Hate the sin or the sinner?

[defcon]

Its just I read this...

www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7-1689843,00.html

And I was wondering what your qualifications were?

You see why would these people be born sinners? If it is a sin.

And if evertything is sinful which falls short of His Grace then all of us are sinners to some extent. So can we ever justify actually hating someone?

I believe not for it would make us hypocrites. If we hate someone because they sin, regardless of what sin it is, then surely we would be as well hating ourselves first.

In one sense you are correct in that we are all born sinners. Yet even if they prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that homosexuality is genetic, this doesn't make it not a sin. Testosterone levels can be more advanced in some individuals which will lead them to be more violent. Addictions to alchohol and other drugs can be past on from the mother to the child. Yet, none of these can be used for excuses before a perfect and holy God. We are all born in sin inherited from Adam. We all must fall on the grace of Jesus Christ through His sacrifice to be saved - no excuses. Once one becomes saved, the Spirit comes into the person's life to help them overcome sin. We don't instantly never sin again and the weakness may be present in some capacity for our entire life, but we are no longer a slave to it.

 

[eccl3_6]

In one sense you are correct in that we are all born sinners. Yet even if they prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that homosexuality is genetic, this doesn't make it not a sin. Testosterone levels can be more advanced in some individuals which will lead them to be more violent. Addictions to alchohol and other drugs can be past on from the mother to the child. Yet, none of these can be used for excuses before a perfect and holy God. We are all born in sin inherited from Adam. We all must fall on the grace of Jesus Christ through His sacrifice to be saved - no excuses. Once one becomes saved, the Spirit comes into the person's life to help them overcome sin. We don't instantly never sin again and the weakness may be present in some capacity for our entire life, but we are no longer a slave to it.

I'm not trying to infer that it is not a sin or not....thats another thread entirely. I am trying to say that it is unacceptable to hate a sinner. Regardless of what that sin might be. So even if you do regard homosexuality as a sin.....they should still not be hated.


Do you (addressed to the wider audience) hate homosexuals?

I, personally, am heterosexual and do not.

 

[defcon]

What's the point of giving a law to people that will either encourage the misguided belief that a human can keep it, or else will lead to the realization that one is totally unable to keep it (though commanded to do so), when "grace" would not be extended for many centuries? That's a lot of people living a lie, or else living in despair and fear, with nowhere to turn (since grace had not yet been extended). I understand the impulse to take a big historical perspective and look at the whole "story" of God's (apparent) interaction with the Jews, but if you also insist that salvation is only available through one means alone, then God's interactions with his people prior to Christ appear confused or cruel: requiring a huge number of animals to be killed in a totally ineffective sacrificial system, and holding people to a law (on pain of death) that they had no hope of possibly keeping, in order to "make a point" to later generations.

Even in the Old Testament we find that Abraham was credited righteousness by faith (Romans 4:3), so to extrapulate out that everyone in the Old Testament perished eternally is incorrect. The Jews were God's chosen people. The gospel is what it is. To try to rationalize with God is an endeavor that we are hardly qualified to take on. Romans 11:33-36 -
Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God!
How unsearchable his judgments,
and his paths beyond tracing out!
"Who has known the mind of the Lord?
Or who has been his counselor?"
"Who has ever given to God,
that God should repay him?"
For from him and through him and to him are all things.
To him be the glory forever! Amen.

 

[missedmarks]

When I said Christ simply said "Stop Sinning" I oversimplified...Christ said quite a bit more then that.

God gave the Law, man imedieately dug into it to find loopholes. He dug through it and read it like a man made legal document and figured, "All right, I'm not sleeping with my neighboors wife...I am keeping the comandment."

Jesus came and pointed out that just avoiding sex with your neighbor's wife was not enough for righteousness. Just avoiding certain behaiviors is like washing the outside of the cup and leaving the inside filthy. He suggested cleaning the inside of the cup and the outside will get clean in the process. In other words seek to desire what is good, and your behaivior will follow naturaly. Of course we will fail, life is a struggle and we are imperfect. That doesn't mean we don't try.

Of course men took Jesus's words and imediately started looking for loopholes. They say now make sure you don't look lustfully on your neighbor's wife and your are good to go. That's not the point. It's not about behaivior, it's about your internal motivations and your desires. The only way to clean the inside of the cup is by letting Christ get in there and do the scrubbing.

The other problem we have is that we get salvation issues mingled in there with other stuff. If you believe in Christ he will forgive your sins. The reason for following his commands is not to earn favor from him, or because it's a condition of salvation. You follow Christs commands because he was brilliant, he presents the best information on how to live your life. He is God, you do what God says because God said so.

 

[eccl3_6]

When I said Christ simply said "Stop Sinning" I oversimplified...Christ said quite a bit more then that.

