why do you sin/free will

[hobelim]

We "sin" because our hard wired behavior is the product of evolution, while "sins" are a construct of human intelligence. It is no surprise that these two concepts do not perfectly align. We didn't evolve to be pacifists, or to form alliances with competitors, for instance.

So, as per usual, another goofy religious construct is rendered false and obsolete by empirical knowledge.

What religious people have come to think of sin is not what Jesus thought of as sin. What Jesus thought of as sin is what dings thinks of as a religious duty and holy obligation.

If one takes the moral law literally it creates an image of a petty and capricious God with the emotional maturity of a pre pubescent bully.

There is not and never has been any such God ever in existence..

Obviously Jesus found deeper meaning in the same book of the law that has nothing whatever to do with what you wear and what you eat and the sexual preferences of consenting adults, hidden subject that actually reflects wisdom worthy of a holy God..

Funny thing here is that Ding professes to be a sinner, but does not acknowledge that the idolatrous worship of Jesus is a sin but instead is the way to eternal life even though his chosen religious practices fit the definition of idolatry perfectly and is a clear violation of the law of God every way you interpret it.

He must have lost his mind a very long time ago.

To address the thread topic, people who make sinfulness a deliberate choice and continue to sin even after their error is exposed sin because they are cursed, dead , in hell, abandoned by God and on their way to destruction.

at least thats what the bible says.

It's a very sad story.

 

[Taz]

We "sin" because our hard wired behavior is the product of evolution, while "sins" are a construct of human intelligence. It is no surprise that these two concepts do not perfectly align. We didn't evolve to be pacifists, or to form alliances with competitors, for instance.

So, as per usual, another goofy religious construct is rendered false and obsolete by empirical knowledge.

What religious people have come to think of sin is not what Jesus thought of as sin. What Jesus thought of as sin is what dings thinks of as a religious duty and holy obligation.

If one takes the moral law literally it creates an image of a petty and capricious God with the emotional maturity of a pre pubescent bully.

There is not and never has been any such God ever in existence..

Obviously Jesus found deeper meaning in the same book of the law that has nothing whatever to do with what you wear and what you eat and the sexual preferences of consenting adults, hidden subject that actually reflect wisdom worthy of a holy God..

Funny thing here is that Ding professes to be a sinner, but does not acknowledge that the idolatrous worship of Jesus is a sin but instead is the way to eternal life even though his chosen religious practices fit the definition of idolatry perfectly.

He must have lost his mind a very long time ago.

To address the thread topic, people who make sinfulness a deliberate choice and continue to sin even after their error is exposed sin because they are cursed, dead , in hell, abandoned by God and on their way to destruction.

at least thats what the bible says.

It's a very sad story.

 

[boedicca]

if you believe in total free will, why do you sin??
these priests, of all people, should know not to sin---but they do..why? -- if there is total free will

85% of murders are committed by males
murder is a sin [ yes? ]..85% is too large a number to refute/argue/etc
why do females ''''choose'''' not to commit the sin of murder at the rate that males do??
....some groups of humans commit murder at much higher rates than other groups..why? if there is total free will

Because not everyone embraces the same values.

Some people do not value the lives of others, as we have seen demonstrated in quite bloody ways throughout history.

 

[hobelim]

We "sin" because our hard wired behavior is the product of evolution, while "sins" are a construct of human intelligence. It is no surprise that these two concepts do not perfectly align. We didn't evolve to be pacifists, or to form alliances with competitors, for instance.

So, as per usual, another goofy religious construct is rendered false and obsolete by empirical knowledge.

What religious people have come to think of sin is not what Jesus thought of as sin. What Jesus thought of as sin is what dings thinks of as a religious duty and holy obligation.

If one takes the moral law literally it creates an image of a petty and capricious God with the emotional maturity of a pre pubescent bully.

There is not and never has been any such God ever in existence..

Obviously Jesus found deeper meaning in the same book of the law that has nothing whatever to do with what you wear and what you eat and the sexual preferences of consenting adults, hidden subject that actually reflect wisdom worthy of a holy God..

Funny thing here is that Ding professes to be a sinner, but does not acknowledge that the idolatrous worship of Jesus is a sin but instead is the way to eternal life even though his chosen religious practices fit the definition of idolatry perfectly.

He must have lost his mind a very long time ago.

To address the thread topic, people who make sinfulness a deliberate choice and continue to sin even after their error is exposed sin because they are cursed, dead , in hell, abandoned by God and on their way to destruction.

at least thats what the bible says.

It's a very sad story.

lol.. I know... very sad.


