Love the SInner - Hate the Sin
This is one of my favorite Christo-speakese phrases. It demonstrates yet another example of the ignorance Christians have about their own rule book, the Bible, as well as an attempt by modern believers to make their God nicer than he really is. A quick search on GOOGLE will reveal that this phrase, or a variation of it, is found in numerous online sermons. I know that I myself heard that quaint concept repeated uncountable times in the many churches I frequented during my long tenure as a true believer.
On the face if it, the phrase seems like a nice idea. Basically I take this to be an admonition to be nice to everyone, regardless of ideology, but lovingly stand against their non-Christian lifestyles, behaviors, etc. I would agree with the "be nice to everyone" attitude, and commend those who try to adopt the policy. To debate the value of this simple philosophy is not my issue here, but to demonstrate that although such thinking may be a nice fluffy Evangelical ideal, it is not in the vocabulary of Bible God and it is certainly not part of Christianity. In the style of how I approached things in the past as a Christian, I ask now, "What saith the Scriptures?"
1) God is angry with the wicked every day. Psalms 7:11
Notice He is not angry with the sin, while loving the sinner. He is angry with the wicked themselves, the person, the individual, the human being.
2) God distributeth sorrows (to sinners) in his anger. Job 21:17
3) The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil. Proverbs 16:4
Sounds like God's displeasure is with the person again, not with the sin as if it existed outside the person. He even says he made the wicked for a certain reason, the day of evil. Here it doesn't come close to sounding like HE loves them.
There are absolutely dozens and dozens of verses in the Old Testament that I could use to prove my point, but there are too many modern Dispensationally hampered Christians who retreat from the hard theology of the OT to hide their minds behind a shield of, "that was the old covenant, so it doesn't count anymore." "We are in the new and better covenant of love, mercy and forgiveness." So, rather than get on a rabbit trail and belabor the fallacy of dividing the hokey word (err, holy word), I will only use the NT from here on out.
3) A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh. Luke 6:45
The sin and the sinner are tied together. They are absolutely one and the same in the mind of the Bible writers.
4) These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; Jude 1:12
Love the sinner and hate the sin? I don't see it here.
5) But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption; 2 Peter 2:12
Still no love for the sinner while hating the sin.
6) If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema (aka: CURSED). 1 Corinthians 16:22
Love the sinner but hate the sin? I think not.
7) If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: 2 John 1:10
Love him? Hell no...... Don't even invite him into your house!
8) But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. Revelation 21:8
It is not the sin that is finally confined to the bowels of hell in God's loving plan, it is the people themselves.
It's sad, but the harsh, arrogant, condemning, angry Christians who try to rebut the articles on this site, and who send in the harsh judgmental letters, are actually closer to following the plain teachings of their deity than the more reasonable Christian commentators. Nowhere does the B-I-B-L-E teach that sin should be hated while sinners should be loved. A sinner is one who sins, pure and simple and the only way a sinner is ever given the possiblity of being loved is if he turns from his unbelief and sin. Up until then, there is no real offer of love. The love of GOD has huge strings attached, and the formula for getting in on that love has no alternatives. The sin that really puts that sinner in the Christian hell is rejection of Jesus as "personal savior." (Where in the bible the concept of "personal savior" comes from could be the topic of another rant, but for now I'll let that one alone.) If for any reason a person on the planet does not submit themselves to the requirements for receiving that "LOVE." then that person is totally rejected, condemned and eternally tortured without mercy.
It is commendable that many who have swallowed the blue pill of oblivion sending them into the fantasy world of Christianity are unwilling to adopt the horrific world view of Bible God. It is humanistically commendable, but it is not historic Christianity. One reason so much of Christian history is drenched in bloodshed, promulgated by "Christians" is because the religion does not teach tolerance of other lifestyle, or religious choices in any way shape or form. The only people that Christians are commanded to tolerate, are other believers. Those outside the fold are goats and chaff destined for the burning flames of hell, pure and simple. You can call your God love if you want, but the only ones he really loves are HIS own people. In the O.T. it was the Hebrews HE cares about and in the N.T. it is the Christians. Everyone else only exists as a tool to demonstrate HIS nefarious attributes of wrath, anger, ect.
Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. Revelation 4:11
"All things" includes sinners and the hell they are condemned to inhabit for all eternity.
