It is difficult to define sin in a world that denies all sin.  What once was sinful has become the accepted value in society.  So does sin exist?  And if so, what is sin?  Sin, as defined by the theologies of the world, is the disobedience of God’s laws.  But what is God’s law and what is man’s?

Mankind has defined sin by varying standards, making the definition subjective to interpretation.  Wars were fought, people were tortured and millions of lives destroyed by man's need to inflict his definition of sin.  The Christian bible speaks of God directly interacting with man in the Old Testament, when it was necessary.  This usually involved some upcoming chastisement or cataclysm and only a select few people ever talked directly with God in the Old Testament.  The New Testament demonstrates the Word of God made flesh in Jesus Christ.  Now, sin was defined at a much more specific level, but even then, the apostles and the Christian churches reinterpreted the teachings of Christ.

So, what was the definition of sin during those 5000 years before Christ?  Most of the world was making up their own ideas about sin, so every bit of treatise on sin was handed down by word of mouth from one generation to another - ergo all the different beliefs of the world. Whether you are Christian, Buddhist, Jewish or some other belief, your concepts of sin are programmed in you by your forefathers, not God. Man has a very skewed, subjective view of reality; therefore, his concept of sin is most of the time wrong. The world is like a child trying to figure it all out and growing up is a difficult process, but then you don’t enter this world with a service manual now do you?

There are positive results derived from society’s ‘growing up’ socially, such as not stoning prostitutes, teaching people to never demean or ridicule minorities and giving women equality in the workforce.  Our interpretation of sin has definitely evolved over the centuries.  But, while we seem to grow in needed areas, we degenerate in others.  The very revolution that has empowered woman has virtually destroyed the family unit.  Children are left to themselves in the family structure to disseminate what is right and what is wrong.  This leads to chaos and in the more serious scenarios destruction.  Man's sexual promiscuity is at an all time high and even worse it seems to be the norm.  So, we must be sinning more than ever, right?

If history is accurate, we have simply supplanted our barbaric nature for a humanitarian one.  That is, we may not get as perverse a thrill out of hanging or crucifying people in the 21st century as did our forefathers, because we now pamper and indulge ourselves in excesses of sensuality.  If the truth be known, we are probably at an all time high in the sinning department while abhorring blood shed - typical social maturity.

So what should mankind do, return to the barbarism of our forefathers and enforce totalitarianism on society by subjective interpretation of sin?  That would be ludicrous!  We must be thankful for what we have achieved in our growth, but we need to consider the insidious acts left in society that may be as destructive, only on another plane.  These acts are subliminal since they ‘comfort the senses’ so to speak.   Removing corporal punishment from the family unit and the school system may comfort the senses of certain people, but it produces disrespect and laziness in children.  Need examples?  Just visit any school and see the ‘fruits of our labor’.   Making materialism your god is a comfort to the senses, but inevitably renders people as nothing better than social animals – every man for himself.  Corporate America probably commits more sin on a daily basis than the Roman Empire did, yearly.  We just pat each other on the back a lot more now.

Sin, then takes on an objective definition.  That is, regardless of any period in time or any group of learned people, sin is simply that which leads to social decay.  If you were an atheist you would even agree that doing that which is destructive for society is a loosing proposition.  The trees and foliage of the earth produce oxygen from carbon dioxide, the ‘exhaust’, so to speak, of animals and mankind.  This is a perfect symbiotic relationship that is functional and therefore good.  If some destructive person figured out how to stop this process, then their act would be dysfunctional to the world ergo sinful.

Simply put, sin is any act by man that leads to a bad end.  Whether we can see the end or not does not change the effect. So, sin ( that which leads to destruction ) is objective not subjective to interpretation.  If you burn the rain forest down, then you burned the rain forest down, regardless of what anyone thinks.  How you are judged on your sin is man's supreme failing.  His first instinct was to pick up a rock and hit you with it and his next was to appoint a panel of your peers to make a somewhat dubious judgment on your fate.  What's next - mind alteration?

Our social progression is ongoing.  And it is true, we are much more humanitarian than our ancestors, but as far as sinning is concerned; we are at an all time high.  We have only shifted the emphasis by changing the rules.

Whether small or great, ‘the wages of sin is death’ to you, our world and me.  We can, however,  always make better decisions by judging the outcome, not the person. I believe Our Creator would be pleased to see man judging the ‘fruits of his labor’ rather than pontificating on sin. Let's leave the judgment of sin to God and make our judgments functional for the day.