Jonathan Haidt in his work on moral foundations found that people often distinguish between two different types of moral transgression. Moral transgressions which are actual moral violations, such as harm of another person, and moral faults that are more violations of social conventions rather than actual wrongs. It was found that violations of the latter type were more easily excused than those of the former. If sin is just a measure of what God wants, or what God intended us to be, it seems that this falls in the latter category as well. It's someone's expectation of us. It isn't true moral harm in the way that certain transgressions are. Making it 'About God' seems to take the teeth out of any Christian moral framework. It's taking something that should be about real violations and making it merely a betrayal of God's conventions. I think that's part of why nonbelievers don't take 'sin' seriously, beyond not believing in God.
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)