I present the plain words of these verses as a challenge to modern Christianity's idea that loving sinners while hating the sin is supported or taught by their mythical J.C., or his equally nonexistent Sky Daddy or any of their self appointed mouth pieces from their holey book.
Christianity is not about love, it is about closing your mind and doing what you are told.
On the face if it, the phrase seems like a nice idea. Basically I take this to be an admonition to be nice to everyone, regardless of ideology, but lovingly stand against their non-Christian lifestyles, behaviors, etc. I would agree with the "be nice to everyone" attitude, and commend those who try to adopt the policy. To debate the value of this simple philosophy is not my issue here, but to demonstrate that although such thinking may be a nice fluffy Evangelical ideal, it is not in the vocabulary of Bible God and it is certainly not part of Christianity. In the style of how I approached things in the past as a Christian, I ask now, "What saith the Scriptures?"
1) God is angry with the wicked every day. Psalms 7:11
Notice He is not angry with the sin, while loving the sinner. He is angry with the wicked themselves, the person, the individual, the human being.
2) God distributeth sorrows (to sinners) in his anger. Job 21:17
3) The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil. Proverbs 16:4
Sounds like God's displeasure is with the person again, not with the sin as if it existed outside the person. He even says he made the wicked for a certain reason, the day of evil. Here it doesn't come close to sounding like HE loves them.
There are absolutely dozens and dozens of verses in the Old Testament that I could use to prove my point, but there are too many modern Dispensationally hampered Christians who retreat from the hard theology of the OT to hide their minds behind a shield of, "that was the old covenant, so it doesn't count anymore." "We are in the new and better covenant of love, mercy and forgiveness." So, rather than get on a rabbit trail and belabor the fallacy of dividing the hokey word (err, holy word), I will only use the NT from here on out.
3) A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh. Luke 6:45
The sin and the sinner are tied together. They are absolutely one and the same in the mind of the Bible writers.
4) These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; Jude 1:12
Love the sinner and hate the sin? I don't see it here.
5) But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption; 2 Peter 2:12
Still no love for the sinner while hating the sin.
6) If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema (aka: CURSED). 1 Corinthians 16:22
Love the sinner but hate the sin? I think not.
7) If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: 2 John 1:10
Love him? Hell no...... Don't even invite him into your house!
8) But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. Revelation 21:8
It is not the sin that is finally confined to the bowels of hell in God's loving plan, it is the people themselves.
It's sad, but the harsh, arrogant, condemning, angry Christians who try to rebut the articles on this site, and who send in the harsh judgmental letters, are actually closer to following the plain teachings of their deity than the more reasonable Christian commentators. Nowhere does the B-I-B-L-E teach that sin should be hated while sinners should be loved. A sinner is one who sins, pure and simple and the only way a sinner is ever given the possiblity of being loved is if he turns from his unbelief and sin. Up until then, there is no real offer of love. The love of GOD has huge strings attached, and the formula for getting in on that love has no alternatives. The sin that really puts that sinner in the Christian hell is rejection of Jesus as "personal savior." (Where in the bible the concept of "personal savior" comes from could be the topic of another rant, but for now I'll let that one alone.) If for any reason a person on the planet does not submit themselves to the requirements for receiving that "LOVE." then that person is totally rejected, condemned and eternally tortured without mercy.
It is commendable that many who have swallowed the blue pill of oblivion sending them into the fantasy world of Christianity are unwilling to adopt the horrific world view of Bible God. It is humanistically commendable, but it is not historic Christianity. One reason so much of Christian history is drenched in bloodshed, promulgated by "Christians" is because the religion does not teach tolerance of other lifestyle, or religious choices in any way shape or form. The only people that Christians are commanded to tolerate, are other believers. Those outside the fold are goats and chaff destined for the burning flames of hell, pure and simple. You can call your God love if you want, but the only ones he really loves are HIS own people. In the O.T. it was the Hebrews HE cares about and in the N.T. it is the Christians. Everyone else only exists as a tool to demonstrate HIS nefarious attributes of wrath, anger, ect.
Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. Revelation 4:11
"All things" includes sinners and the hell they are condemned to inhabit for all eternity.
I present the plain words of these verses as a challenge to modern Christianity's idea that loving sinners while hating the sin is supported or taught by their mythical J.C., or his equally nonexistent Sky Daddy or any of their self appointed mouth pieces from their holey book.
Christianity is not about love, it is about closing your mind and doing what you are told.