God gave the Law, man imedieately dug into it to find loopholes. He dug through it and read it like a man made legal document and figured, "All right, I'm not sleeping with my neighboors wife...I am keeping the comandment."

Jesus came and pointed out that just avoiding sex with your neighbor's wife was not enough for righteousness. Just avoiding certain behaiviors is like washing the outside of the cup and leaving the inside filthy. He suggested cleaning the inside of the cup and the outside will get clean in the process. In other words seek to desire what is good, and your behaivior will follow naturaly. Of course we will fail, life is a struggle and we are imperfect. That doesn't mean we don't try.

Of course men took Jesus's words and imediately started looking for loopholes. They say now make sure you don't look lustfully on your neighbor's wife and your are good to go. That's not the point. It's not about behaivior, it's about your internal motivations and your desires. The only way to clean the inside of the cup is by letting Christ get in there and do the scrubbing.

The other problem we have is that we get salvation issues mingled in there with other stuff. If you believe in Christ he will forgive your sins. The reason for following his commands is not to earn favor from him, or because it's a condition of salvation. You follow Christs commands because he was brilliant, he presents the best information on how to live your life. He is God, you do what God says because God said so.

And Unfortunately if you don't agree - eternity in hell.

 

[missedmarks]

People don't go to hell for not agreeing, and they don't go to hell because they failed to observe the proper religious rituals. People go to hell because they deserve it.

I know alot of people really don't like that idea. I know most people look at themselves and consider themselves fairly decent people. I thought the same way before I went to the Kosovo. I am no Calvinist, but he got the totally depraved part right. The difference between the day to day inhumanity we all experience in traffic and ethnic cleansing is only in the results. Human cruelty and selfishness is staggering in it's depth. Whether we like to admit it or not, most of us, put in the right situation would happily do things that would make hardened SS veterans puke. I'm not saying that everyone is a sadistic potential serial killer, I'm saying that most people do horrible things to each other, and are only held in check by the situation and by civilization's threat of punishment. Given the right conditions people normally go the route of evil.

 

[intro2faith]

And Unfortunately if you don't agree - eternity in hell.

And whose choice would that be? You were offered a way out...and you didn't take it.

 

[billwald]

You were offered a way out. All you gots to do is say, "Jesus,"come into my heart," and Jesus/God is backed into a corner and gots to issue you a fire insurance policy.

 

[eccl3_6]

And whose choice would that be? You were offered a way out...and you didn't take it.

So if a kid in school says to a child, "do as I say or I'll beat you up." he's not a bully?


I'm not trying to infer what is or is not a sin....thats another thread entirely. I am trying to say that it is unacceptable to hate a sinner. Regardless of what that sin might be. So even if you do regard homosexuality as a sin.....they should still not be hated.


#1 Addressing to the wider audience, do you hate homosexuals?

I, personally, am heterosexual and do not.


#2 On this site there seems to be a body of people who's propagation of hate is justified by the doctrine they hold true. Is this correct?

 

[billwald]

>Grace had not come through His sacrifice,

Then Abraham was not "saved by grace?"

>therefore the sacrificial atonement for the Old Testament still held.

Isn't one verse in Exo thru Deut that states or implies that the Mosiac Covenant was strictly a social contract for the people living in the Israel. Not one verse refers to the next life or to gentiles living in Austrailia.

>However, the Law as not intended to bring life

Agree. It was to provide a civil government.

>but to drive people to understand that they were utterly sinful.

Then Moses and God lied to the people?

>When Christ gave this command it was no different than God in the Old Testament giving laws that >people couldn't keep in our sinful state.

He gave the command to Jews living in Israel. Yes, they could "keep" the Law. The Mosiac Contract provided sacrifices so that people who inadvertantly violated the contract could continue to live in the community. There was NO sacrifice for intentional sin. The intentional violator had to die. BUT the Law made no reference to after life disposition. In other words, an elect (technically righteous) person who committed a felony could go to Heaven after his death as King David did.

>The goal was to show sinfulness, not to be made righteous from the law.

This is an intentional misinterpretation by St Paul for political (command and control) reasons.

 

[Chileice]

The very few people who have the ability to hate the sin but love the sinner are generally canonized as "saints." I've never personally met any.

Sure you have... your parents. I loved my brother even though I hated his doing drugs. I tried to get him to stop every chance I could. And I still hate drugs with a passion but a person can love the sinner and hate the sin and not be a "saint". It happens everyday.


Here from the book of Jude is an example of how we OUGHT to live. Yes, loving the sinner and hating the sin is very biblical.

20But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy)faith, praying in the Holy Spirit,

21keep yourselves in the love of God,)waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life.

