteous.

Sorry but I don't see how that explains sociopaths and psychopaths who only make up a small proportion of the general population.

I cannot prove this, but I cannot help but wonder if pyscopaths in society are demon-possessed, and that is why they are devoid of normal human emotion and empathy.

I don't see any reason at all to suggest that sociopaths are possessed by demons, especially since nobody has ever shown demons to exist in the first place.

Sociopaths are shaped by their life experiences mixed with their genetic predispositions, as most human beings are.

Whatever the case we have all been created with freewill. But that does not give us the right to dictate morality, or to abuse of it. Freewill was given to us by a God of love so that we may freely express love, especially to our Creator.

For without freewill we would merely be robots, like the beasts of the field governed by instinct.[/QUOTE]

What would be wrong with that? If say, we were all morally correct robots, the world might be a better place for everyone, wouldn't it?



You haven't seemed to address my point about why you think it makes more sense for unbelievers to believe that if there is no God that anything is permitted. That doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

But, if one holds that there is no God, couldn't we then say "My values are my values and you can't tell me I'm wrong?"

A god doesn't necessitate objective values. Any more than a parent has better values than their children, or the inventor of straws telling me I can't value it for art projects because it was intended for drinking liquids.
Just another person in a sea of persons claiming that their values are superior.

More realistically it's just subjectively interpreting the scripture after subjective scribes translating scripture after subjective prophets laying down what they think a god wants. And the rest of us deciding if we agree that what it wants is valuable.

 

[Eyes to See]

So it is claimed.

From where I sit, it's human beings who dictate morality. I see no evidence of any God(s) doing so.


Sorry but I don't see how that explains sociopaths and psychopaths who only make up a small proportion of the general population.


I don't see any reason at all to suggest that sociopaths are possessed by demons, especially since nobody has ever shown demons to exist in the first place.

Sociopaths are shaped by their life experiences mixed with their genetic predispositions, as most human beings are.



For without freewill we would merely be robots, like the beasts of the field governed by instinct.

What would be wrong with that? If say, we were all morally correct robots, the world might be a better place for everyone, wouldn't it?



You haven't seemed to address my point about why you think it makes more sense for unbelievers to believe that if there is no God that anything is permitted. That doesn't make any sense to me.[/QUOTE]

There is a difference between sociopaths and psychopaths, and I never claimed that sociopaths were demon-possesed. I did make a speculation on psychopaths.

There would be nothing wrong with being robots if that is what God wanted us to be. He made beasts of the field, and flying creatures of the heavens governed by instinct, and many of them in their natural instinct are wiser than humankind in certain things.

But we were made in God's image, with that comes self-awareness, and freewill. As Jehovah himself says:

"The One who made the ear, can he not hear?
The One who formed the eye, can he not see?
The One correcting the nations, can he not reprove?
He is the One who imparts knowledge to people!"
-Psalm 94:9-10.

 

[F1fan]

No of course not. Just because a person claims to be godly does not make them so. In fact atrocities committed by unholy and ungodly people in the name of God was foretold to happen.

Of course it was foretold by those creating a new god and religion, they saw it happening and surely were doing it themselves.

The question is why the "godly" commit atrocities if they are tuned in to God. The ungodly will misbehave, but we expect the godly to be damned near perfect, right? If not, then what use is being godly if you're not going to be moral anyway?

For example we are told in 2 Timothy 3:1-6 that in the last days people would have a form of godliness but prove false to its power.

Like donald trump being elected president by Christians.

As to your question about fallibility, I am, like you, very prone to error and mistakes. God's word is like a mirror that reflects to a person whom that person is, it reveals to us all our flaws, exposed in God's eyes.

That's why good people make good theists, and bad people make bad theists, and religion won't make bad people good. It's essentially good people are good people, even if atheists.

For God's word is alive and exerts power and is able to penetrate to the marrow, and discerns thoughts and intentions of the heart:


"For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, this one is like a man looking at his own face in a mirror. For he looks at himself, and he goes away and immediately forgets what sort of person he is. But the one who peers into the perfect law that belongs to freedom and continues in it has become, not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work; and he will be happy in what he does."-James 1:23-25.

"For the word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of joints from the marrow, and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart."-Hebrews 4:12.

None of this is very reliable, is it? It doesn't make corrupt believers into good people.

 

[Eyes to See]

Of course it was foretold by those creating a new god and religion, they saw it happening and surely were doing it themselves.

The question is why the "godly" commit atrocities if they are tuned in to God. The ungodly will misbehave, but we expect the godly to be damned near perfect, right? If not, then what use is being godly if you're not going to be moral anyway?


Like donald trump being elected president by Christians.


That's why good people make good theists, and bad people make bad theists, and religion won't make bad people good. It's essentially good people are good people, even if atheists.


None of this is very reliable, is it? It doesn't make corrupt believers into good people.

Sorry I don't know how to separate out the quotes like you do here. Maybe I'll copy and paste below:

"The question is why the "godly" commit atrocities if they are tuned in to God."

Because they have freewill. Satan the Devil was an angel in heaven before he sinned. Why did he sin, did he become ungodly? He coveted that which did not belong to him, namely worship, and then he sinned. If Satan the Devil, or humans were created as robots incapable of independent thought or freewill then sin would not be possible. Scripture states it this way:

"But each one is tried by being drawn out and enticed by his own desire. Then the desire, when it has become fertile, gives birth to sin; in turn sin, when it has been carried out, brings forth death."-James 1:14-15.


"Like donald trump being elected president by Christians."

Jesus told us that his followers were not part of this world, and his kingdom is no part of this world:

“My Kingdom is no part of this world."-John 18:36.

"If you were part of the world, the world would be fond of what is its own. Now because you are no part of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, for this reason the world hates you."-John 15:19.

