The Meaninglessness of Sin
Sin, and the forgiveness from it, is one of the main tenets of the Christian faith–but what exactly does “sin” mean to a Christian? Sin is said to be a transgression of God’s law, but if that is the case, then it cannot be said that Jesus saved believers from the “law.” If Jesus saved believers from the laws, then there can no longer be “sin,” as there are no laws to break. Sin then becomes a paradox, and cannot be easily defined. Furthermore, if Jesus paid for all the “sins” of mankind, then believers would no longer have to “pay” for their sins, as Jesus already did that on the cross, absolving believers from having to take responsibility for their actions. As long as a believer has “faith” in Jesus and repents, they believe they will still gain entrance into paradise, without having to pay for their own mistakes. In other words, “sin” is meaningless, as there are no consequences for believers even if they do commit any so-called “sins.”
However, even if we consider that sin is defined as an act of lawlessness as it states in 1John 3:4–whose laws do Christians follow? Is it considered a sin to break man’s law, or God’s laws? If it is considered a sin to break God’s laws, then the laws were not eliminated and they still stand, as Jesus himself stated in the fulfillment passages of Matt 5:17-20. Paul would be wrong to have claimed that believers were no longer under the law–but that is exactly what he did. Paul forgoes the law in favor of “grace” and preached that once a believer offered themselves to Jesus they were “set free” from sin, and they become slaves to righteousness. i.e., they would be “slaves” to doing what is right—while at the same time being taught that they are “born sinners” and cannot help but to not do what is not right, as it is not possible for them to be perfect.–a double bind. In fact, it’s a double, double bind, as the Bible does claim that it is possible to be perfect! (In our previous post, we explained what “double binds” are, and how they lead to confused thinking, and/or psychosis, and also what “perfect” really means.)
In Romans, Paul wrote:
For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace. What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness. Romans 6:14-18
If it is considered a sin to break man’s laws, then God’s laws are redundant, and there is no such thing as “sin,” as a sin is defined as immoral act which is considered to be a transgression against divine (God’s) law.
“Where there is no law, there is no transgression.” Romans 4:14.
Paul implied that once one believes in Jesus Christ, they are under “grace” and not the law, while at the same time promoting the idea that all of humanity is burdened with the “original sin” of Adam and Eve. According to Paul, salvation from sin came through through the blood of Christ, as he states in both Romans and 1Corinthians:
“Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned” Romans 5:2
“For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive”. 1Cor 5:22
Through Paul, Christians have been taught that they are “tainted” by Adam and Eve’s “original sin” and they sin due to their innate “human nature.” If this was the case however, God would still be responsible for their actions as he created them with this “innate human nature” as, “…every decision is from the Lord.”( Prov:16:33). Logically, if “every decision is from the Lord” as the Bible states, then Yahweh decides everything, including which babies suffer and die from hunger, and which women get raped and murdered, and he also decides who the murderers are–humans have no free will. Even if Christians claim that Satan brings evil thoughts to their minds–this too negates their free will and makes Satan more powerful than God.
However, let us look at one of the main Christian responses against my argument, if not the only one. Some Christians claim that the fall of man was included in God’s plan for the very purpose of demonstrating and manifesting his “love” via the “ultimate sacrifice” of Jesus. They claim that in order to demonstrate the very greatest part of his nature of love, God/Jesus would have to die for us, and this could not be done if there was no one for him to die for, and no reason for Jesus. Christians claim this is why there is sin, as there could be no reason for God/Jesus to die if there were no need for an atonement. However, if causing such suffering in the world in order for his love to be recognized, and to show his “love” is the best God can do, then he is not all-powerful, or, he is not all knowing because if he was all powerful, then he could have found a better way to show his “love” as opposed to having “sin” in the world, and he would know how to do it. According to this claim, then he would not be all powerful, or he would not be all knowing. But perhaps he is all powerful and all knowing, which would lead us to another alternative–that is, the Christian god is selfish, and is a masochist and a sadist.