Comments
When Adam and Eve ate the fruit in the Garden of Eden a huge power was put in their hands. Much like putting a chainsaw in the hands of a 2 year old. And since then, humans have been filled with such hatred. We turn on each other like wolves. Since sin entered this world life has not been perfect, humans are not perfect. Sometimes people say or do things out of anger or selfishness or just without thinking; people let us down. Am I right? The tongue can be a very evil, hurtful tool. And there can be people that come into our lives that we put a lot of trust in and love them and listen to them ... and then they let us down. And everything they ever said we question how real it was. We get angry and become bitter. Sometimes we even disbelieve anything and everything the person(s) ever said because they were the ones who said it.
People can let us down. But God can not. I'm not saying you should never trust anyone...you should. But FIRST you should trust what God says then people. If a certain person says something that God says differently, then God should be the one you trust.
You want love? Then make a decision to follow Christ. God IS Love. And God loves you (John 3:16, For God so loved the world that he gave is one and only son, that whoever believes in him shall not parish but have eternal life).
Basically it comes down to one thing: you and God.
Basically, it comes down to since the dawn of mankind, man hasn't been able to explain his own existance, or fathom his own NON-existance--- so in turn, he has created "God(s)" in his own image to give his life meaning, to explain the unknown, and to cushion the reality of death.
"God", as personal being, exists nowhere outside the mind. N-O W-H-E-R-E. Have a great day = )
The Church is an Idol of worship!
The statues and the cross are an Idol of false worship!
The fake photo's of Jesus and God are all Idols of false worship!
The nice clothes and jewery and the fancy automobiles are all Idols of false worship!
The money collected in the offering plate are all Idols of false worship!
The preachers are an Idols of false worship!
The words written down in the Bible are Idols of false worship!
What sins? Which sins?
John who?
Was John, a God speaking about himself?
God who? Which God?
(Can't ya just feel the warm Christian Love?)
Totally "ignorant" of God and His character.
(But I Edwin, have exclusive knowledge of God, because I am a Christian!)
Yes, God hates the wicked because of their "wickedness", which is a willing rebellion against God.
(Ok how many people are rebelling against God? It must be in the Billions. How does one rebel against God? Please tell us Edwin, so we can rebel against this God!)
God will punish those who "wickedly" reject His Son, Jesus. But yes, He "loved" them so much that He gave His only begotten Son for them. (Is this the best plan this stupid God could come up with? Hello!!!)
(Yet because people's hearts were so continually wicked, that he regreted making a man and a woman Hello???!!!)
John 3:16 the verse that even 6 year olds know... ( John who did he have a last name, I do not belive him, was John, Jesus?)
(Yet he put those very same wicked people in charge of explaining God's plan of salvation! Hello!!!)
He hates those who reject His love and forgiveness. (God is such a loving and forgiving God, but yet he hates, sounds like Satan to me, Hello!!!)
He is slow to anger and willing to forgive wickedness, but if the wicked reject this willingness to forgive, then he will "punish" and "hate" them.
(This God you love, sounds like an evil and wicked God to me, No Thanks!!! You can have and worship your wicked Bible God, Hello!!!)
Got it now? Good. Glad I could help :)
(We got it, and we don't want it! You can keep your evil wicked Bible God!!! Good Bye Edwin!!)
And what is the fruit, then? This "chainsaw" of your's is nothing more than a conscience: the ability to discern right from wrong. If you think it's better to live without a conscience than to live with one, then be my guest.
There are plenty of verses that say to hate sin, and to not treat those outside of the body of Christ as brothers in Christ (#6, #7, #4), just as there are several verses that reveal the ultimate end of the unbeliever (#5, #8), but where does it say that Christians should hate sinners?
Hopefully, we can grow past the level of scholarship that let point #3 (well, the *second* point #3) make it into the final article; anyone should be able to clearly see the distinction made between the good/evil man and the good/evil that is brought forth by the man.
I realize you don't like what the Bible has to say, but you could try harder to actually interact with the Bible and Christian claims when you criticize them.
What I showed is that God hates sinners, and those who are god-bots are commanded to be like him, are they not?
Regardless, perhaps you think this is a poor understanding of things, but believe it or not, this is merely a synopsis of a few sermons I endured while in a Christian Reconstruction church several years ago.
Imagine that, Christians who disagree with one another. Hmm.
Romans 12:9-21 should be clear enough. Some key phrases from that passage:
Hate sin:
v 9 - Hate what is evil; cling to what is good.
