i equate the two as one and the same.
i thank you for the complement - "eloquent" - i equate morals with sin/rightiouness - same in my book.
if not the same in other's books (fundies - from any religion) - then they view is not mine, they are free to have their wrong view, and i'll call them out on why they view morals and sin/rightousness as not the same.
then they will just ignore my posts on the matter.
- and all ignorance and wisdom from those that have one or the other - shall continue on in their realms.
I understand your point - i do really - but view myself the bigger picture (man by DNA is "good" - his view of his God/s - being a reflection of him, will be generally good, so "Sin" is same is "Morality".
yes there will always be some dicks - author/s of Leviticus - book is shit, its view of God is same. Ezra was too - his book is similarlly garbage. as is some of the Torah.
I note the theme of the books in the bible - via my morality (does the author's view of "god" fit mine? - if not, then that author's view of "sin" is not mine, but the author's and his view of his god).
I have morals, and equate sin with immorality and rightiousness with morality, and why i value the message of the OT bible works Jonah (author was saying the Jonah being a "beleiver in the right God" was a dick, while the pagan fisherman being heathens beleiving in many foreign gods, acted morally, while Jonah never did and just sleeped through the storm.
Amos (author of) - is another work i value - ie, do not welcome the end of the world and assume you are "saved" just for appearing rightious, while the little folks you ingore starve, and you relish assuming others not worshiping the correct god with be destroyed.
Amos (note the last part was added centuries later and negates the original authors theme of his work) states that if you are a dick (as a people - arrogant, assuming you are rightious and welcome the end of the world and destruction of your enemies) you will loose your "God's Chosen" - amos is clear, being "chosen" means a responsibility,not a privaledge (something Israel/Judaic Israelis (80-percent of in that land) should, but no not note being privalaged/racist assholes) .......(God will throw the Jews to the curb and adopt Ethoipians (who author references in his work - the concept of course includes all persons in all lands not just Etheopeans)........last part of Amos ( the concept of Judiac adoption by God as His people is unconditional) was added centuries later (this is not disputed by bibilical scholars), and i ignore as jewish propoganada
I don't like the term "pride" - self love is fine. all should self love, even the narcisist, i do not think it ever good to self hate, even if Ted Bundy.
self knowledge is the most important of course, then self love.
pride - the word to me is not introspective to me - more bragging mentality.
-----that my view of that word, it not fixed. if your view is more akin to "self love" then fine. thats just my view of that word equating self love/forgiveness.
to me "pride" seems the opposite of "humility" and so why i don't like it.
I think christians/etc(beleivers in any god/s) veiw as I do, that self love is fine, but pride is more partisan (bragging/cutting down others while lifting self up (naricisistic).
your whole argument i suspect may be symantic/concept of what "pride" is - to you, me, and "Beleivers" - if we viewed that words in the same way, i think we would end up in agreement. imo.
ok. thanks for reply, appreciate discussion
I assume you are an Atheist like me? not that it matters to me - just wondering, and assumed by this reply.