Some of these holier than thou people aren't goin up to Hebbin in spite of their many charms, professed love for Jesus, billions of people crying out to God for mercy,, and long list of dirty deeds.

 

[Taz]

We "sin" because our hard wired behavior is the product of evolution, while "sins" are a construct of human intelligence. It is no surprise that these two concepts do not perfectly align. We didn't evolve to be pacifists, or to form alliances with competitors, for instance.

So, as per usual, another goofy religious construct is rendered false and obsolete by empirical knowledge.

What religious people have come to think of sin is not what Jesus thought of as sin. What Jesus thought of as sin is what dings thinks of as a religious duty and holy obligation.

If one takes the moral law literally it creates an image of a petty and capricious God with the emotional maturity of a pre pubescent bully.

There is not and never has been any such God ever in existence..

Obviously Jesus found deeper meaning in the same book of the law that has nothing whatever to do with what you wear and what you eat and the sexual preferences of consenting adults, hidden subject that actually reflect wisdom worthy of a holy God..

Funny thing here is that Ding professes to be a sinner, but does not acknowledge that the idolatrous worship of Jesus is a sin but instead is the way to eternal life even though his chosen religious practices fit the definition of idolatry perfectly.

He must have lost his mind a very long time ago.

To address the thread topic, people who make sinfulness a deliberate choice and continue to sin even after their error is exposed sin because they are cursed, dead , in hell, abandoned by God and on their way to destruction.

at least thats what the bible says.

It's a very sad story.

lol.. I know... very sad.


Some of these holier than thou people aren't goin up to Hebbin in spite of their many charms, love for Jesus, an long list of dirty deeds...

You have no proof that we're not all going to the same place when we die. And a book ain't it.

 

[hobelim]

We "sin" because our hard wired behavior is the product of evolution, while "sins" are a construct of human intelligence. It is no surprise that these two concepts do not perfectly align. We didn't evolve to be pacifists, or to form alliances with competitors, for instance.

So, as per usual, another goofy religious construct is rendered false and obsolete by empirical knowledge.

What religious people have come to think of sin is not what Jesus thought of as sin. What Jesus thought of as sin is what dings thinks of as a religious duty and holy obligation.

If one takes the moral law literally it creates an image of a petty and capricious God with the emotional maturity of a pre pubescent bully.

There is not and never has been any such God ever in existence..

Obviously Jesus found deeper meaning in the same book of the law that has nothing whatever to do with what you wear and what you eat and the sexual preferences of consenting adults, hidden subject that actually reflect wisdom worthy of a holy God..

Funny thing here is that Ding professes to be a sinner, but does not acknowledge that the idolatrous worship of Jesus is a sin but instead is the way to eternal life even though his chosen religious practices fit the definition of idolatry perfectly.

He must have lost his mind a very long time ago.

To address the thread topic, people who make sinfulness a deliberate choice and continue to sin even after their error is exposed sin because they are cursed, dead , in hell, abandoned by God and on their way to destruction.

at least thats what the bible says.

It's a very sad story.

lol.. I know... very sad.


Some of these holier than thou people aren't goin up to Hebbin in spite of their many charms, love for Jesus, an long list of dirty deeds...

You have no proof that we're not all going to the same place when we die. And a book ain't it.

The book isn't about where you are going after you die. Its about where you are at while you are living.


If people don't take a place among the living in this world, they won't find a place in the next one.

 

[Taz]

We "sin" because our hard wired behavior is the product of evolution, while "sins" are a construct of human intelligence. It is no surprise that these two concepts do not perfectly align. We didn't evolve to be pacifists, or to form alliances with competitors, for instance.

So, as per usual, another goofy religious construct is rendered false and obsolete by empirical knowledge.

What religious people have come to think of sin is not what Jesus thought of as sin. What Jesus thought of as sin is what dings thinks of as a religious duty and holy obligation.

If one takes the moral law literally it creates an image of a petty and capricious God with the emotional maturity of a pre pubescent bully.

There is not and never has been any such God ever in existence..

Obviously Jesus found deeper meaning in the same book of the law that has nothing whatever to do with what you wear and what you eat and the sexual preferences of consenting adults, hidden subject that actually reflect wisdom worthy of a holy God..

Funny thing here is that Ding professes to be a sinner, but does not acknowledge that the idolatrous worship of Jesus is a sin but instead is the way to eternal life even though his chosen religious practices fit the definition of idolatry perfectly.

He must have lost his mind a very long time ago.

To address the thread topic, people who make sinfulness a deliberate choice and continue to sin even after their error is exposed sin because they are cursed, dead , in hell, abandoned by God and on their way to destruction.

at least thats what the bible says.