What not to do about evil deeds:
v17a - Do not repay anyone evil for evil.
What to do about evil deeds:
v14 - Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse.
v17b - Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. 18. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.
Perhaps this doesn't go far enough to show that a Christian is to love the sinner, but it clearly shows a distinction between the way we are to act towards those who do evil (seeking peace, not more evil) while still hating evil.
> What I showed is that God hates sinners, and those who are god-bots are commanded to be like him, are they not?
You did a very good job showing that God hates sinners, but I'm not convinced that it is the case that we are to be like God. Where in the Bible is such a commandment given, particularly and especially in the matter of judgment of sin?
I grant that there are times where a specific examples from God is given that we are to follow, for instance, Christ's example of how to pray (Luke 11:2-4). Interestingly, this example is different from Christ's own prayer later on (Luke 22:42).
I don't know of any general statement to the effect that we are to be like God in all matters, or, if not in all matters, in matters of the judgment of sin. However, there are very strong warnings about how a Christian is to judge a sinner, after all, the Christian claim is that everyone is a sinner and in need of God's Grace (Rom 3:10), even the Christian. With this understanding, it seems all the more meaningful that Christ should say about those seeking to judge the adulterer, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone." (John 8:1-11)
> Regardless, perhaps you think this is a poor understanding of things, but believe it or not, this is merely a synopsis of a few sermons I endured while in a Christian Reconstruction church several years ago.
I have no doubt that some Churches teach that Christians are to be like God, and that you were taught such, but I do wonder how they prove that Biblically, and how they resolve the logical contradiction of finite man commanded to be like an infinite God. Perhaps there is a very good answer, but I am unaware of one.
> Imagine that, Christians who disagree with one another. Hmm.
Indeed, Christians disagree with one another. But that is nothing unusual. Humans disagree with one another, regardless of religion, intelligence, or culture. Still, it is interesting that despite the Bible being an objective source anyone can reference, there should be as much disagreement as there is. By the Christian account, that's the effects of the fall for you.
By the secular account, that's the non-existence of the magical holy ghost for your.
Well, OK, we aren't supposed to be like your God. Well, are we supposed to be like Paul? He said anyone who didn't believe in his Jesus should be cursed. And whoever wrote the letters attributed to John said don't even bid an unbeliever hello!
Are those guys good examples of how we are supposed to be? I won't deny that the characters in the Bible offered some good advice at times, but you can't simply gloss over all the rest. You can't throw out the Imprecatory Psalms, the gleeful celebrations at children's heads being dashed against stones, the celebratory way that all the unbelievers are tossed into an everlasting BBQ of horror, etc.
Love the sinner, but torture him forever if refuses to bow. Give him everlasting retribution for temporal unbelief.
Here's one example of a minister who says God hates sinners: LINK.
Now, you can argue all day long that God can do whatever He likes, but we have to show love.
So, in other words, people are more loving than God. Isn't that a hoot. We are kinder than Jesus. Or maybe it's a case of "Do as I say and not as I do?"
This may not make sense to you, but if the Christian worldview is true, and there are people who will go to hell for not repenting of their sins, then the most loving thing a Christian can do is to clearly call out their sin and declare the unrepentant sinner to be apart from God while he still has a chance to turn to Christ and avoid that fate. And so, Paul tells us to declare the sinner Anathema before God, that is, to make it clear that as long as they are unrepentant, they are cursed. Likewise, I believe John is saying to not greet the sinner as a brother or sister in Christ, or to pretend that they are right with God.
I would claim that it is more loving to call out a person's weakness and help them to grow than to hide it from them and gloss over it. This holds for Christians, as we still struggle with sin while we seek to lead a Christ led life; and it holds for the unrepentant who need to clearly hear what God declares will be their fate should they not repent, and how they may escape that fate.
I wouldn't say that we are therefore more loving than God when it is God who tolerates the sin he hates and allows it to persist for a time unpunished.
As for glossing over portions of the Bible, I do not believe I have. I haven't seen all verses relevant to this thread, and I gave some quick and not very detailed responses to some of the verses you mentioned, as I do not have time to exegesis all the verses for you in any sort of detailed fashion. But I think I have given enough detail to show how I would view those verses I have not responded to.
In summary, I hold that:
* There is a difference between the way Christians are to treat sinners on earth and the way God will ultimately treat them, though I see a similarity in the grace a Christian is to show sinners on earth and the grace God shows sinners on earth.