22And have mercy on some, who are doubting;

23save others, snatching them out of the fire; and on some have mercy with fear, hating even the garment polluted by the flesh.

 

[intro2faith]

You were offered a way out. All you gots to do is say, "Jesus,"come into my heart," and Jesus/God is backed into a corner and gots to issue you a fire insurance policy.

God doesn't "have" to accept anyone into His heavenly kingdom. He WANTS to! That is His greatest desire...that ALL shall be saved and come to Him. He rejoices beyond belief when someone chooses Him!

 

[defcon]

He gave the command to Jews living in Israel. Yes, they could "keep" the Law. The Mosiac Contract provided sacrifices so that people who inadvertantly violated the contract could continue to live in the community. There was NO sacrifice for intentional sin. The intentional violator had to die. BUT the Law made no reference to after life disposition. In other words, an elect (technically righteous) person who committed a felony could go to Heaven after his death as King David did.

>The goal was to show sinfulness, not to be made righteous from the law.

This is an intentional misinterpretation by St Paul for political (command and control) reasons.

Romans 3:20 " Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin." Misinterpretation? I don't see it. Please explain.

 

[defcon]

>Grace had not come through His sacrifice,

Then Abraham was not "saved by grace?"

I mentioned this already in another post (Post #143) affirming my point that we can't keep the Law. Also, Scripture isn't wrong in saying it even today because we still can't keep the Law in our flesh.

Isn't one verse in Exo thru Deut that states or implies that the Mosiac Covenant was strictly a social contract for the people living in the Israel. Not one verse refers to the next life or to gentiles living in Austrailia.

Tried reading this section a few times, are you saying that Exodus through Deut. is a social contract? The first sentence doesn't say this but the second sentence affirms the first sentence as if it was, please explain.

>However, the Law as not intended to bring life

Agree. It was to provide a civil government.

Nope. Galatians 3:22 "But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe." It helped civil government, no question, but as you can see there is much more to it.

>but to drive people to understand that they were utterly sinful.

Then Moses and God lied to the people?

Lie? No - it wasn't a lie. To be righteous by the Law you could never break the Law - that was the standard. To say otherwise would be to affirm Christ's death was meaningless because we could atone for sin through animal sacrifices. Hebrews 10:1-2 "The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. If it could, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins."

 

[defcon]

Here from the book of Jude is an example of how we OUGHT to live. Yes, loving the sinner and hating the sin is very biblical.

20But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy)faith, praying in the Holy Spirit,

21keep yourselves in the love of God,)waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life.

22And have mercy on some, who are doubting;

23save others, snatching them out of the fire; and on some have mercy with fear, hating even the garment polluted by the flesh.

:thumb: I agree, nice post!

 

[eccl3_6]

Sure you have... your parents. I loved my brother even though I hated his doing drugs. I tried to get him to stop every chance I could. And I still hate drugs with a passion but a person can love the sinner and hate the sin and not be a "saint". It happens everyday.


Here from the book of Jude is an example of how we OUGHT to live. Yes, loving the sinner and hating the sin is very biblical.

20But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy)faith, praying in the Holy Spirit,

21keep yourselves in the love of God,)waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life.

22And have mercy on some, who are doubting;

23save others, snatching them out of the fire; and on some have mercy with fear, hating even the garment polluted by the flesh.

This post should humble a lot of pious people here on TOL.
Should but won't.

 

[OMEGA]

Eph 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.

 

[intro2faith]

Eph 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.

Yes, there I believe it is talking about the FRUITS of darkness. Not the people of darkness. Although we are not to fellowship with unbelievers too much, as they will probably rub off on us eventually. That's not saying that we can't hang out with them and give them a Godly example though.

For all those people that say it's okay to hate sinners...think about this. God's love is absolutely unconditional. That means that you don't have to be saved for Him to love you, you don't even have to be a good person for Him to love you. Because His love isunconditional. Therefore, shouldn't our love be unconditional as well?

 

[defcon]

Eph 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.

Cherry-picking verses doesn't help, nowhere does this say that we should hate sinners. It simply says to expose evil deeds. God's love often rebukes our faults, to rebuke sin doesn't mean you hate the sinner. Apathy to sins is not love.

 

[billwald]

Romans 3:20 " Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin." Misinterpretation? I don't see it. Please explain.

Paul was wrong.

"Tried reading this section a few times, are you saying that Exodus through Deut. is a social contract?"

Read it several dozen times in a half dozen translations. Yes, it is a social contract.

"Lie? No - it wasn't a lie. To be righteous by the Law you could never break the Law - that was the standard."

Not the standard set by God in the Mosiac Covenant. If you were correct then there would be no sacrifices for inadvertant violations.