Guilt and sinning...

[Caz]

Is guilt the feeling of regret for even considering a sin, or is it restricted to the feeling of regret after committing an act of sin?

I.E. should a man be guilty for having the urge to commit adultery when he never acts upon the urge? Has he committed a sin?

[Robert Walper]

Personally, I don't think a person should feel guilty about considering anything. Thoughts can be amended. Actions, in a lot of cases, cannot.

[Caz]

Personally, I don't think a person should feel guilty about considering anything. Thoughts can be amended. Actions, in a lot of cases, cannot.

That's pretty much my opinion as well. However, in a lot of modern religions, the idea that "the thought is just as sinful as the act" seems to be common. For example, with Catholicism's view on homosexuality.

[Robert Walper]

Personally, I don't think a person should feel guilty about considering anything. Thoughts can be amended. Actions, in a lot of cases, cannot.

That's pretty much my opinion as well. However, in a lot of modern religions, the idea that "the thought is just as sinful as the act" seems to be common. For example, with Catholicism's view on homosexuality.

Well, my opinion that religion is way down there in the depths of human stupidity is well established.

[Charon]

Personally, I don't think a person should feel guilty about considering anything. Thoughts can be amended. Actions, in a lot of cases, cannot.

That's pretty much my opinion as well. However, in a lot of modern religions, the idea that "the thought is just as sinful as the act" seems to be common. For example, with Catholicism's view on homosexuality.

I believe in the case of the church it is a thought structure that even having the idea of doing wrong is a weakness of character, and it is, but to hold one to such a high standard is absolutely ridiculous.

[The Cleric]

Give "sin" a real hard thought. It doesn't really make any sense.

[Ace Pace]

Personally, I don't think a person should feel guilty about considering anything. Thoughts can be amended. Actions, in a lot of cases, cannot.

So basicly you shouldn't feel guilty about hurting someone, even acidently? What your saying smacks of selfishness to the high heavens.

[Bratty]

Well, my opinion that religion is way down there in the depths of human stupidity is well established.

That is a sad thing.

A man without religion is a man without hope.

Although I do not conform to organized religion, I do believe religion is important to each individual. Everyone has to find their solace from the storm. Everyone has to find their reason for being or living.

Even if it is something as non mystic as money or science or narcism, everyone should have some sort of higher thought. Those who do not frighten me.

In regards to this thread, I do believe that when you conform to a form of an organized religion, you adopt its principles. You adopt its ways of thinking. To have a thought of a "sin" within that context, where your mind should be other places, should bring about guilt. Guilt is a checks and balances for any kind of morality. The superego.

Now whether you should conform to any particular religion is your choice on the matter.

but I do not believe guilt is bad. Like any emotion, it has its place. Fear, for example, keeps us safe from harm and trying crazy things that makes insurance agents' eyes bleed ;). It protects us. I believe guilt is there to protect us as well.

When one feels guilt, one should evaluate whether it is healthy, and a form of protection, or whether it is just to adhere some sort of brainwashing principle.

Example given, homosexuality is bad per Catholic religion. Makes me wonder why there are ANY homosexual, bisexual, etc, within the Catholic religion. In all logic and probability, this belief is made to discriminate against who and what they are. To hate or loathe oneself cannot, in any way, be good for the soul.

Guilt, in healthy context, could be good for the soul. Example, lying. I may feel guilty because I thought of lying or even told a lie. It happens. Everyone lies in some form or another. But still, I feel guilty, because it makes me uncomfortable in the context. Maybe I would betray a trust. Maybe I would anger one of my closest friends. In this context, lying is a protection for me, and ignoring it would be ignoring any consequences of any actions taken.

So thoughts ahead of time are good and serve a purpose, as much as thoughts after the fact. It is trying to look at things from a whole perspective, weighing in the consequences of your actions, and feeling remorse over the might have been so that you know what you are getting into. Then, one can take a look at the cost vs benefit of whether or not the guilt is worth paying attention to. Example, I feel guilty for eating ice cream and cheating on my diet. However, I may do so anyway. Why? because it is a birthday party, or I had a rough day and deserve a treat, or whatever the case may be. Does not erase the guilt, but guilt was healthy in trying to assist you to make the best choice for you.

[Cynical Cat]

That is a sad thing.

A man without religion is a man without hope.

You will find a considerable amount of disagreement with the statement.

[Ace Pace]

Cynical, I think she was using religion in the more general belief sense.

Even if it is something as non mystic as money or science or narcism, everyone should have some sort of higher thought. Those who do not frighten me.