* That Christians are not commanded (as far as I am aware) to be like God in a general sense, though specific examples from God that we are to follow may be found.
* There is a difference between showing love to a sinful person and glossing over the state of a sinful person. That is, in love we are to declare what God has revealed about those who do not repent; it would be unloving to do otherwise. (I should also note that I have only proven that we are to show peace and bless those who do evil to us. Perhaps we are not called to "love" unbelievers at all.)
What fate? You mean the fate of your loving heavenly father tossing the unbeliever into horrific, everlasting torment? That fate? The fate of unmerciful retribution without chance of reform or opportunity for parole, forever and ever?
What about your fate, to live forever with a sadistic despot who is slow-roasting most of humanity (relatives and friends and others) just over the hill and out of your eye sight? And why his HE torturing them, anyway? Is it only because they didn't come to believe in the correct version of the "right" religion? Does that really make sense?
Hitler has nothing on your god. At least he let his victims die. Your guy won't even grant that mercy.
I sincerely hope you are more loving than your god. If you're not, you might be able to one day justify some pretty heinous crimes against humanity.
Oh, wait. Christians regularly justify the crimes of genocide and such, if they really believe the Old Testament is the actual Word of God!
More to the point, anony-nony, do you really believe you personally have committed crimes in your short lifetime that justifiably warrant an everlasting imprisonment in a nightmarish fiery dungeon? Seriously, what great offense against god and man have you committed that realistically should be rewarded with eternal torture? Do you realize how long eternal is?
And since when is torturing human beings ever the right thing to do?
It could certainly be posited that "God's ways are not our ways," but His ways aught at least to be better than our ways, not worse. Don't you think?
God loves sinners, but tolerates them a bit before punishing them?
I tolerate my kids at times, and when they were younger I sometimes punished them. I would never confine them to an everlasting torture chamber, however, no matter how much they annoyed me.
I think your god is a bit primitive in his understanding of love and justice. Or maybe He's just really immature.
God doesn't love anyone. He loves Himself, His glory... Remember, it's "His Story."
Love the sinner?
I think I'll go home and love my pet rabbit. Barbeque rabbit is soo good.
Yes, that fate.
> ...do you really believe you personally have committed crimes in your short lifetime that justifiably warrant an everlasting imprisonment in a nightmarish fiery dungeon?
Yes, I do.
I have rebelled against God and have pushed him away. I have responded to his word with slander and pejoratives, and I have mocked his people and his statutes. I have twisted God's words to support whatever interpretation suites me in the moment. I have separated myself from God's glory, and for that, I deserve the separation from God's glory that is hell, were it not for God saving grace. I'm sure all that is terribly uninteresting and quite foolish in your eyes.
I don't think there is anything more I need to add to this conversation; I've mostly been clarifying what I've already said before, and correcting what most needed a response for the last two posts. So, I bid you farewell.
Forever yours,
Anony-bot Anony-nony
Any you honestly believe that the temporal "sins" you just listed deserve eternal torture? I just can't believe you think most of humanity should be tortured for all eternity for not falling into the correct version of the right religion. It all sounds so Jason and the Argonauts, or something.
WebM: "Do you really believe you personally have committed crimes in your short lifetime that justifiably warrant an everlasting imprisonment in a nightmarish fiery dungeon?"
Anony-bot: "Yes, I do."
This is the extremely sad. This is the kind of thinking that keep us in the Dark Ages for centuries. This is the kind of thinking that burned thousands upon thousands at the stake. This is the kind of thinking that justified slavery for so long.
This isn't thinking: this is religion.
There are commandments,and laws that govern us from the Bible as christians.
They are there for a purpose to guide and protect everyone not just Israelites, or Jews.
Gods' chosen people are the ones who in their heart,spirit,soul and mind beleive in him, his Son and obey by the rules much like a parent does with his internal manual for raising his child.
Is any of this making sense?
Hate, greed, lust, all of these are choices we make to SIN against each other when we think to do harm against each other.
I used to be a part of the occult for 15 years I KNOW.
Leaving that was the best wake up call I ever had because all the gods they have, all the tools they have all the nonsense they use is just a prop for trouble.
I can say that because I did it.
Everyone of their Gods can be put out of business by the One true living God because he can replace them all.
The god for fertility, god of peace, god of love, and god of war if he has to really get your attention he will do what he says..he is a jealous God.
