Hate the Sin and Love the Sinner

[micatala]

Many Christians, when accused of being hateful or intolerant because of their statements concerning sin in general or examples of people who are in their view sinning, respond with the phrase 'hate the sin but love the sinner.'

What does this exactly mean?

To ask this question in 'loaded form,' is this phrase just a dodge to try and avoid the criticism that some CHristians harbor hateful attitudes or engage in hateful behavior?

Finally, what is the Biblical justification for this statement? Is there any?

[McCulloch]

Finally, what is the Biblical justification for this statement? Is there any?

But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

[micatala]

Finally, what is the Biblical justification for this statement? Is there any?

But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

This doesn't quite fill the bill, in my view, but it is close. The first verse is talking about God's love, not necessarily how we are to act. Assuming we are to follow God's example, it seems to say we should love sinners without expecting them to have repented first.

The second verse implies we are to be as much like God as possible. This of course means we should do our best not to sin.

I suppose we next need some verses on 'hating sin'.

Are there any verses or passages which talk about these issues together? In my view, that would be the ideal, as we then do not have to worry about whether the contexts are the same or similar enough.

[Confused]

Luke 17:1-4Jesus said to his disciples: "Things that cause people to sin are bound to come, but woe to that person through whom they come. It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin. So watch yourselfs. If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him. If he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times comes back to you and says "I repent", forgive him.

I think this verse and similar ones found in Matthew and John tell you just the opposite. If one sins, hate the sinner, if he repents, forgive the sinner. But I can find no passage that says to hate the sin, but love and forgive the sinner without repentance.

[McCulloch]

I suppose we next need some verses on 'hating sin'.

Nothing off the top of my head, but I shouldn't think that they would be hard to find.

Are there any verses or passages which talk about these issues together? In my view, that would be the ideal, as we then do not have to worry about whether the contexts are the same or similar enough.

If there were, then the apologists and promoters of Christianity would be using them rather than the non-Biblical "hate the sin and love the sinner". There consistent and repeated use of this phrase does seem to point out an apparent omission in their perfect book!

[melikio]

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se ... version=51

1 One day Jesus said to his disciples, "There will always be temptations to sin, but what sorrow awaits the person who does the tempting! 2 It would be better to be thrown into the sea with a millstone hung around your neck than to cause one of these little ones to fall into sin. 3 So watch yourselves!
"If another believer sins, rebuke that person; then if there is repentance, forgive. 4 Even if that person wrongs you seven times a day and each time turns again and asks forgiveness, you must forgive."

What some call a "sin", others do not. Only a move of God can change what we sometimes view as being sin (or not). Even so, there are real and practical restrictions to abide in communicating that period.

And I think one MASSIVE problem is that some do not regard the reasonable or humane limits of "rebuking", "chastising" or "convincing" others concerning sin. Some believe they have the POWER and RIGHT to force a view of what is right/wrong upon other human beings; it all becomes weird and obssessive in many cases. More specifically, some "believers" too often highlight what they see as sin in OTHERS, rather than taking verses like these, and realizing that how they apply true righteousness to THEMSELVES makes the most significant difference in this and the spiritual world. Hypocritical religion isn't a rare thing to behold; people are human (imperfect) and Jesus was fully aware of that reality.

The reality (and Jesus also knew it), is that no one could be FORCED to be "right" or "good". And again, not all people view the same things as being sinful. So, how do we deal with that fairly and compassionately? I think that grace is too often overlooked, in lieu of religious "zealotry". Certainly, the biblical verses quoted above do not give "Christians" the right to IMPOSE their sense of righteousness upon others; I don't see that. And considering Jesus' admonitions of people to avoid hypocracy, it would be reasonable for any "Christian" to consider that they do have real LIMITS to how often or how much they could really PUSH others toward "righteousness". It's just not apparent to some people of "faith", that the SPIRIT OF GOD is very often the only catalyst for the CHANGES (even repentance) they wish to see in other people.

I am familiar with how people's interpretations of religion or the Bible affect homosexual people, because I have experienced it numerous times. It is apparent to me that some want religion to be in control of people, rather than have it guide them instead; some people DO operate on the fear and guilt which their religion provides them with. And they would force that same fear and guilt upon others not aligned with their religious views.