It's a very sad story.

lol.. I know... very sad.


Some of these holier than thou people aren't goin up to Hebbin in spite of their many charms, love for Jesus, an long list of dirty deeds...

You have no proof that we're not all going to the same place when we die. And a book ain't it.

The book isn't about where you are going after you die. Its about where you are at while you are living.


If people don't take a place among the living in this world, they won't find a place in the next one.

There's no proof of that either.

 

[hobelim]

What religious people have come to think of sin is not what Jesus thought of as sin. What Jesus thought of as sin is what dings thinks of as a religious duty and holy obligation.

If one takes the moral law literally it creates an image of a petty and capricious God with the emotional maturity of a pre pubescent bully.

There is not and never has been any such God ever in existence..

Obviously Jesus found deeper meaning in the same book of the law that has nothing whatever to do with what you wear and what you eat and the sexual preferences of consenting adults, hidden subject that actually reflect wisdom worthy of a holy God..

Funny thing here is that Ding professes to be a sinner, but does not acknowledge that the idolatrous worship of Jesus is a sin but instead is the way to eternal life even though his chosen religious practices fit the definition of idolatry perfectly.

He must have lost his mind a very long time ago.

To address the thread topic, people who make sinfulness a deliberate choice and continue to sin even after their error is exposed sin because they are cursed, dead , in hell, abandoned by God and on their way to destruction.

at least thats what the bible says.

It's a very sad story.

lol.. I know... very sad.


Some of these holier than thou people aren't goin up to Hebbin in spite of their many charms, love for Jesus, an long list of dirty deeds...

You have no proof that we're not all going to the same place when we die. And a book ain't it.

The book isn't about where you are going after you die. Its about where you are at while you are living.


If people don't take a place among the living in this world, they won't find a place in the next one.

There's no proof of that either.

Lets think about that for a minute. If someone pours gasoline on themselves, do you need proof to know that if they light a match they will go up in flames?

In the same way, reality is reality whatever a person believes. True?

If their mind is not firmly rooted in reality now, they will not be equipped to deal with the reality of being without a physical body if there is an afterlife whether anyone has proof of an afterlife or not.

 

[Taz]

lol.. I know... very sad.


Some of these holier than thou people aren't goin up to Hebbin in spite of their many charms, love for Jesus, an long list of dirty deeds...

You have no proof that we're not all going to the same place when we die. And a book ain't it.

The book isn't about where you are going after you die. Its about where you are at while you are living.


If people don't take a place among the living in this world, they won't find a place in the next one.

There's no proof of that either.

Lets think about that for a minute. If someone pours gasoline on themselves, do you need proof to know that if they light a match they will go up in flames?

In the same way, reality is reality whatever a person believes. True?

If their mind is not firmly rooted in reality now, they will not be equipped to deal with the reality of being without a physical body if there is an afterlife whether anyone has proof of an afterlife or not.

Reality is reality, not what someone perceives it to be. Just because you perceive pink elephants doesn't mean they are real.

There's no proof that you need to somehow clear your mind to make it when you die. That's delusional.

 

[ding]

lol.. I know... very sad.


Some of these holier than thou people aren't goin up to Hebbin in spite of their many charms, love for Jesus, an long list of dirty deeds...

You have no proof that we're not all going to the same place when we die. And a book ain't it.

The book isn't about where you are going after you die. Its about where you are at while you are living.


If people don't take a place among the living in this world, they won't find a place in the next one.

There's no proof of that either.

Lets think about that for a minute. If someone pours gasoline on themselves, do you need proof to know that if they light a match they will go up in flames?

In the same way, reality is reality whatever a person believes. True?

If their mind is not firmly rooted in reality now, they will not be equipped to deal with the reality of being without a physical body if there is an afterlife whether anyone has proof of an afterlife or not.

Reality is reality, not what someone perceives it to be. Just because you perceive pink elephants doesn't mean they are real.

There's no proof that you need to somehow clear your mind to make it when you die. That's delusional.

Exactly which is why if you judge pink elephants to be one way or another that judgement is meaningless.

 

[hobelim]

lol.. I know... very sad.


Some of these holier than thou people aren't goin up to Hebbin in spite of their many charms, love for Jesus, an long list of dirty deeds...

You have no proof that we're not all going to the same place when we die. And a book ain't it.

The book isn't about where you are going after you die. Its about where you are at while you are living.


If people don't take a place among the living in this world, they won't find a place in the next one.

There's no proof of that either.

Lets think about that for a minute. If someone pours gasoline on themselves, do you need proof to know that if they light a match they will go up in flames?

