I have never been able to accept the concept of sin. Sin is I think a crime against God. I have thought the concept unnecessary as humans do have an inmate sense of morality. Why should we be concerned with violating the will of a god that exists in the imaginations of only some humans and nowhere else?

Humans are the most destructive, infectious form of life to have ever have inhabited this planet. We also the most creative and compassionate too. Whether or not they balance - and how - are different questions.

As I see it as a self destruction weapon! Nothing destroys humanity than sin! So it is not against GOD, it is against your own soul, a self destruction weapon.
God doesn't benefit from it except you.
I belief in God that’s about it, if there is no GOD, there is no morality n everything is permissible and we can't talk about morality at all but I will say blaming religion for mankind’s atrocities is like blaming science for weapons of mass destruction.

Morality is what we make it. There are immoral / amoral people, some of them believe in god, some don't.
Many of the acts portrayed in all so call holy books would be considered immoral/criminal by today's standards.
Many of the world's most religious countries / states are the most immoral and violent. Many of the most secular ones are the most moral and peaceful.
God, whether she exists or not has nothing to do with morality, despite what you may have been indoctrinated to believe.

The good news.... Morality is secular! The bad news, humans are responsible for all the shitty things we have done as a species. I think it much better to think of "sin" as a 'crime' not against God but against humanity, either our own humanity or the humanity of our community of neighbours which includes all of us humans.

It also makes me wonder what a sin against God actually is and if it’s a sin against us what kind of questions that rises.
I think it would be safe to say those created with the ability to think and choose.

But I am open for the discussion.

ps/smoh

 

What exactly is Evil you think? Drop the religious trappings around it, does it still exist or does it change into something else….? BTW: I am moral consequentiality.

I think the terms "good" and "evil" are absolutely not helpful, especially in discussion of morals. more or less harmful, negative acts against society, negative acts against humans and society, or positive acts, or better the positive or negative outcome of acts for other humans and society are much clearer and definite to be used as the loaded:
Good or evil!

I think that good and evil are perceptions. I don't believe in universal moral absolutes.

I define evil, as very profound immorality. Of course, people will have different ideas about what falls under the evil category, but I think acts which are intended to cause the intense suffering of living creatures are a good example.
Evil is just a highly egoistic evolutionary strategy that harms other individuals.  

It feels like we have in almost inherited understanding of what evil is. We know it when we see it even if no one has talked to us about it before. 

Evil is something that goes against your conscience. The conscience is pure when you are born but then it slowly becomes corrupt when you become an adult. Your conscience makes you feel guilty, and that's how you know what is evil.
Evil is just a biologically and socially conditioned response. It's nothing but a cloud of molecular interactions in your brain.
Existential good and evil only makes sense if there is a mind above us all.

It seems a lot of "evil" evokes no negative response at all depending on who we are dealing with.

From evolutionary perspective, this basic perception of "good" and "evil" precedes religion, and some religions are based on it.
There is no need to create any deity to understand what is good or evil. After that it can get more complicated, because what is altruistic to a group can be egoistic to others, so this model explains the world very well, much better than any fairy tales with "sin" involved.

There seems to be a law of human nature which are manners many expect the other to know automatically. If I shove someone I expect that person to be upset but if I say ‘excuse me please; I hope they'd let me by.

Evil actions manipulate these manners for a desired response and expect a price for their trouble if it doesn't work out favourably. Good actions expect a desired response and get offended if it doesn't work out for their trouble.

There's no devil made me do it or God is blessing me its habits of practice that shape our thinking and our responses according to the law of human nature. Freewill allows us to change our habits and alter the responses hopefully favourably.

You see morality is created by people, not by any god and is therefore intended to serve humans. True morality in my opinion, should be based on consequential. In other words moral acts should be based on the results they produce, i.e. do they create good or bad consequences?

Of course this can be difficult to carry through at times, because we cannot always be sure of our good intentions.

There is also deontological morality which is duty or rule based and involves people acting the right way because it's the right thing to do rather than acting based on consequences and can be seen much like the laws of any given generation of people although morality implies, instead of a societal interpretation of right and wrong, an individualistic perspective in accordance with better or worse ways of determining our actions in any given circumstance.