I don't know all of anything (obviously); still there are the things some people of faith do, which bolster their own faith (only), but by the same token (in the case of many "Christians") they aren't truly ambassadors of Jesus Christ. And I think to be truly effective as a Christian, that one must consider that not all that happens that is "good", must necessarily be accomplished through the rigid harshness that many employ (often in the name of their God or religion). I mean, at SOME POINT/S (at least) the sense of righteousness of fellow human beings isn't the same as God's absolute will (especially for others); is it? I don't think so.

While the image of a person being drowned with a "millstone" applied to their neck is poignant; I don't see where Christianity or the Bible calls for people to "fit" other human beings with such apparatus and commence with drowning those they believe are "sinning" or "sinners". To the contrary, it also means something important when Jesus says:

"...Even if that person wrongs you seven times a day and each time turns again and asks forgiveness, you must forgive."

I think (in the broader sense) that "Hate the Sin and Love the Sinner", should be taken more literally by Christians who really want to make a difference in this reality and beyond. And most need to start with what they know or believe is sin IN THEIR OWN LIVES, and go from there in grace, faith, hope and love to others. For in the specific instances where I see homosexual people being handled by Christians, there is something often missing, that because of the absolutely-emotional topic that homosexuality is... "grace" so frequently overlooked and even discounted.

(Perhaps if I weren't "gay", I would not have noticed these things I'm typically pointing out; everything might just seem to be "ok". But years of hatred where many claimed there was love, and heaps of pain where encouragement was claimed, questions arose.)

It's not usually difficult or rare to see people "hating" others, where they should be "loving" them in real and practical ways. And I don't think there is one person (including myself), who hasn't fallen short in that category.

I think it's true, that some people only know how to poke, stab and dismember people (sinners) with their spiritual "Swords"; but sometimes it is Jesus who will insist, that there is a time to let HIM "heal" the very wounds we've caused suffering with (I think of Jesus replacing the ear of the soldier that Peter cut off). And just as Peter was chastised for his action upon the Roman soldier, I think the same is now affecting the "Church" in many areas. That is, many "Christians" (and other religious folk) are doing things to others in misguided ways, that I believe God really doesn't approve of.

Some people wrongly assume, that they ALWAYS know what's right/good for a given "sinner"; it's not like that really. Only God knows absolutely what each person needs or doesn't need. Of course we are going to see "sin" in people's lives, but that doesn't mean we are allowed to make an all-out assault upon that person because of it (especially when we have our own issues to winnow out before God in our own lives).

-Mel-

[Easyrider]

And I think one MASSIVE problem is that some do not regard the reasonable or humane limits of "rebuking", "chastising" or "convincing" others concerning sin. Some believe they have the POWER and RIGHT to force a view of what is right/wrong upon other human beings; it all becomes weird and obssessive in many cases. More specifically, some "believers" too often highlight what they see as sin in OTHERS, rather than taking verses like these, and realizing that how they apply true righteousness to THEMSELVES makes the most significant difference in this and the spiritual world. Hypocritical religion isn't a rare thing to behold; people are human (imperfect) and Jesus was fully aware of that reality.

No doubt there is some (or a lot of this) going on. On the other hand, just because some do this doesn't mean crusading for righteousness and defining sin to others is wrong. Even the Old Testament prophets did that, as well as Paul, Jesus, John the Baptist, etc.

I think (in the broader sense) that "Hate the Sin and Love the Sinner", should be taken more literally by Christians who really want to make a difference in this reality and beyond. And most need to start with what they know or believe is sin IN THEIR OWN LIVES, and go from there in grace, faith, hope and love to others. For in the specific instances where I see homosexual people being handled by Christians, there is something often missing, that because of the absolutely-emotional topic that homosexuality is... "grace" so frequently overlooked and even discounted.

Grace is great, but didn't Jesus tell people to repent also? Have you ever seen a pro-gay individual in a gay relationship (sexual acts assumed in this example) repent of it? I don't know of one in any forum I've ever been in who ever has. Don't you think that might be important in the eyes of Christ, since he commanded people to repent of their sins?

[micatala]

Grace is great, but didn't Jesus tell people to repent also? Have you ever seen a pro-gay individual in a gay relationship (sexual acts assumed in this example) repent of it? I don't know of one in any forum I've ever been in who ever has. Don't you think that might be important in the eyes of Christ, since he commanded people to repent of their sins?

But here is the whole problem, isn't it.

Who gets to define what is sinful?