True Christians remain neutral to politics in any nation they live in. They are obedient to the superior authorities paying back Caesar's things to Caesar, and God's things to God. They look to God's kingdom in heaven for which Jesus asked for us to pray to come to earth and make God's will done on earth as it has been done in heaven.

Jesus said that many people would claim to be his followers but when he returns he would refute their claims and tell them he never knew them:

“Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will. Many will say to me in that day: ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’  And then I will declare to them: ‘I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!’
"-Matthew 7:21-23.

Herein is the key true Christians are doing the will of God. There are many false professed Christians who are not doing his will as you have pointed out.

 

[F1fan]

There is a difference between sociopaths and psychopaths, and I never claimed that sociopaths were demon-possesed. I did make a speculation on psychopaths.

There would be nothing wrong with being robots if that is what God wanted us to be. He made beasts of the field, and flying creatures of the heavens governed by instinct, and many of them in their natural instinct are wiser than humankind in certain things.

But we were made in God's image, with that comes self-awareness, and freewill. As Jehovah himself says:

"The One who made the ear, can he not hear?
The One who formed the eye, can he not see?
The One correcting the nations, can he not reprove?
He is the One who imparts knowledge to people!"
-Psalm 94:9-10.

Humans were literally beasts in the field as we evolved. As we evolved a more complex brain we also had opportunities to develop discipline of though and actions. Are the disciplined just robots? No, they have the choice to be evil and corrupt like anyone else, but have just developed a set of principles that have meaning aligned to our potential, capacity, and character. If you are a person capable of moral action, shouldn't that understanding be your choice: moral action.

Morals as dictated by dogma may make the self a robot or agent for some dogma, and relieves the self of any moral responsibility. So being a person free of religious influence and obedience makes a person less robotic, and more free to examine the self's moral capacity.

Buddhism has an advantage of offering a person a set of tools and practices to examine their own minds and thinking. The Abrahamic religions don't do this, and as a result the believer will be whatever they are by nature, a good believe, or a bad believer, and no lessons that challenge a bad believer to reconsider their poor judgments. The believer can be convinced their immoral behavior is correct because they blindly follow their dogma. It offers no test. This is how we get people like the 9-11 hijackers and trump voters

 

[F1fan]

Sorry I don't know how to separate out the quotes like you do here.

Just type [ quote] at the beginning of anything you want to respond to, and type [ /quote] at the end, but take out the spaces I put in so you can see what to do.

Plus when you reply the software automatically puts a quote at the top and at the end. You just need to add the quote instructions if you're going to break up a post.

 

[Eyes to See]

Of course it was foretold by those creating a new god and religion, they saw it happening and surely were doing it themselves.

None of this is very reliable, is it? It doesn't make corrupt believers into good people.

None of what has been quoted you from the healthy word of truth has failed. It has all come true and is reliable. You have not shown otherwise. Just stating the obvious that people abuse their freewill which they have been given. Everyone is given the option to do what is right or wrong. All of your questions and reasoning doesn't change that. It just validifies that.

 

[Eyes to See]

Humans were literally beasts in the field as we evolved. As we evolved a more complex brain we also had opportunities to develop discipline of though and actions. Are the disciplined just robots? No, they have the choice to be evil and corrupt like anyone else, but have just developed a set of principles that have meaning aligned to our potential, capacity, and character. If you are a person capable of moral action, shouldn't that understanding be your choice: moral action.

Morals as dictated by dogma may make the self a robot or agent for some dogma, and relieves the self of any moral responsibility. So being a person free of religious influence and obedience makes a person less robotic, and more free to examine the self's moral capacity.

Buddhism has an advantage of offering a person a set of tools and practices to examine their own minds and thinking. The Abrahamic religions don't do this, and as a result the believer will be whatever they are by nature, a good believe, or a bad believer, and no lessons that challenge a bad believer to reconsider their poor judgments. The believer can be convinced their immoral behavior is correct because they blindly follow their dogma. It offers no test. This is how we get people like the 9-11 hijackers and trump voters

Humans were created with freewill in the likeness of God:

" Then God said: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness."-Genesis 1:26.

The fact that we are able to contemplate eternity, unlike unreasoning animals, shows us that God has put eternity into our hearts:

"He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has even put eternity in their heart."-Ecclesiastes 3:11.

We cannot see into the invisible realm where God resides and from whence the physical realm of existence came into being. But we can perceive it is there. The very fact that you are able to conceive of the notion of God is proof that he is real. Animals do not reason on god, they are not spiritual, they cannot peer into the unknown with their mind's eye, nor do they contemplate eternity. Things which we have been given. It takes a little contemplating to realize these simple truths. They are not complex or difficult to understand. That is why we are also told that to refuse to acknowledge a maker in the creation as we contemplate it is inexcusable in God's eyes. I imagine to him someone who ignores his existence is absurd. He is probably thinking, and rightly so, we should be thanking him for life and all that he has done for us:

"For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable."-Romans 1:20.

"You are worthy, Jehovah our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power, because you created all things, and because of your will they came into existence and were created.”-Revelation 4:11.

 

[Nakosis]

This is, of course, in counterpoint the thread "I just want to sin!!"

I offer up this question to those believers who honestly think that, without God, everything is permitted. That is, if you really do believe that dictum ("without God, everything is permitted"), then you must also admit that if you did not believe in God, and follow what you believe to be God's commands, you would not know right from wrong.

Really? Is that really true?

Make a case for me, anyone who really thinks that.

I suspect one would find it hard put to sin without a God to disobey.

What is permitted not permitted is defined by civil laws. That's it.
Perhaps there is some similarity between the laws of some God and civil laws but that doesn't mean there is an actual correlation.

For sin there is no earthy accountability. For civil laws there is, at least in the books.