I tend to find the consequential morality as being the most beneficial for evolving beings. As people grow spiritually they may embrace truth, beauty and goodness regardless of the consequences which may have good or bad consequences depending on the mental stability and level of distortion embraced by that particular being.  
We must embrace a perspective wholly unified in science and philosophy in order to maintain a healthy and balanced personality dedicated to serving a God of love, showing mercy and compassion for all fellow beings.

So how do you know what these absolute morals are?
My answer is by my own moral standards, based on empathy, reason and logic, situational judging what is the best moral decision.
So from here you can see what type of a person we are dealing with by their action.

And that is the only objective: To find the best possible moral solution for any given situation that requires moral actions or decisions!

I am, as I stated above consequentiality.

And if you now say:
Why should your morals then be binding for me...?
They aren't, but if we disagree on anything, then we would have to discuss it, and either I convince you, or you convince me with arguments, or we have to find a compromise, or we go on disagreeing.
But just because you claim to have some sort of absolute objective morality, I will not just accept your opinion!

Morality has zero relevance or meaning absent moral agents e.g. humans, so thinking there's some universal or independent morality seems pointless.
Morality is more or less as we define it.
Some may claim that morality then becomes relative, and in a way it does, however, if its application is based on a reasoned framework and applied consistently in relevant contexts, then you can essentially have an objective morality IN the contexts that matter.
Of course, it depends on what moral principles we deem important and how we construct and apply whatever framework we choose to employ - Iow morality is as objective or as relative as we make it.

Ignorance always has to be factored into all things, be it individuals, societies, and political organizations.
Ideals are goals and will begin as personal expressions and then manifest in the rules and regulations albeit in a watered down, lowest common denominator fashion.

Moral principles and laws are derived from human motivations.
It begins with the individual and spreads through society, hopefully leading to a better world in which we can all live peacefully and enjoy abundant life.

 

ps/smoh

I realize I am the sum of my choices and that the human condition is largely our responsibility – yet remain thankful for the choice. I will do better.

I own my life, I do not give it to any of the arrogance of organized religion. I only belief in God... My life is God gift to me and I live wisely, balancing my own pleasure and satisfaction with the welfare and good of the world and the rest of humanity. 
So many times in history, humankind was sure it had it all figured out - whether through revelation or science.
So, I remind myself to remain humble in the face of the universe's mysteries.

Every single one of the organised religion members claims to know the answer to everything, to have God on their side, or that they're the only ones who would be saved because of their beliefs.
People need to understand God on a personal level, and not by blindly accepting the beliefs of others.
It doesn't matter whether you are Christian, Muslim, pagan, or atheist - what matters is that you have examined your beliefs thoroughly on your own, and that you respect the fact that other people may see things differently than you do.

I myself do not like Creeds or Dogmas and I am not into religion but I believe we all heading to the same place from different paths.
When I look at the way the universe and nature they are so perfectly designed and balanced that I think there is a sort of creative intelligence which is the source of everything.... Though, what created the source?
That's the mystery....

God  to me is the creative intelligence we see reflected in the design of nature. And if the creation is intentional, that suggests that there is a purpose to creation.

Trying to reason out what that purpose might be is an interesting intellectual exercise.

But if we study nature, and try to live in accordance and in harmony with nature, it would seem that we would be aligning ourselves with that purpose, whatever it might be.

The overall "mind" of the human race I think has expanded, in short... The cold frightening truth is that we have "progressed" in thinking and truth, anyone who fears progress is a fool..
I say;
let us continue to seek truth, seek reasoning..

God/deity did give us minds to think; not to be blinded and become puppets.. This goes to all members of religious sects too, seek truth within your religion but not be afraid to go out the boundaries,

BE surprised and LEARN... but also GROW in your faith, we all have different faiths.. after all..

Religion is used as a tool to keep us divided. While we worry about who's right and whose wrong, the evilest deeds are being committed with no resistance. My personal belief is that believing in God has nothing to do with organised religion.

Religion is the frontier of failsafe to control life itself.

Well thats all from me, my usual, non-sense ramblings.

ps/smoh

I am one of those people who open my heart too easily. If our own chosen responses to another being are seen as uncomfortable or even unbearable, in whom are those feelings occurring, What use is sensitivity if we are blind to others' feelings?

