Many people presume that it is useless to believe a lot of ideas Christians believe....like for example that disobeying the Law is "sin" rather than merely committing (or is it instead: performing) "mistakes" done either in ignorance or even deliberately.
There is, however and nevertheless, general public agreement on what exactly many of those "mistakes" are relating to if then how much another person is physically or mentally harmed without good cause, or their property destroyed without good cause (as "good" is defined by The Absolute Standard).
Anti-Christian disbelievers deem not only weird but even absurd Christian dogma stating that "sinful" errors need to be atoned or compensated against by simply believing that history's most unusual man, named "Jesus," who was crucified on a cross over in Israel some 2000 years ago, is what makes up for one's transgressions against the Law, both temporally and thereafter.
Not only that, but questionably-veracious human-effort "faith" in "Christ" and "good" works done for and because of "Him" seem to many a cop-out....not worthy of compensating for the misery inflicted on others near and far, nor practically applicable concerning proper, thorough-enough, just or fair retributional correction against slight-to-significant antisocial speech and misbehaviors whether inside or outside of religious institutions and establishments.
Ever since early childhood, parents have warned their kids to not do this or that, with the threat that if they actually do what they were told to not do, various consequences would occur....whether those consequences involve punishment of whatever types and durations from the parents themselves and/or natural injuries of whatever kinds. This webtract author could go on and on listing examples and examples elaborating on both, but you the reader can easily imagine many of those yourself (but if we must, we recall the many life-and-health-saving "Poison", "High Voltage," "Radioactive," "No Trespassing," "Explosive," and other prohibitory warning signs we have seen and yet see around us).
Is "transgressing" those parental commands and warning, disregarding their threats of consequence, "sin?" And if so, how is transgressing them "atoned" for?
Let's take some adult scenarios.
If a motorist drives on the wrong side of the road on a two-way highway (in sane America, that would be on the left side), or goes through an intersection without stopping for a red light or stop sign, a typical squad-car police officer would consider that "breaking the Law" (if you will pardon the strange euphemism, in that the Law remains intact even though violated by an offender).
The consequence is generally flashing red-and-blue lights in the rear-view mirror of the motorist's car, and we all know the discomfortable and lamentable yet completely-understandable procedures which usually transpire. But can and/or should such driving infractions have the religious term: "sin" or "wickednes" applied?
The penalty for traffic infraction is frequently a hefty monetary fine, and for repeated violations, seizure of the Driver's License and/or temporary imprisonment. Not only that, but remembrance of that is perpetuated by a hard-to-erase Police Record of and against the violator, sometimes even affecting employment or promotion prospects.
The religious concept of "sin" is based on Biblical enlightenment involving the existence and characteristics of God the Creator, the perception, awareness, and sense of morality He has embedded in humans, His conveyance of His intentions through words-based spoken and written communication to those humans, and directly related to the religious concepts of "atonement" and "grace."
For people to embrace that religious dogma requires a scientific and non-biased open-mindedness which few possess, for whatever mystifying causes.
In the quest for non-closed-minded investigation and discovery, honest and searching people discover "The Holy Bible" with the at-least "story" and at-best "record" of "Eve" and "Adam" doing what disobedient kids do: disobeying their "Heavenly Father" (i.e. their Creator) who [allegedly] gave them explicit warning to not eat of "The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil" - but of which they instead did eat, and the sordid myriad consequences to them and their reproduced progenie are written throughout the remainder of that Bible.
It is from that Holy Bible humans acquire the concept of "sin" which needs to be "atoned" for, and such atonement begins with Hebrew Jewish belief that animal sacrifices performed by "sinners" signify "repentance" and a desire to never "sin" again in whatever ways that has occurred.
But [apparently, according to the Christian Old and New Testaments of The Holy Bible], animal sacrifices performed are said to be inadequate to stop people from continuing to sin (i.e. commit what is considered "wrong" or "evil") and also are not able to purge the "guilty conscience" of the penitent for mistake-like "sins" committed in the past.
At that point, the Bible gets into a new and higher eschelon of "forgiveness" with requirement to accept "the gospel" of merely believing that the lynching and murder against (and not "of") Jesus (who the Bible considers not only the Son of God and Everlasting Father, but Divinely-Perfect Atoner) on some Roman cross nearly 2000 years ago expiates and alleviates not merely the fines or penalties for sinning but also guilty-conscience rememberances associated with contemporary personal transgressions against the laws contained within The Holy Bible.
It is of great interest to note that many (if not most) of the directives and precepts contained within The Holy Bible are similar if not identical to specifics of civil Law enforced by government legislators, judges, agents, and officials. Such rules and regulations involve orderly accomodation for those in a civilized society and community to maintain peaceful cooperative unity and wellbeing.
According to the record of that Holy Bible, the source of knowledge for civil laws and statutes of necessity (by logical historical order in terms of timing) originates from where the Holy Bible states they originated from, first verbally only, and then in written form (such as "The Ten Commandments" supposedly given to Moses by the LORD Himself).
If one thinks the Bible credible (and there is no reason to not think so), one can quickly and easily understand and accept assumptive premises stated above without realistic doubts, apprehension, nor fear of being deceived in any way.
Of all people, yours truly has found that genuine Christians are the most skeptical, difficult-to-convince, non-gullible group on the planet. If there were alien beings or advanced technology landing on UFOs from outer space, even government agents could not stop them from exposing the truth about it, and would die rather than hide it away from and against those they believe would benefit or be seriously affected. Such saints have a long-standing reputation of never deluding themselves, nor causing others to believe a lie, as to what has been inerrantly preserved in The Holy Bible (at least in the inerrant ben Ashur Masoretic Old-Testament Hebrew Text and the Scrivener/Trinitarian New-Testament Greek Text). The impudent belligerance of deceptive fools who deny reality about such does not affect Christ's elect nor alter their courageous and eerie persistence whatsoever to hold and profess what they know as valid, and Acts of God certify with uncanny circumstantial coincidence over and over, based on spiritual powers not of this world.
Assuming the above is true, Christ our Creator and Redeemer still wants us to obey the totality of His commandments, suggestions, and advice given throughout His Divinely-inspired Sacred-66-books Holy Bible -- for His good pleasure, plus for our safety and satisfaction....but not for us to selectively obey now and then (to varying degrees of success and failure) pet precepts of His Scripture (not our own one-sided distorted alterations and legalistic additions and/or omissions) for the futile purpose of us trying in vain to self-justify and self-atone ourselves by ourselves alone as pseudo self-saviors.