Tired of being considered a sinner.

[Darren]

Since I am not an adherant to christianity, I am not a sinner. Christians steadily refer to non-christians as sinners, but we are not - indeed we could not be.
I think it is important to make the distinction, because I for one do not want to be judged by their twisted and impossible system of right and wrong. I think christians would do well to remember that non-christian = non-sinner.

[Beto]

Sorry if my lack of attention killed the thread. I was holding back because I didn't want to get into a namecalling match (someone calling me a sinner here, at this point is little different than any other name I didn't choose.)
I had myself on probation while I learned about this site and it's rules.
If someone has reason why it is fair for you to use your name for me (especially one I disapprove of), I am listening, but I have not heard much reason about it.
I respect the emotional appeals as much as they deserve.

Lets look at another emotionally charged word, fundamentalist.

If you say that someone is a fundamentalist, you could mean it as an insult. However, you could mean that the someone adheres to and emphasizes the fundamentals of his faith. Context is everything.

But if I call someone a fundamentalist I have a basis for doing so, infered by comments and points of view. It's also something that can be argued, one can defend oneself.

If someone calls you a sinner, they could mean it as an insult. However, they could also mean that you, like they, have not lived up to all of the expectations and commandments from their God.

They can't know that, so they say I'm a sinner from birth, with no chance of defense, effectively insulting me, my mother, my father, and all my ancestors. It's not just a personal insult.

[Darren]

If someone calls you a sinner, they could mean it as an insult. However, they could also mean that you, like they, have not lived up to all of the expectations and commandments from their God.

While I agree that it could be an insult, saying that I haven't lived up to all of the expectations and commandments from their god supposes a lot of things.
1. Supposes that there is a god.
2. Supposes that this god takes an interest in the affairs of mankind.
3. Supposes that this god takes an interest in my personal affairs.
4. Supposes that they know what their god wants.
5. Supposes that I am in contravention of these 'wants' of god.
6. Supposes that I am somehow bound by their moral code (the supposer and their god, I mean).
Since they lack evidence for each of these suppositions, they are making accusations based on ignorance. It is an insult direct with no facts to back it.

[Fallibleone]

There is also a difference between calling someone a sinner without realising you are offending them and being aware that you are offending them and continuing to call them a sinner. In my book this qualifies as a deliberate insult.

[Darren]

There is also a difference between calling someone a sinner without realising you are offending them and being aware that you are offending them and continuing to call them a sinner. In my book this qualifies as a deliberate insult.

Much of the problem that I have with this is that many think of me as a sinner. It colours their perception of me in an awful way, and I would like to stop that. It would be much more acceptable to me to be thought of as a murderer. That is also a claim with quite negative connotations, but it is at least an accusation that can be measured, quantified and answered with fact. 'Sinner' just paints a person as a loser with no opportunity to defend.

[Assent]

This is the true nature of sin: that you regret a thing that you have done. If there is no regret, then there is no sin. You can only sin against yourself, even if what you have done harms others.

Forgiveness can only be found within, as well, though it may be shown to you by an outside source. Sometimes you will feel better if you are forgiven by your victim (if any). Sometimes you will feel better if you tell your regrets to a person who does not judge you wanting, who accepts you even though you do not accept yourself. Sometimes you tell no one, but try to balance your act with an act you approve of, and thus forgive yourself. You might not ever be rid of that feeling of regret, but the emotions that come with it--sadness, guilt, and shame--can be removed.

There is a way to feel regret without acting in a way you disapprove, but that is only if you have given someone else moral authority over you. If that person disapproves of your actions, you will feel shame and regret, and the only way to be rid of them is if this other person forgives you, and the person may demand penance first.

Children almost always automatically give moral authority to their parents, at least until they are old enough to at least partially internalize their morals.

So my answer is this: if a person has known regret, then he or she has known sin as I have defined it.

[Darren]

This is the true nature of sin: that you regret a thing that you have done. If there is no regret, then there is no sin. You can only sin against yourself, even if what you have done harms others.

Forgiveness can only be found within, as well, though it may be shown to you by an outside source. Sometimes you will feel better if you are forgiven by your victim (if any). Sometimes you will feel better if you tell your regrets to a person who does not judge you wanting, who accepts you even though you do not accept yourself. Sometimes you tell no one, but try to balance your act with an act you approve of, and thus forgive yourself. You might not ever be rid of that feeling of regret, but the emotions that come with it--sadness, guilt, and shame--can be removed.

There is a way to feel regret without acting in a way you disapprove, but that is only if you have given someone else moral authority over you. If that person disapproves of your actions, you will feel shame and regret, and the only way to be rid of them is if this other person forgives you, and the person may demand penance first.

Children almost always automatically give moral authority to their parents, at least until they are old enough to at least partially internalize their morals.

So my answer is this: if a person has known regret, then he or she has known sin as I have defined it.

Your definition is interesting, but what of 'original sin'? I think that is the real origin (lol) of the concept, and so it is at the root of everyone's usage of that word. I submit that since I have no detectable stain of original sin, calling me a sinner is simply an insult. Your definition may mean that you don't mean to insult, but even if I redefine the word 'jerk' for myself personally to mean someone who is fast, that doesn't make it less insulting to call you a jerk.

[Greatest I Am]

This is the true nature of sin: that you regret a thing that you have done. If there is no regret, then there is no sin. You can only sin against yourself, even if what you have done harms others.

Forgiveness can only be found within, as well, though it may be shown to you by an outside source. Sometimes you will feel better if you are forgiven by your victim (if any). Sometimes you will feel better if you tell your regrets to a person who does not judge you wanting, who accepts you even though you do not accept yourself. Sometimes you tell no one, but try to balance your act with an act you approve of, and thus forgive yourself. You might not ever be rid of that feeling of regret, but the emotions that come with it--sadness, guilt, and shame--can be removed.