I understand the mass desire for denial now, addressing the realities of the path it’s a very sophisticated hard journey which most are sadly, not up to. It's finding people to keep your tender heart safe that is trickiest!
Even after decades, people can surprise you by turning into someone who will attack rather than defend your precious self.

I have been practicing discernment. Recognizing when the feelings – frequency and vibrations I am receiving are not my own. The negative or ones of sorrow go right to my gut. It feels awful. I step back and discern "are these MY feelings"? I own my own emotions, but when I have no reason to be feeling that way I reflect back positive energy. Energy of love. Just doing so makes me feel somewhat better. I will add the "conscious armouring" and wear a tin foil hat because being empathic can be overwhelming at times. *__^

"Being a sensitive person can be a confusing, complicated thing in this still harsh world. It feels intuitively right to open, to feel, to enhearten our daily life, but the world is still vibrating at a more armoured and edgy place. It is not yet attuned to the ways of the open heart.

So what to do?

We don't want to deaden our capacity to feel, but if we feel too much, we get run over by an often heartless world. I have found my best answer in three places:

(1) Selective Attachment; that is- carefully discerning between positive and negative individuals and environments, and only attaching to those people and places that can hold our tender heart safe;

(2) Strong energetic boundaries; that is- being physically and emotionally charged, so that we can more effectively repel unwelcome energies;

(3) Conscious Armouring; that is- learning how to put on armour when necessary to manage the world and difficult situations, and, consciously removing it when it is no longer needed.

If we cultivate these practices, we stand a much better chance of preserving our sensitivity. Once we lose it, we lose our connection to the moment altogether.

Here's to a sensitive way of being! What a courageous path."

I get exhausted when I’m in a toxic environment or company. I just get depleted and run down and depressed and nothing changes in the other.

If someone comes with heavy baggage in their 50s, in my experience it’s very unlikely these changes will come quick enough for the counterpart to maintain their own vibrancy while the work goes on, or, indeed, doesn't go on.

The trouble is when you meet folk who have (3) Unconscious armouring, complete with a whole host of weaponry to protect themselves, that ultimately destroys the very love they and each soul seeks - pushing away, blocking, controlling, moods that they then project back onto the other in any attempt to fiercely avoid taking any personal responsibility.

When in the wake of that and no ability to talk about these issues with any real honesty, one finds that meeting with these energy drainers that number 2 becomes weakened as a result and therefore recourse to number 1,  selective attachment, MUST come into practice.

I am meeting these kind of unconscious being all too often and am looking at why.

I do know though that I am getting quicker at removing myself because having been there many times I know the end result of staying there and trusting that love, compassion and understanding will win out in the end. It hasn't.

A tendency also for these kind of folk to only see where they FEEL they are being denied affections and see no insight into their own rejecting behaviours that eventually manifest in the other a holding back.

Time for one to take responsibility for their own inner light and journey. Until such a time they do they will only continue to try and quash the light of those they meet, and then blame you for it.

As another indigo, I have tried with much empathy to meet these folk and aid in the adjustment but it takes it out from me.

No more. Higher vibration others need only apply, especially when it comes to matters of my intimate vulnerable and giving heart.

Find out what is working for you and what you like to be. Try to discern what fear is and what intuition is. Protection and truth!

 

 

ps/smoh

An OBJECTIVE OPINION is only as OBJECTIVE as the human perception formulating the OPINION.

Don't be in a hurry to condemn because one doesn't do what you do or think as you think. 
I am simply content with myself; I don’t compare or compete with another.

Everything is actually perfect, being, perfectly itself. If you want to compare something to anything, it makes the most sense to compare it to itself, in such a case; it's nothing other than perfect. 
A diamond with a "flaw" is still perfectly as such, and could never be anything else. 
Only when we take to comparing something to another thing which, it could never be do we come to this idea that there is imperfection everywhere.

Perfect as in you could never be anything else. Name someone who is "perfect" according to your standards. If perfection is someone who has never lied, doesn't go hungry, doesn't lust, never got angry, etc. sorry to break it to you, but that person doesn't exist. 
That’s the baggage that a lot of people have. Perfection is this unrealistic feat they wish to achieve.

It is your story so you can write it however you want, what I see is, trying to protect the outside influence. ....may be good, but failing to take into account the possibility of outside influence and being vulnerable.

