The Instigator
Con (against)
The Contender
Pro (for)

Is sinning necessarily bad?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
KDDebater has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/16/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 436 times Debate No: 103011
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)




Let's start with a definition; what is good/bad?
I think the best definition is "something that creates happiness/unhappiness, that heals/hurt, that cause pleasure/suffering".
If your definition was "that is in accordance/against to the commandments of God", I'd say that it has no meaning, that it is pointless. Being good or bad with this last definition has no consequences.

Stealing, raping, and killing are bad, I think we all agree on this. But they are not bad because the bible says it; Stealing is bad because someone loses a property. Raping, because it hurts someone. And killing because the relatives lose someone they loved.

Sinning is not the cause of the action being bad.

With this reasoning, I come to the conclusion that sinning is not necessarily bad.


I wasn't sure whether or not I should even take this one because it's so loosely defined, but ehhh' why the hell not?

Is sinning necessarily bad?

Yes. But only in the same way that it could also necessarily not be either. The word 'necessarily' thrown into the mix really only implies that an opinion is being asked for rather than any hard evidence or solid statements. But yeah, sure, why not? Sinning COULD necessarily be bad.

Just because YOU would say that it has no meaning it doesn't mean that other people wouldn't say that and subscribe to the definition you disagree with. Fact of the matter is; there is no fact of the matter. You could be wrong and at the end of the day unless you can prove wrong; anyone who employs those beliefs and definitions to their self; you're not necessarily right, are you? And so in this sense; if you're not necessarily right, you could be wrong, and if you are wrong; dependent on what the individual believes; if they are correct, and you are not then the consequences could be spending eternity in hell.

The definition of good and bad can literally only be what the individual thinks is good and bad.

If you were to say Justin Bieber is good; but your friend says he's sucks; does that mean that either of you are necessarily correct? No, of course not. But the consequences of that could be that you hit puberty and realize that you were wrong and now all of your friends are making fun of you because you used to like Justin Bieber so you are obviously a closet case. Are they wrong? Not necessarily.

I'd also disagree that everyone would agree that stealing, raping and killing are bad. If that were so; why would some people do it? The fact that an idea of an action exists that we feel the need to name and label as one thing or the other suggests that it's a 'thing' and likely a prominent enough 'thing' that it must be something that could easily be reasoned to a person, be it by the person themselves or someone else; that it's alright to do those things.

Would Hitler agree with you? I think not.

Stealing, murdering, raping are not bad because the Bible says they are bad; but again; it also doesn't necessarily mean that those actions are not and cannot be constituted as sins. If a person chooses to represent the "bad" actions in question as a sin, by calling it a sin, then it should be assumed by social norms in the Western world that what the person means is that by using the word 'sin' it's attributed to a Biblical or Spiritual nature and karmas. And so lastly; to those people...

Yes, a sin would necessarily be bad and your opinion doesn't matter because if someone truly believes it; it's not going to change their mind.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by backwardseden 2 years ago
Each of you bozo's take top prize for not knowing his bible all that well...
Does every man sin?
Yes. There is no man who does not sin (I Kings 8:46; see also 2 Chronicles 6:36; Proverbs 20:9; Ecclesiastes 7:20; and I John 1:810)
No. True Christians cannot possibly sin, because they are the children of God. Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is a child of God.. (I John 5:1). We should be called children of God; and so we are (I John 3: 1). He who loves is born of God (I John 4:7). No one born of God commits sin; for Gods nature abides in him, and he cannot sin because he is born of God (I John 3:9). But, then again, Yes! If we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us (I John 1:8)
Posted by missmedic 2 years ago
It's only through abandoning certain widespread religious ideas that progress towards a truly just and consistent morality is possible.
According to the bible, to disobey gods commandments is a sin. And the bible has over 1600 commandments. No where in the bible does it say you can follow the commandments you like and ignore the rest, nor does it say you can reduce the punishment god has imposed for breaking them. This makes it impossible to follow the bible. We don't base morality on revelation from authority, that would render us merely obedient.
On the other hand the Jains have only one commandment; Do not injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture or kill any creature or living being.
Jain scripture
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.