There is a way to feel regret without acting in a way you disapprove, but that is only if you have given someone else moral authority over you. If that person disapproves of your actions, you will feel shame and regret, and the only way to be rid of them is if this other person forgives you, and the person may demand penance first.

Children almost always automatically give moral authority to their parents, at least until they are old enough to at least partially internalize their morals.

So my answer is this: if a person has known regret, then he or she has known sin as I have defined it.

If I beat the hell out of a bully who has terrorized the school, I will have no regrets because he deserved retribution. I still have sinned.

God regretted the flood. He is still a sinner.

Even His forgiveness would need to come from the victims.

Regards
DL

[Darren]

This is the true nature of sin: that you regret a thing that you have done. If there is no regret, then there is no sin. You can only sin against yourself, even if what you have done harms others.

Forgiveness can only be found within, as well, though it may be shown to you by an outside source. Sometimes you will feel better if you are forgiven by your victim (if any). Sometimes you will feel better if you tell your regrets to a person who does not judge you wanting, who accepts you even though you do not accept yourself. Sometimes you tell no one, but try to balance your act with an act you approve of, and thus forgive yourself. You might not ever be rid of that feeling of regret, but the emotions that come with it--sadness, guilt, and shame--can be removed.

There is a way to feel regret without acting in a way you disapprove, but that is only if you have given someone else moral authority over you. If that person disapproves of your actions, you will feel shame and regret, and the only way to be rid of them is if this other person forgives you, and the person may demand penance first.

Children almost always automatically give moral authority to their parents, at least until they are old enough to at least partially internalize their morals.

So my answer is this: if a person has known regret, then he or she has known sin as I have defined it.

If I beat the hell out of a bully who has terrorized the school, I will have no regrets because he deserved retribution. I still have sinned.

God regretted the flood. He is still a sinner.

Even His forgiveness would need to come from the victims.

Regards
DL

It looks a lot like you are saying that if you 'do the right thing', you are still a sinner (i.e.-wrong).
Great life view you have there. I wish you could keep it to yourself and not view others with such a fouled lens.

[Greatest I Am]

This is the true nature of sin: that you regret a thing that you have done. If there is no regret, then there is no sin. You can only sin against yourself, even if what you have done harms others.

Forgiveness can only be found within, as well, though it may be shown to you by an outside source. Sometimes you will feel better if you are forgiven by your victim (if any). Sometimes you will feel better if you tell your regrets to a person who does not judge you wanting, who accepts you even though you do not accept yourself. Sometimes you tell no one, but try to balance your act with an act you approve of, and thus forgive yourself. You might not ever be rid of that feeling of regret, but the emotions that come with it--sadness, guilt, and shame--can be removed.

There is a way to feel regret without acting in a way you disapprove, but that is only if you have given someone else moral authority over you. If that person disapproves of your actions, you will feel shame and regret, and the only way to be rid of them is if this other person forgives you, and the person may demand penance first.

Children almost always automatically give moral authority to their parents, at least until they are old enough to at least partially internalize their morals.

So my answer is this: if a person has known regret, then he or she has known sin as I have defined it.

If I beat the hell out of a bully who has terrorized the school, I will have no regrets because he deserved retribution. I still have sinned.

God regretted the flood. He is still a sinner.

Even His forgiveness would need to come from the victims.

Regards
DL

It looks a lot like you are saying that if you 'do the right thing', you are still a sinner (i.e.-wrong).
Great life view you have there. I wish you could keep it to yourself and not view others with such a fouled lens.

I was pointing out that it is to others as well as ourselves to judge what is sin and what is not.

I was obviously not doing the "right thing". Neither was God if He sent a flood.

Regards
DL

[Darren]

This is the true nature of sin: that you regret a thing that you have done. If there is no regret, then there is no sin. You can only sin against yourself, even if what you have done harms others.

Forgiveness can only be found within, as well, though it may be shown to you by an outside source. Sometimes you will feel better if you are forgiven by your victim (if any). Sometimes you will feel better if you tell your regrets to a person who does not judge you wanting, who accepts you even though you do not accept yourself. Sometimes you tell no one, but try to balance your act with an act you approve of, and thus forgive yourself. You might not ever be rid of that feeling of regret, but the emotions that come with it--sadness, guilt, and shame--can be removed.

There is a way to feel regret without acting in a way you disapprove, but that is only if you have given someone else moral authority over you. If that person disapproves of your actions, you will feel shame and regret, and the only way to be rid of them is if this other person forgives you, and the person may demand penance first.

Children almost always automatically give moral authority to their parents, at least until they are old enough to at least partially internalize their morals.

So my answer is this: if a person has known regret, then he or she has known sin as I have defined it.

If I beat the hell out of a bully who has terrorized the school, I will have no regrets because he deserved retribution. I still have sinned.

God regretted the flood. He is still a sinner.

Even His forgiveness would need to come from the victims.

Regards
DL

It looks a lot like you are saying that if you 'do the right thing', you are still a sinner (i.e.-wrong).
Great life view you have there. I wish you could keep it to yourself and not view others with such a fouled lens.

I was pointing out that it is to others as well as ourselves to judge what is sin and what is not.

I was obviously not doing the "right thing". Neither was God if He sent a flood.

Regards
DL

Sin is defined pretty clearly in the various bibles. Original sin in particular. I say there is no sin. If someone calls me a sinner, I find it insulting the same as I would just about any unsupported assertion.
Original sin is a ghastly concept.