So in one sense, nothing is perfect in life, and everything is below par. But, by a necessity, if you examine closer, instead of nothing being perfect in life, everything is actually perfect, being, perfectly itself.

For, if we're to compare something to anything, it makes the absolute most sense to compare it to itself, in such a case; it's nothing other than perfect. 
So, really, whenever I find that there is reason to think that X is meaningless, where X is any arbitrarily selected subject, I always tend to find the road winds around to exactly the opposite conclusion once a little more thought is applied.

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. 
A wise person never knows all, only fools know everything. Most of the greatest evils that a being has inflicted upon another have come through one’s feeling quite certain about something which in fact was false. But of course truth is stranger than fiction. 
Fiction has to make sense, depends on who you are talking to and what subject. 
Train yourself to see the good in everyone, forget about your idiotic loyalty to what you feel you are defending. 
To argue with a person who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead. 
Nothing in the universe is contingent, but all things are conditioned to exist and operate in a particular manner by the necessity.

Those who invalidate reason ought seriously to consider whether they argue against reason with or without reason; if with reason, then they establish the principles that they are labouring to dethrone: but if they argue without reason which, in order to be consistent with themselves they must do, they are out of reach of rational conviction, nor do they deserve a rational argument.

This doesn't mean that we should welcome suffering, or purposely seek it out. But when it does appear in our lives, we should be aware that, beneath its negative surface, there is an opportunity for growth and deepening.

We have been provided a set of knowledge and processes that should we choose to utilize them, we can maximize our potential and make ourselves into the best humans we are capable of being. 
The obvious point is that there simply are not enough stories, perspectives, knowledge in the end; it's a matter of perspective.

You choose how you want to view the situation or even the world.

Have you ever experienced a moment that you couldn't find the words to explain? 
No, not because the words were hard to find - but because there wasn't a word already invented to name that particular moment.
What relatable moment/feeling/circumstance do you think deserves to have a name for itself?

So it is...

 

ps/smoh

(•_•)
\) (> 
/ \ Respond;

What about when I raise my voice because the idiocy is bothering me?

Don't assume that frustration equates ignorance.

There's a big difference between someone who has an argument and is frustrated with someone who has a severe cognitive dissonance issue and someone who just rambles.

However the only part I wanted to retort, is that I can get pretty loud and abrasive when met with the profanely resistant. Those who maintain cool even after hours of deadlocked discussion aren't in possession of genius intellect, but rather saintly patience.

You can bring up the best argument in the world, if the other is entirely set on maintaining ignorance, no silver tongue can sway that because most choose ignorance and stupidity, and you will never MAKE them change, so don't waste your time or breath.

"Agreeing to disagree" you said......it is a death sentence to any argument, because at least one of the 2 engaged in the argument stopped listening.

ps/smoh

The wise pursue understanding; fools follow the reports of others....

It seems it is getting harder and harder today to find an unbiased source for news. No matter which television station you watch, radio show you listen to, or news page on the internet that you read, it seems that they all have an agenda.
It is foolish to blindly follow the reports of others, especially when those sources have hidden agendas which you are not privy to.
With this in mind, you may ask,
“What is a person to do if he wants to understand world events?”

That is a hard question to answer. The best you can do, if you do not have personal knowledge or have trustworthy friends with personal knowledge of what is going on, is to get your information from several different sources.

This is akin to hearing both sides of the story. If you hear only one side, you will find that you are in the dark, as far as your understanding goes. Don’t take things for the truth just because they are on television or because they are in writing or because ‘your friend’ said so.

Facts and statistics can be slanted to demonstrate whatever someone wants them to illustrate. Many people are experts when it comes to twisting the truth to fit their own personal agenda. Don’t take what they say as gospel.
No matter what the topic may be, strive to achieve an understanding of the issue. Trusting in the reports of others can prove dangerous and misleading.

We has to depend on the truth, not the spin.

Sure, they will have their reasons and will justify their actions, but you can’t take “real” honour on and off like your jacket.

Either you are a being of honour, or you are just plain bullshit. You can’t have it both ways.  

Don’t be one of those people who talk about honesty and character, but in the end really can’t live up to what they profess.

 

ps/smoh