In the same way, reality is reality whatever a person believes. True?

If their mind is not firmly rooted in reality now, they will not be equipped to deal with the reality of being without a physical body if there is an afterlife whether anyone has proof of an afterlife or not.

Reality is reality, not what someone perceives it to be. Just because you perceive pink elephants doesn't mean they are real.

There's no proof that you need to somehow clear your mind to make it when you die. That's delusional.

I agree that reality is not just what someone perceives it to be.

And I didn't say there was proof. Pay attention. I said that if a persons mind is not firmly rooted in reality now, they will not be equipped to deal with the reality of being without a physical body if there is an afterlife whether anyone has proof of an afterlife or not. Thats just a logical conclusion. If their conscious mind can't deal with this reality in the comfort and security of a physical body, how could their conscious mind possibly deal with a greater reality without one??

Anyway don't count on reincarnation. There is no guarantee that you will be reincarnated into some better life and future. Thats delusional.

If God is merciful, you could come back as a european Jew in 1929.

 

[Taz]

You have no proof that we're not all going to the same place when we die. And a book ain't it.

The book isn't about where you are going after you die. Its about where you are at while you are living.


If people don't take a place among the living in this world, they won't find a place in the next one.

There's no proof of that either.

Lets think about that for a minute. If someone pours gasoline on themselves, do you need proof to know that if they light a match they will go up in flames?

In the same way, reality is reality whatever a person believes. True?

If their mind is not firmly rooted in reality now, they will not be equipped to deal with the reality of being without a physical body if there is an afterlife whether anyone has proof of an afterlife or not.

Reality is reality, not what someone perceives it to be. Just because you perceive pink elephants doesn't mean they are real.

There's no proof that you need to somehow clear your mind to make it when you die. That's delusional.

I agree that reality is not just what someone perceives it to be.

And I didn't say there was proof. Pay attention. I said that if a persons mind is not firmly rooted in reality now, they will not be equipped to deal with the reality of being without a physical body if there is an afterlife whether anyone has proof of an afterlife or not. Thats just a logical conclusion. If their conscious mind can't deal with this reality in the comfort and security of a physical body, how could their conscious mind possibly deal with a greater reality without one??

Anyway don't count on reincarnation. There is no guarantee that you will be reincarnated into some better life and future. Thats delusional.

If God is merciful, you could come back as a european Jew in 1929.

"I said that if a persons mind is not firmly rooted in reality now, they will not be equipped to deal with the reality of being without a physical body if there is an afterlife whether anyone has proof of an afterlife or not"

So if there's no proof of an afterlife, the clearing your mind theory is really only a guess.

 

[TNHarley]

I dont adhere to the man made concept of sin. So i dont sin

 

[hobelim]

The book isn't about where you are going after you die. Its about where you are at while you are living.


If people don't take a place among the living in this world, they won't find a place in the next one.

There's no proof of that either.

Lets think about that for a minute. If someone pours gasoline on themselves, do you need proof to know that if they light a match they will go up in flames?

In the same way, reality is reality whatever a person believes. True?

If their mind is not firmly rooted in reality now, they will not be equipped to deal with the reality of being without a physical body if there is an afterlife whether anyone has proof of an afterlife or not.

Reality is reality, not what someone perceives it to be. Just because you perceive pink elephants doesn't mean they are real.

There's no proof that you need to somehow clear your mind to make it when you die. That's delusional.

I agree that reality is not just what someone perceives it to be.

And I didn't say there was proof. Pay attention. I said that if a persons mind is not firmly rooted in reality now, they will not be equipped to deal with the reality of being without a physical body if there is an afterlife whether anyone has proof of an afterlife or not. Thats just a logical conclusion. If their conscious mind can't deal with this reality in the comfort and security of a physical body, how could their conscious mind possibly deal with a greater reality without one??

Anyway don't count on reincarnation. There is no guarantee that you will be reincarnated into some better life and future. Thats delusional.

If God is merciful, you could come back as a european Jew in 1929.

"I said that if a persons mind is not firmly rooted in reality now, they will not be equipped to deal with the reality of being without a physical body if there is an afterlife whether anyone has proof of an afterlife or not"

So if there's no proof of an afterlife, the clearing your mind theory is really only a guess.

Well yes, any theory remains a theory until you put it to the test. If you purify and refine your mind you will see God and heaven will be opened to you and you will taste the fruit of eternal life in the realm of God and immortal living beings and living creatures from distant spheres of superior intelligences will make themselves known to you before you die.