People who categorically condemn homosexuality typically refuse to accept even the possibility that they could be wrong. Since the Bible does allow that people have at least some latititude to define what is sinful for themselves (See Romans 14 and elsewhere), why do many continue to harangue homosexuals and seek to restrict their legal rights when those that are believers have, in most cases, decided with legitimate Biblical support that they are not inherently sinful?

I know you declined to participate in the thread "Is homosexuality sinful in all circumstances" and can appreciate your reasons for doing so. However, I continue to stand by the case I have made there that there is at least a reasonable possiblity God will not categorize all homosexual behavior as sinful.

[Confused]

And I think one MASSIVE problem is that some do not regard the reasonable or humane limits of "rebuking", "chastising" or "convincing" others concerning sin. Some believe they have the POWER and RIGHT to force a view of what is right/wrong upon other human beings; it all becomes weird and obssessive in many cases. More specifically, some "believers" too often highlight what they see as sin in OTHERS, rather than taking verses like these, and realizing that how they apply true righteousness to THEMSELVES makes the most significant difference in this and the spiritual world. Hypocritical religion isn't a rare thing to behold; people are human (imperfect) and Jesus was fully aware of that reality.

No doubt there is some (or a lot of this) going on. On the other hand, just because some do this doesn't mean crusading for righteousness and defining sin to others is wrong. Even the Old Testament prophets did that, as well as Paul, Jesus, John the Baptist, etc.

I think (in the broader sense) that "Hate the Sin and Love the Sinner", should be taken more literally by Christians who really want to make a difference in this reality and beyond. And most need to start with what they know or believe is sin IN THEIR OWN LIVES, and go from there in grace, faith, hope and love to others. For in the specific instances where I see homosexual people being handled by Christians, there is something often missing, that because of the absolutely-emotional topic that homosexuality is... "grace" so frequently overlooked and even discounted.

Grace is great, but didn't Jesus tell people to repent also? Have you ever seen a pro-gay individual in a gay relationship (sexual acts assumed in this example) repent of it? I don't know of one in any forum I've ever been in who ever has. Don't you think that might be important in the eyes of Christ, since he commanded people to repent of their sins?

I would ask this of you Easyrider because once I get outside the major Gospels of the NT, I get fairly confused, so you know. Is there a specific passage in the NT, no tthe OT, that specifically condemns homosexuality. I know this thread isn't spedific to it, so forgiveme Micalta. It isn't my intention to change the focus. But this seems to be a central sin that I hear the greatest contention over and I dont recall anywhere in the NT where it is specifically addressed?

[Confused]

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se ... version=51

1 One day Jesus said to his disciples, "There will always be temptations to sin, but what sorrow awaits the person who does the tempting! 2 It would be better to be thrown into the sea with a millstone hung around your neck than to cause one of these little ones to fall into sin. 3 So watch yourselves!
"If another believer sins, rebuke that person; then if there is repentance, forgive. 4 Even if that person wrongs you seven times a day and each time turns again and asks forgiveness, you must forgive."

What some call a "sin", others do not. Only a move of God can change what we sometimes view as being sin (or not). Even so, there are real and practical restrictions to abide in communicating that period.

And I think one MASSIVE problem is that some do not regard the reasonable or humane limits of "rebuking", "chastising" or "convincing" others concerning sin. Some believe they have the POWER and RIGHT to force a view of what is right/wrong upon other human beings; it all becomes weird and obssessive in many cases. More specifically, some "believers" too often highlight what they see as sin in OTHERS, rather than taking verses like these, and realizing that how they apply true righteousness to THEMSELVES makes the most significant difference in this and the spiritual world. Hypocritical religion isn't a rare thing to behold; people are human (imperfect) and Jesus was fully aware of that reality.

The reality (and Jesus also knew it), is that no one could be FORCED to be "right" or "good". And again, not all people view the same things as being sinful. So, how do we deal with that fairly and compassionately? I think that grace is too often overlooked, in lieu of religious "zealotry". Certainly, the biblical verses quoted above do not give "Christians" the right to IMPOSE their sense of righteousness upon others; I don't see that. And considering Jesus' admonitions of people to avoid hypocracy, it would be reasonable for any "Christian" to consider that they do have real LIMITS to how often or how much they could really PUSH others toward "righteousness". It's just not apparent to some people of "faith", that the SPIRIT OF GOD is very often the only catalyst for the CHANGES (even repentance) they wish to see in other people.