So why take the chance of knowingly make the wrong decision when one knows it as opposed to making a responsible right decision and thus not suffereing the consequences?
Please it is that simple even child when told that something hot will burn you , if he does it once and gets burned, do you not think he has programmed his thinking to not do the same thing again?
Some are slower than others but soon enough they catch up.
It doesnt mean being mean to other people or name calling, or casting your pearls before swine.
You can only let a person you truly want to help, care about or love know for so long that they can change and they are capable of making choices and they are conscious of their decisions they make and there are no excuses for them. THEY KNOW THIS QUITE WELL> when they choose.
So the only one to blame for ones unhappiness is the one making the choices. Not the Jews, Not the Christians, Not the Gentiles... NO ONE but the one person making up his own MIND! got it now?
Have a wonderful day.
I still agree with the opinion that one should love sinners but hate sin, but your perspective gives me a lot of food for thought. Yum.
really so full of shit self righteous uncircumcised prick.
enjoyed your article.
angie hart
"When Adam and Eve ate the fruit in the Garden of Eden a huge power was put in their hands. Much like putting a chainsaw in the hands of a 2 year old."
A Nonny Mouse,
Would you give a two year old child a chainsaw? If you would, then I understand your attachment to a god who did the same and then sought to escape being held responsible for the results.
It is very clear that we should not hate, condem or judge anyone.
Judging others?
Leviticus 19:15 In righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour.
John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.
1Corinthians 2:15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
Condemn?
1Corinthians 16:22 If anyone does not love the Lord, he is to be accursed. Maranatha.
Love?
Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
Should we rejoice when our enemies suffer?
Psalm 58:10 The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance: he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked.
--S.
Ron, what part of Ex-Christian do you not understand?
"It is very clear that we should not hate, condem or judge anyone..."
Then why does Biblegod hate, condemn and judge people and even entire planets? What a hypocrite.
Think about this... If you created something, gave it freedom and it abuses it's freedom to it's own detrement what would you do?
The chainsaw idea... Maybe not the best example but think of this... in order for anyone to feel a loving touch you would have to be sensitive to touch. That sensitivity would result in a lot of pain if you touch a burning coal. That is freedom. Freedom is the right to coose between life and death. If you don't however choose life and cause others to stumble as well, what shall be done then about that freedom?
I am sure all of you agree that all humans are fallable. What or who then would you put your hope in? Or do you choose to live without hope? If we are all going to die and there is nothing after this, is it better to live with hope or without hope and come to the same end? However if you lived in truth and you come to the end and you iheret eternity the picture changes dramatically...
Regards,
Ron
If I were the biblegod as it is described in the bible I would not have given it any freedom, then would torture it for all eternity for doing what I planned for it to do in the first place.
Heads up Ron...humanity has NO freedom in a "biblegod created the world" scenario.
As for the rest of you nonsensical blathering I can only surmise that you have equated "hope" with "certainty", which are mutually exclusive concepts.
Ron, you still have not answered me. What I want to know is this:
Having created the situation in which eating the fruit of the tree in the garden was inevitable, yahweh expresses surprise, indignation and anger at the fact that the fruit was eaten; why is it acceptable that, having done the equivalent of giving a two-year-old a chainsaw, yahweh should seek to evade responsibility for the carnage that he, and he alone created?
It is important to do the best we can, I think, to use the best tools we have as humans to determine to the best of our ability, what is closer to being true and what is probably false because certainty cannot be reached. Tools such as evidence, experimentation, reason, and logic.
To accept as true that wich cannot be proved to be true or false lends itself to absurdity. Do you believe that leprechauns are real also? If not, I'd like you to explain why. Did you go through much difficulty in proveing they don't exist? What was the proof that convinced you that they do or do not exist?
"To tell you the truth, it is more difficult to try and prove that He does not exist than to prove that He does...."
How so?
Personally, I would much rather know the truth, than to put 'my-all' into a lie of false hope.
Let me ask you this Ron.
If you were very ill and in the hospital and had a slim chance of recovering, which choice would you prefer here:
1. Would you prefer that the doctors and nurses lie to you, telling you that your condition isn't so bad and you'll pull-through.
2. Would you prefer to know the truth of your slim chances so you could use your short remaining time, to tie up loose ends with loved one's etc.?
I have found that most Doctors/Nurses and even family members, will usually not tell a patient how serious their condition is, thinking if they know that information, that information alone would hasten the patient's demise.