Seriously, how dumb must a person be to demand proof that improving the condition of your mind improves your experience of life especially since if they just did it they would have the proof?

 

[Taz]

There's no proof of that either.

Lets think about that for a minute. If someone pours gasoline on themselves, do you need proof to know that if they light a match they will go up in flames?

In the same way, reality is reality whatever a person believes. True?

If their mind is not firmly rooted in reality now, they will not be equipped to deal with the reality of being without a physical body if there is an afterlife whether anyone has proof of an afterlife or not.

Reality is reality, not what someone perceives it to be. Just because you perceive pink elephants doesn't mean they are real.

There's no proof that you need to somehow clear your mind to make it when you die. That's delusional.

I agree that reality is not just what someone perceives it to be.

And I didn't say there was proof. Pay attention. I said that if a persons mind is not firmly rooted in reality now, they will not be equipped to deal with the reality of being without a physical body if there is an afterlife whether anyone has proof of an afterlife or not. Thats just a logical conclusion. If their conscious mind can't deal with this reality in the comfort and security of a physical body, how could their conscious mind possibly deal with a greater reality without one??

Anyway don't count on reincarnation. There is no guarantee that you will be reincarnated into some better life and future. Thats delusional.

If God is merciful, you could come back as a european Jew in 1929.

"I said that if a persons mind is not firmly rooted in reality now, they will not be equipped to deal with the reality of being without a physical body if there is an afterlife whether anyone has proof of an afterlife or not"

So if there's no proof of an afterlife, the clearing your mind theory is really only a guess.

Well yes, any theory remains a theory until you put it to the test. If you purify and refine your mind you will see God and heaven will be opened to you and you will taste the fruit of eternal life in the realm of God and immortal living beings and living creatures from distant spheres of superior intelligences will make themselves known to you before you die.

Seriously, how dumb must a person be to demand proof that improving the condition of your mind improves your experience of life especially if they just did it they would have the proof?

Except that your mind doesn't seem clear, coherent or rational. So you do it first, and I'll see...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If one takes the moral law literally it creates an image of a petty and capricious God with the emotional maturity of a pre pubescent bully.

No doubt! I agree...ignore every word of that nonsense, and get morality via reason.

 

[Fugazi]

Let's say I was the leader of a group, and I wanted to increase my membership in said group. I could publish a manifesto which states that all the fun things in life are a sin. The catch, and this is the ingenious part, is that you can partake in all these sins with no consequences, as long as you stayed a member of my group, and told me about all the sick shit you've done.
Want to have sex with your neighbors wife, no problem, just make sure to tell me about it, so I could masturbate later.

 

[hobelim]

If one takes the moral law literally it creates an image of a petty and capricious God with the emotional maturity of a pre pubescent bully.

No doubt! I agree...ignore every word of that nonsense, and get morality via reason.

lol... I wouldn't go that far. There is hidden wisdom to be found, relevant and essential wisdom that you already apply to your own life. For instance if you understood that the subject of kosher law is not about what flesh you eat or don't eat and diligently obsessing over your diet but about what teaching you will or will not allow to take root into your own mind you would become a believer. Those who fail to stand guard over the purity of their own mind and adopt the teaching of irrational people who do not ruminate become unclean, their flesh will defile and contaminate your mind, your perceptions, and the quality of your life and you will degenerate into an unclean creature that cannot ruminate, think deeply and you will say and do stupid things that injure yourself and the people around you.

The consequence for setting aside the instruction to differentiate between clean and unclean teaching is what the ancient people tried to describe as divine judgment, death, their strange and disturbing beliefs and behaviors you would attribute to a thought disorder. Whats the difference?

You already believe that many people clinging to religious flotsam suffer from that don't you?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

lol... I wouldn't go that far.

I know. And that makes you goofy. Especially since you definitely do go that far, and simply find justification for your morality in your custom made allegory. When, in reality, your morality chiefly derives from reason, itself based on the knowledge you were "blessed" to have via the genetic accident of where and when you were born.

 

[hobelim]

lol... I wouldn't go that far.

I know. And that makes you goofy. Especially since you definitely do go that far, and simply find justification for your morality in your custom made allegory. When, in reality, your morality chiefly derives from reason, itself based on the knowledge you were "blessed" to have via the genetic accident of where and when you were born.

lol....

If I am the only person around here that understands that ancient Hebrew adults weren't giving their children a bowl of sugar coated turds when they were hungry to learn the hard truth about the greater world around them and how to deal with the wild beasts of the field that the Lord God had also made, (who were always trying to get them to eat slimy baloney sandwiches with bread baked on human dung), then I surely am very blessed, but it was no accident of birth.