Nevertheless, let us assume that the Christian claim above is true, and the argument is valid and sound, and that the conclusion is true. That is, it is necessary to have sin in the world in order for the love of God to be recognized as without sin, there would be no suffering, and we could not “see” the goodness of god. How absurd that is!! In fact, a good father who loves his children would rather go unrecognized rather than have his children suffer so that he could be recognized by them for loving them. It would be selfish on the father’s part to make his children suffer merely so that he could be recognized. This argument is also similar to a wife being beaten by her husband so that he can then show his “love” to her afterwards. It is ridiculous and absurd. If the Christian god were truly a loving god, then he would rather go unrecognized rather than cause suffering to his children. Instead, the Christian god would rather be “known” by causing his children pain and suffering–making him sadistic.
It is disturbing that Christians believe there really isn’t much any of them can do about their so-called “sinful nature” because they believe they don’t have the ability in themselves to overcome this so-called powerful law of what they believe to be their human nature–which is why they rely so heavily on the blood of Jesus Christ to save them from their sins. This means then, that they continue to “sin” believing they cannot help themselves. (Again, this means they believe they have no “free will” to stop themselves.) If Christians believe that their “human nature” is responsible for their evil deeds (and not their own free will) then instead of worshiping Yahweh, Christians should be blaming him, as according to the Bible, it was Yahweh who gave them their “human nature” in the first place–which, as they say, is prone to sin and most importantly, according to the Bible, “…EVERY decision is from the Lord.” (Proverbs 16:33) The logic indicating Yahweh is responsible for the problem of evil is in the form of Modus Ponens, and is as follows:
P1. If God created us as Christians claim, then God gave us “human nature.”
P2. If human nature allows us to sin, then God is to blame for the problem of evil.
C. Therefore, God is to blame for the problem of evil.
So, we see by their own admission that the christian god, if he existed, is to blame for the problem of evil. He is also to blame for humans being disobedient due to their “human nature” that he himself created. Furthermore, after setting humans up to fail by giving them human nature, he then chooses at his whim whom he gives grace to. How cliquey and sadistic of him to “pick and choose” who suffers for eternity, and who is “saved.”:
“The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord.” Proverbs 16:33
“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—” Ephesians 2:8
Our “human nature” aside, without the belief of the fall of Adam and Eve, there would be no such thing as original sin, and no need for redemption at all. In other words, there would be no need for the religion known as Christianity if the story of Adam and Eve was not taken literally, as there would be nothing to be redeemed from. Therefore, if what Christians say is true, their god creates the suffering and the “sin” so that he can be “recognized”–making him a sadistic god, or, there was no “fall of man” or “original sin” and we as humans can decide for ourselves to do what is right. It is after all, just a matter of choice. We can choose to do right, or we can choose to do wrong, but it makes it so much easier for Christians to do what is wrong when they have a “fall guy” named Jesus to take the punishment for their bad choices upon his shoulders, thereby absolving believers of any responsibility for their actions. How convenient–and how treacherous. Ultimately, we must all take responsibility for our own actions, or see the demise of civilization, and/or humanity itself.
Yes if the christian god exists , he must surely not be a humble type of god anyway. As you point out, he needs for himself to be known. Even if this need also needs to cause much hurt and harm.
Yet its also been said how us humans are created in the image of god. But that we humans are also said to need to remain very humble types.
The christian god it seems is neither the type to want to try and lead by his own good example.
Little wonder that so many groups of christians can often seem to almost act like a big bunch schizophrenics .
Well said Gandolf–it is interesting that the followers of this god are to remain humble to be “known” to him, but he has to cause suffering to be “known” to them–how bizarre. I have no doubt in my mind that religious beliefs (especially of this type) have more of a tendency to result in mental illness in their followers than in let’s say–the nature religions of the indigenous peoples of the Americas, Australia, NZ, etc.