While I wouldn't fault a person for not wanting to know this dreaded information about their condition, I can tell you that I most certainly would rather have the truth, than slowly die while thinking I wouldn't.
I can't tell you what others here might want though....Anyone?
I think that it's important to know if one's death is really the end or not as well.
If one has a belief that one can help their children from the afterlife side of existence, then one might procrastinate that help to their children while they are still alive.
One might even leave some things unsaid while alive, thinking they could be said when they meet up in heaven later on.
Sorry, but without credible proof of an afterlife, I have to assume when I die, it will be the ultimate end for me. Therefore, I would plan my life accordingly.
In contrast to my view these days, there was a time in my life where I was sure everyone had an afterlife, that jesus was going to return very soon, so I made mistakes about my future based on that terrible false premise and "HOPE".
So yes, I feel a false hope can be an evil thing to believe !!
Far better to understand the world as best we can, based on what can be proven out, rather than sticking our minds in a false belief that some "Wizard of Oz" will save our butts from our fate.
As far as **hermeneutics** goes....
I don't care what methodology you chose to interpret your fable book with.
In the end, it's still nothing but a collection of fables and outright lies.
ATF ( Who thinks the bible is, "A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing")
Personally, I would much rather know the truth, than to put 'my-all' into a lie of false hope.
Let me ask you this Ron.
If you were very ill and in the hospital and had a slim chance of recovering, which choice would you prefer here:
1. Would you prefer that the doctors and nurses lie to you, telling you that your condition isn't so bad and you'll pull-through.
2. Would you prefer to know the truth of your slim chances so you could use your short remaining time, to tie up loose ends with loved one's etc.?
I have found that most Doctors/Nurses and even family members, will usually not tell a patient how serious their condition is, thinking if they know that information, that information alone would hasten the patient's demise.
While I wouldn't fault a person for not wanting to know this dreaded information about their condition, I can tell you that I most certainly would rather have the truth, than slowly die while thinking I wouldn't.
I can't tell you what others here might want though....Anyone?
I think that it's important to know if one's death is really the end or not as well.
If one has a belief that one can help their children from the afterlife side of existence, then one might procrastinate that help to their children while they are still alive.
One might even leave some things unsaid while alive, thinking they could be said when they meet up in heaven later on.
Sorry, but without credible proof of an afterlife, I have to assume when I die, it will be the ultimate end for me. Therefore, I would plan my life accordingly.
In contrast to my view these days, there was a time in my life where I was sure everyone had an afterlife, that jesus was going to return very soon, so I made mistakes about my future based on that terrible false premise and "HOPE".
So yes, I feel a false hope can be an evil thing to believe !!
Far better to understand the world as best we can, based on what can be proven out, rather than sticking our minds in a false belief that some "Wizard of Oz" will save our butts from our fate.
As far as **hermeneutics** goes....
I don't care what methodology you chose to interpret your fable book with.
In the end, it's still nothing but a collection of fables and outright lies.
ATF ( Who thinks the bible is, "A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing")
I certainly do not claim to know everything...in fact I know far too little. I have however been through the valley where I thought of myself as an atheist and tried to make myself believe that there is no God. To tell you the truth, it is more difficult to try and prove that He does not exist than to prove that He does....
Regards,
Ron
You wrote:
in order for anyone to feel a loving touch you would have to be sensitive to touch. That sensitivity would result in a lot of pain if you touch a burning coal. That is freedom.
No, it's possible to feel touch and not feel pain. There is a condition called congenital insensitivity to pain. People that have this have all the normal sensitivities associated with touch, but cannot feel pain. In this world, of course, not being able to feel pain is a detriment, and evolution had greatly favored those that can feel pain. It has nothing to do with freedom, or with the ability to feel other sensations.
If we are all going to die and there is nothing after this, is it better to live with hope or without hope and come to the same end?
Of course this has nothing to do with whether or not the Bible or Christianity is true (neither is), but let's look at your statement anyway. All other things being equal, it would be better to live with hope. My hope is that the world can become a better place for all humanity. The Bible gives no such hope, but instead gives us Armageddon. An then, in the afterlife, according to the Bible, the vast majority of people will suffer for eternity with absolutely no hope of escape. So, for me, the atheistic, or at least secular humanist, worldview gives much more hope.
Respectfully,
Franciscan Monkey
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. - Carl Sagan
Post a Comment