I disagree with it but I can see why she would think that.

But lets not turn this into another Religion debate, we have metric kilometers of those elsewhere.

[Robert Walper]

Personally, I don't think a person should feel guilty about considering anything. Thoughts can be amended. Actions, in a lot of cases, cannot.

So basicly you shouldn't feel guilty about hurting someone, even acidently? What your saying smacks of selfishness to the high heavens.

What are you smoking, Ace? How do thoughts hurt someone? You can only hurt someone through actions.

[Ace Pace]

Personally, I don't think a person should feel guilty about considering anything. Thoughts can be amended. Actions, in a lot of cases, cannot.

So basicly you shouldn't feel guilty about hurting someone, even acidently? What your saying smacks of selfishness to the high heavens.

What are you smoking, Ace? How do thoughts hurt someone? You can only hurt someone through actions.

Apprently I misread, I thought you were saying there is no need to feel guilt for actions. [/quote]

[Robert Walper]

Well, my opinion that religion is way down there in the depths of human stupidity is well established.

That is a sad thing.

A man without religion is a man without hope.

One doesn't need religion to subscribe to hope. (although actually I don't subscribe to either)

Furthermore, don't go around asserting your personal beliefs as facts.

[Robert Walper]

So basicly you shouldn't feel guilty about hurting someone, even acidently? What your saying smacks of selfishness to the high heavens.

What are you smoking, Ace? How do thoughts hurt someone? You can only hurt someone through actions.

Apprently I misread, I thought you were saying there is no need to feel guilt for actions.

No problem. And yeah, that would be a nasty way of thinking in some cases.

[Bratty]

Well, my opinion that religion is way down there in the depths of human stupidity is well established.

That is a sad thing.

A man without religion is a man without hope.

One doesn't need religion to subscribe to hope. (although actually I don't subscribe to either)

Furthermore, don't go around asserting your personal beliefs as facts.

What do you believe in then? Do you believe in anything?

Psychologically speaking, if you do not believe in something, what do you hold onto? If there is nothing to hold onto, what is hope>

Factually speaking, religion has been around since the dawn of time.

More specifically, religion and organized religion are not necessarily the same thing.

As far as facts going on in here, let's talk about facts.

So far - asserted as facts are "sin does not make sense", "guilt is pointless", etc. Those aren't facts; those are beliefs, and appropriate, as my comments are appropriate as well.

We are not talking about facts here. We are talking about concepts, abstract and otherwise. Including guilt.

[Ace Pace]

To be a DA, you can allways hold onto physical things, as a father holds onto his family.

[Bratty]

That is a sad thing.

A man without religion is a man without hope.

You will find a considerable amount of disagreement with the statement.

I am used to it ~chuckles~

Thanks for the tip.

[Robert Walper]

One doesn't need religion to subscribe to hope. (although actually I don't subscribe to either)

Furthermore, don't go around asserting your personal beliefs as facts.

What do you believe in then? Do you believe in anything?

While I have no doubt the concept is distressing to you, no, I don't believe in anything.

Psychologically speaking, if you do not believe in something, what do you hold onto? If there is nothing to hold onto, what is hope>

Hold on to? Do you mean what is important to me? I'd say, family, love, the well being and advancement of mankind. Things of those nature.

Factually speaking, religion has been around since the dawn of time.

So has human gullibility and stupidity. I don't particularily like either.

More specifically, religion and organized religion are not necessarily the same thing.

Not disputed there.

As far as facts going on in here, let's talk about facts.

So far - asserted as facts are "sin does not make sense", "guilt is pointless", etc. Those aren't facts; those are beliefs, and appropriate, as my comments are appropriate as well.

We are not talking about facts here. We are talking about concepts, abstract and otherwise. Including guilt.

Who's stating guilt is pointless or that sin does not make sense?

[Bratty]

Give "sin" a real hard thought. It doesn't really make any sense.

To quote the Cleric ver batem.

Conceptually speaking, you and Caz have both indicated that guilt, before action, was not really something with a point. Rather, that one should not feel guilty about thoughts, rather than actions.

Honestly, you have named your religion, whether you realize it or not. Family. It is what gives you hope, and provides answers and truth to you. Probably also combined with several things. That is my 'religion' too, thinking on a broader term of religion than hell and damnation and the like. So you do believe in something, something you hold dear to you.