I am familiar with how people's interpretations of religion or the Bible affect homosexual people, because I have experienced it numerous times. It is apparent to me that some want religion to be in control of people, rather than have it guide them instead; some people DO operate on the fear and guilt which their religion provides them with. And they would force that same fear and guilt upon others not aligned with their religious views.

I don't know all of anything (obviously); still there are the things some people of faith do, which bolster their own faith (only), but by the same token (in the case of many "Christians") they aren't truly ambassadors of Jesus Christ. And I think to be truly effective as a Christian, that one must consider that not all that happens that is "good", must necessarily be accomplished through the rigid harshness that many employ (often in the name of their God or religion). I mean, at SOME POINT/S (at least) the sense of righteousness of fellow human beings isn't the same as God's absolute will (especially for others); is it? I don't think so.

While the image of a person being drowned with a "millstone" applied to their neck is poignant; I don't see where Christianity or the Bible calls for people to "fit" other human beings with such apparatus and commence with drowning those they believe are "sinning" or "sinners". To the contrary, it also means something important when Jesus says:

"...Even if that person wrongs you seven times a day and each time turns again and asks forgiveness, you must forgive."

I think (in the broader sense) that "Hate the Sin and Love the Sinner", should be taken more literally by Christians who really want to make a difference in this reality and beyond. And most need to start with what they know or believe is sin IN THEIR OWN LIVES, and go from there in grace, faith, hope and love to others. For in the specific instances where I see homosexual people being handled by Christians, there is something often missing, that because of the absolutely-emotional topic that homosexuality is... "grace" so frequently overlooked and even discounted.

(Perhaps if I weren't "gay", I would not have noticed these things I'm typically pointing out; everything might just seem to be "ok". But years of hatred where many claimed there was love, and heaps of pain where encouragement was claimed, questions arose.)

It's not usually difficult or rare to see people "hating" others, where they should be "loving" them in real and practical ways. And I don't think there is one person (including myself), who hasn't fallen short in that category.

I think it's true, that some people only know how to poke, stab and dismember people (sinners) with their spiritual "Swords"; but sometimes it is Jesus who will insist, that there is a time to let HIM "heal" the very wounds we've caused suffering with (I think of Jesus replacing the ear of the soldier that Peter cut off). And just as Peter was chastised for his action upon the Roman soldier, I think the same is now affecting the "Church" in many areas. That is, many "Christians" (and other religious folk) are doing things to others in misguided ways, that I believe God really doesn't approve of.

Some people wrongly assume, that they ALWAYS know what's right/good for a given "sinner"; it's not like that really. Only God knows absolutely what each person needs or doesn't need. Of course we are going to see "sin" in people's lives, but that doesn't mean we are allowed to make an all-out assault upon that person because of it (especially when we have our own issues to winnow out before God in our own lives).

-Mel-

'

In some weird way I can see where Christians thought process lay. In their view, a decline in morality, whatever their perception of it may be, may be the downfall of man as well. They themselves justify their views in support of mankind, in a weird sense. The problem is that the only sins I have found in the NT that were specifically addressed by Christ, are the same sins that of the Christians are guilty of themselves. Christ did an awful job clarifying sin. I will agree to this. To what I can see, his commandments were addressed towards how to live ones life, not how not to. So It isn't that Christians hate the sinner, they hate the sin and in their mind are reflecting that hate towards the sinner because they haven't repented. Maybe I am just speaking out my nose since I can't seem to find this elusive path to God or to atheism, but I read the NT and then listen to what some Christians say I have a difficult time merging the two. Who decides the sin, in my view, it is an individual decison. I see nowhere in which Christ himself defines them specifically. What he says is how to live a Chrsitian life, not what a Christian life includes. I see a lot of people quoting the OT. Unfortunately, to do so, one must ignore a lot of the NT. The OT does't preach forgiveness, etc.. It teaches condemnation. In every book, in every passage someone has angered God and has been punished. That in a sense is all the OT is about. The NT seems to override it and show this new God who realizes that ruling by an iron fist will condemn all mankind, so instead, he preaches forgiveness and repentence. But He never dictates what is sin. I can't say hate the sin, because in some cases, the sin is justified. I can't say hate the sinner, because it negates the causation of the sin to begin with. I guess what I am trying to say it that one should treat another as they wish to be treated. If they disagree with a lifestyle, then God will address it on his terms. There is nothing in the NT that can be definitively defined as sin. As such, we must maintain mans law on earth and hope that God's law will follow. I see no other althernative.