It’s so sad really, that so many people end up going over the deep end because of this silliness. It needs to stop.
“more of a tendency to result in mental illness ”
And don’t i know it too . I grew up among the christian faith , and i grew up among lots of mental illness too .Id even need to admit , i’ve struggled to try and stay sane myself. But then what i experienced , was best explained as living within an ongoing faith-war . There was even aspects of torture and torment being used too .
Torment of minds , that were indoctrinated from birth, to fear a place they named hell .
And a form of torture were used , by way of separation and excommunication of family members , should anyone not seem to tow the line.
Why would we even expect ? such things should/could help to produce more sane people. When we don’t even allow torture to be used within normal wars . Do we . And we even will be fully prepared to convict and prosecute and give jail sentences , to people who would even dare to step outside these boundaries.
Yet we still allow faith to be “freely involved” in it . And now we even have huge depts , within our health systems too through mental illnesses . And in big part due to this sort of ongoing faith ignorance , and extreme stupidity.
Even more stupid is the fact we allow such ignorance to continue ,even while calling it “freedom” of faith .
Freedom of faith for whom? , i ask . Freedom for those people whom decide ? how they want to choose to torture and abuse certain people. How nice …. Not !
What kind ? of freedom is this . Some humans ought to learn to be totally ashamed of themselves. Look at the sort of things we will often stand by in such ignorant silence ,and still continue to allow http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPpbmDDRm8M http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLdXSKtG47M
We wont allow torture in normal wars . However it sadly seems, torture is still totally fine , just so long as its faithful folks that’s getting involved in it. And they even say they are involved in the “love of God” . How nice ….. Not !!!!!!
Some christians will say , “yes but not all christians do this” . That may be so . And not all humans use torture in wars either.
But how many christians ? are “active from day to day”, in trying to have this faith-torture stopped . Bugger all are , that’s how many.
Shame on these people . How sad , that so many still don’t seem to really care . Pffffftttt ! …So much for this “love of God”
Seems it creates many more hard-hearted faitful folk. Who dont care
Sorry im a little off topic . These things tend to get me going is all
I love reading what you write Gandolf, as you speak from within your very being. You speak your mind, and anyone who is reading your comment can come to realize the harm religion can do–because of your experiences.
No one should have to go through abusive situations–whether they are religiously motivated or not. It just so happens that religion gives some people an excuse to abuse others. That old “born sinners” routine, and Jesus will forgive them no matter what. WHAT BS!!!
Like you, this subject gets me going too. I literally hate Christianity for what it has done to you, and so many others, so let’s keep working on ridding the world of such nonsense.
“Some Christians claim that the fall of man was included in God’s plan for the very purpose of demonstrating and manifesting his “love” via the “ultimate sacrifice” of Jesus. ”
And they fail to wonder why this god waited 4000+ years to initiate this wonderful act of love.
Putting aside the complete travesty of justice a substitutionary sacrifice is (ESPECIALLY IF IT IS PART OF A PLAN OF AN ALMIGHTY GOD, that is, the whole idea that somehow our wrong-doings are in any way forgiven by making an innocent person or thing suffer is or should be repugnant). IF Christ’s death on the cross was so wonderful and IF it helped mankind that much, why wait? If our lives are better because of this scapegoat, whipping boy, sin-eater act by Jesus, what was he waiting for? Why not allow people that lived before Christ to also enjoy the benefits of this sacrifice. After all, apologists assure me that it isn’t ALL just about getting to heaven, Christ’s life and death and resurrection helped us live better lives here on earth.
