Denies sin but believes in evil

[namax91]

I’m having a discussion about sin with someone who denies it. We got to the point where she said she believes there is such thing as evil, but sin has religious connotations, and that’s what makes it different than evil. Where should I go next?

 

[Rhubarb]

It depends on what their positive idea about evil is, and what you are trying to do with the conversation.

 

[JackVk]

Ask her this: how can she account for good and evil?

According to atheism, “nature is all there is, all there was, and all there ever will be”, as Carl Sagan put it. Is morality a physical thing? An ore you can mine from the ground, or a serum you can inject into your body? If not, then it does not exist; if there’s no God, then morality is just another superstition of a bygone era.

Think I’m being unfair here? This is precisely what Friedrich Nietzsche and Arthur Schopenhauer believed, and they are among the great-granddaddies of modern atheism. I also like to point out another atheist who exposes Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris for the sissies they are: H.P. Lovecraft.

Lovecraft was an author of short stories like “The Call of Cthulhu”, “The Dunwich Horror”, and “at the Mountains of Madness”. His genre, called “cosmic horror”, is meant to illustrate the fact that humanity is not important. Lovecraft knew that, if there is no God, then the human race is the compost of the cosmos that was lucky enough to self-replicate, and nothing more. He famously quipped that “life and death, good and evil… are nothing.”

Needless to say, the “Cthulhu Mythos” tends to attract a lot of nihilists.

 

[JerryZ]

I’m having a discussion about sin with someone who denies it. We got to the point where she said she believes there is such thing as evil, but sin has religious connotations, and that’s what makes it different than evil. Where should I go next?

If she recognizes the presence of evil then I would say that you are half way there.

I would ask her if she believes that murdering an innocent person (a child for example) is evil. If she says yes then I would tell her that since she recognizes the act to BE evil if she did it with full knowledge (it is an evil), and free will (no one coerced her to act that way) then here we have an example of a mortal sin.

Explaining the differences between “mortal” and “venial” sin can be accomplished using appropriate examples as well.

If the person is not totally deranged they will acknowledge that there is something there, they may try sneak away by positing that there is no such thing as “free will” but by using logic you can show them the fallacy of their position.
Good luck in your future discussions and remember to pray for the Holy Spirit to open up the heart of your friend.

---

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I’m having a discussion about sin with someone who denies it. We got to the point where she said she believes there is such thing as evil, but sin has religious connotations, and that’s what makes it different than evil. Where should I go next?

Have you qualified that you are both using the same semantics? It’s possible the two of you are discussing two different concepts and that’s why your conversation is at an apparent impasse.

 

[opusAquinas]

She acknowledges that there is objective evil. Ask her where the objectivity comes from.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

I’m having a discussion about sin with someone who denies it. We got to the point where she said she believes there is such thing as evil, but sin has religious connotations, and that’s what makes it different than evil. Where should I go next?

She evidently doesn’t believe in God. That’s why there is an impasse.

If there is no Creator to offend, why talk about sin?

This person you are talking about has a very long hill to climb.

If she is young, she might get to the top when she reaches old age.

for some people it takes that long.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

She evidently doesn’t believe in God. That’s why there is an impasse.

If there is no Creator to offend, why talk about sin?

Someone that believes there is a creator doesn’t necessarily believe that it can be offended or find the concept of “sin” to be personally relevant. While sin is a part of the classical theistic god-concept, there are other god-concepts that don’t include it.

 

[thinkandmull]

Maybe she believes in God, but the conscience has nothing to do with Him in her opinion

 

[fhansen]

I’m having a discussion about sin with someone who denies it. We got to the point where she said she believes there is such thing as evil, but sin has religious connotations, and that’s what makes it different than evil. Where should I go next?

There is no differnce. Sin is just *moral evil. *

 

[ThinkingSapien]

There is no differnce. Sin is just *moral evil. *

There are differences in how it is conceptuized even among groups of people that can be called religious. “Evil” is used by some to describe things with negative consequences both irrespective of agency (so hurricanes could be seen as evil ) or only because of agency (intentially ending a life would be seen as evil while accidentally ending a life would not). It could also be seen as just having harmful intentions or I’ll will for someone.

Sin is often seen as violating the proscription of a god. Those that think there is no God that has made proscription will not think there are any “sins” by this definition. It may also be describe as a an action or disposition that is more aligned with Satan’s will. Someone that doesn’t believe there is a Satan won’t think this is possible (people that believe there is a God don’t necessarily believe there is a satan). There is also the definition of that which offends God.

More related to the OP many of the meaning of sin are attached to theological concepts. If the OP and the other person do not agree on some of these concepts then the discussion has already started off with disagreement on the premise of the discussion. There is nowhere to go until there is agreement on concepts.

Pardon my mistakes. Sent from a mobile device.

 

[fhansen]

There are differences in how it is conceptuized even among groups of people that can be called religious. “Evil” is used by some to describe things with negative consequences both irrespective of agency (so hurricanes could be seen as evil ) or only because of agency (intentially ending a life would be seen as evil while accidentally ending a life would not). It could also be seen as just having harmful intentions or I’ll will for someone.

Sin is often seen as violating the proscription of a god. Those that think there is no God that has made proscription will not think there are any “sins” by this definition. It may also be describe as a an action or disposition that is more aligned with Satan’s will. Someone that doesn’t believe there is a Satan won’t think this is possible (people that believe there is a God don’t necessarily believe there is a satan). There is also the definition of that which offends God.

More related to the OP many of the meaning of sin are attached to theological concepts. If the OP and the other person do not agree on some of these concepts then the discussion has already started off with disagreement on the premise of the discussion. There is nowhere to go until there is agreement on concepts.

Pardon my mistakes. Sent from a mobile device.

Yes, the concept of sin-or moral evil-really makes no sense unless one believes in some kind of objective moral standard for humans, which, in turn, makes no sense IMO unless one believes in God, a superior law-giver.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

While sin is a part of the classical theistic god-concept, there are other god-concepts that don’t include it.

As I was saying.