Like it or not, religion and how we handle religious and philosophical concepts like death, the afterlife, meaning of life, and how to address day to day moral concerns is here, not going anywhere, and I believe the last stastic I read was that 98% of people believe in something. Some sort of god, whether it be the personification of love and family, or the more literal translation like Yahweh, Belsubub, Isis, or Ra. Religion does not have to be literal, and those who take it as such, miss the point of it.

On the guilt aspect, (trying again to bring it back to the main point) my contention was more that guilt is not necessarily bad, and is a moral and psychological defense mechanism. A compass if you will. If you weigh the cost vs benefit of the conscience or guilt, and decide the benefits outweigh the costs, that is your choice to make. But I do believe it serves a valuable purpose, even in thought.

[Ace Pace]

This asks what is Religion? Is it a belief in a greater power or belief in a concept?

Personally, lets split belief and religion into the seperate things they hard.

[Bratty]

This asks what is Religion? Is it a belief in a greater power or belief in a concept?

Personally, lets split belief and religion into the seperate things they hard.

I think they go hand and hand, intertwining, but will respect if they are seen as seperate.

[Robert Walper]

Give "sin" a real hard thought. It doesn't really make any sense.

To quote the Cleric ver batem.

Conceptually speaking, you and Caz have both indicated that guilt, before action, was not really something with a point. Rather, that one should not feel guilty about thoughts, rather than actions.

True. Feeling guilty about thoughts is relatively pointless.

Honestly, you have named your religion, whether you realize it or not. Family. It is what gives you hope, and provides answers and truth to you. Probably also combined with several things. That is my 'religion' too, thinking on a broader term of religion than hell and damnation and the like. So you do believe in something, something you hold dear to you.

My family is dear to me, although I don't go to them for hope or expect answers from them. And my family is not a religion, anymore than an apple is a car. Nor do I 'believe' in my family, since I know they verifiably exist, and my expectations from them are based upon experience.

Like it or not, religion and how we handle religious and philosophical concepts like death, the afterlife, meaning of life, and how to address day to day moral concerns is here, not going anywhere, and I believe the last stastic I read was that 98% of people believe in something.

So I fall within the 2%...what's your point?

Some sort of god, whether it be the personification of love and family, or the more literal translation like Yahweh, Belsubub, Isis, or Ra. Religion does not have to be literal, and those who take it as such, miss the point of it.

Religion to me is the belief of supernatural concepts and/or god. That's the dictionary definition of religion. I subscribe to neither, and applying the label of religion to anything of value to a person does not make it so.

On the guilt aspect, (trying again to bring it back to the main point) my contention was more that guilt is not necessarily bad, and is a moral and psychological defense mechanism. A compass if you will. If you weigh the cost vs benefit of the conscience or guilt, and decide the benefits outweigh the costs, that is your choice to make. But I do believe it serves a valuable purpose.

Guilt can have it's uses. However, I fail to see how one needs to feel guilty about thoughts, since it's actions which should concern everyone.

[Bratty]

I won't comment on the rest, based off Ace Pace's request to seperate religion and concepts, regardless of personal beliefs on them being intertwined.

Guilt can have it's uses. However, I fail to see how one needs to feel guilty about thoughts, since it's actions which should concern everyone.

Guilt has its uses, so therefore one would need to feel guilty in order for it to be useful, whether by actions or thoughts. If one did not feel guilty, they would have no moral red flags, as mentioned in previous posts.

I am not saying actions do not weigh more heavily then thoughts. But ignoring a thought of guilt is like ignoring the moral 'hand' on the stove.

I still hold by guilt is not necessarily bad in thoughts as a result.

[Ace Pace]

Brat, by all means lets discuss what is religion, but not here.

To get back OT, guilt and I use my own experiances, occurs primarily whenever you feel bad about something you did or did not do. It dosn't neccesarily have to be a bad thing, but if you feel you should have done differant, you'll feel some guilt.

[Robert Walper]

Guilt can have it's uses. However, I fail to see how one needs to feel guilty about thoughts, since it's actions which should concern everyone.

Guilt has its uses, so therefore one would need to feel guilty in order for it to be useful, whether by actions or thoughts. If one did not feel guilty, they would have no moral red flags, as mentioned in previous posts.

I am not saying actions do not weigh more heavily then thoughts. But ignoring a thought of guilt is like ignoring the moral 'hand' on the stove.

I still hold by guilt is not necessarily bad in thoughts as a result.

You misunderstand. I'm not suggesting the thought of guilt is useless...I'm suggesting feeling guilty about thoughts is pointless. There's a difference here.