And who is this god who thinks HE can forgive me if I wrong someone else? It’s unjust. If I wrong someone, the only person that CAN forgive me is that person. If I fail to gain his/her forgiveness, I’m not forgiven, period. And neither is ANY Christian. And IF somehow, this god needs to forgive me IN ADDITION to my seeking forgiveness from any person I might have wronged, being god, he can do it with or without some primitive ritualistic human sacrifice. All any person would really need to do, if god (who is omnipotent and can do anything) ordained it, is sincerely seek forgiveness and intend change for the better and this god could forgive. No suffering or death is needed and no amount of pain and suffering can actually CHANGE the significance of sin, if it has significance. That can only happen in the mind of a god.
I agree that the entire scenario that is “Christian forgiveness” is repugnant. It also leads to people being continually abused, as they live in a cycle of abuse, forgive, repeat when necessary. We see this happening in marriages all over the world–sometimes with the victim dying at the hands of the mate they “forgave.” They would be better off saying to themselves “NO! Nobody is going to get away with hurting me, and I will not forgive anyone for doing so–no matter who they are.”
What is interesting is that I am a prime example of doing just that, and I have never been happier. I rejected family members that intentionally hurt me, and I feel no regret or remorse. In fact, I feel peace, and more people could feel this way if they rejected the Christian philosophy of forgiveness and made the perpetrators pay for their “crimes” instead of allowing them to get away with them, and having them repeat their crimes over and over again. All this does is cause pain, hurt and misery.
” live in a cycle of abuse,”
Hi Linda and Anthony.
I totally agree,its unhealthy to try and continue to live within a cycle of abuse.. I’ve had to learn this myself, even with some of my own family. I’m not always sure “how much” i forgive them . I do know i try to not let my “dislike of this cycle” , turn too-much into any feelings of extreme hatred , on my part. But this is also a work in progress ,for me. For being hurt by those who are supposed to be those who really love us , and specially when its our own flesh and blood. Can be some of the most painful feelings indeed.
What “helps” me to not let my dislike , turn into extreme hate . Is i also try and keep ” reminding myself ” that even my own family have also been made to grow up, within a world so often tainted by faith belief systems . Something that has tended to also help make human-love ,turn into something that is often only more likely to happen , should humans agree with each other.
Maybe i have become something quite the opposite . As i try to fight for right of humans , to be allowed to have room to be somewhat different , and even disagree . Yet i fully understand why there is also some limits to this sort of situation too. For one thing , we know how its unhealthy for us, to need to try living within cycles of abuse.
Hello, I followed the link from “Debunking Christianity” to find your website.
What an excellent article!
You asked, “Whose laws do Christians follow?”
Jesus posed that very same question to the very same audience this way (and yes, I believe that Jesus’s circular references to hearsay are meant to point out the very double-binds you mention in your article, including the fact that Moses’s laws called for breaking God’s law–sacrificing animals or even humans–as part of the repentance process! Still, Jesus’s point being that at least people following Moses’s law were honest witnesses against themselves that they did not follow God’s law, and without such honesty, no one is safe):
Matthew 7:9: And he [Jesus] said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God, in order to keep your tradition! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him surely die’; but you say, ‘If a man tell his father or his mother, “What you would have gained from me is Corban (that is, given to God)”–then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother,’ thus making void the word of God through your tradition which you hand on. And many such things you do.”
You said:
“P1. If God created us as Christians claim, then God gave us “human nature.”
P2. If human nature allows us to sin, then God is to blame for the problem of evil.
C. Therefore, God is to blame for the problem of evil.”
In light of this, I think you may find this very interesting: http://www.humancondition.com
Good post.
I seriously don’t even understand how “free will” enables God to escape the responsibility of the evil evident in this world. As “free will” doesn’t prevent humans from committing evil (because of their sinful nature), why is free will even relevant to this discussion? Free will is nothing more than a property of the “human nature” which, by design, is faulty to begin with.
It’s nothing more than a red herring to try place the blame on mankind rather than the entity that created this world in the first place (assuming that entity exists).
http://mmcelhaney.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/facepalm-of-day-meaninglessness-of-sin.html
Thought you might be interested. He’s at it again!