
Man oh Manischewitz! Christians just can’t seem to stop arguing over what scriptures mean by love. Particularly Christian love and how that should reflect God’s love. Of course, our love can never fully reflect God’s love because we are only human, we cannot love perfectly like God can. We are not holy. To be truly holy would mean to love perfectly.
Anyway, what do I know? Not much. But let’s revisit what two of God’s apostles once had to say on the subject of love. First let’s check in with St. John;
God is love. When we take up permanent residence in a life of love, we live in God and God lives in us. This way, love has the run of the house, becomes at home and mature in us, so that we’re free of worry on Judgment Day—our standing in the world is identical with Christ’s. There is no room in love for fear. Well-formed love banishes fear. Since fear is crippling, a fearful life—fear of death, fear of judgment—is one not yet fully formed in love.
We, though, are going to love—love and be loved. First we were loved, now we love. He loved us first.
If anyone boasts, “I love God,” and goes right on hating his brother or sister, thinking nothing of it, he is a liar. If he won’t love the person he can see, how can he love the God he can’t see? The command we have from Christ is blunt: Loving God includes loving people. You’ve got to love both. (1 John 4, The Message)
And what does loving both God and our fellow man look like? St. Paul sums it up pretty thoroughly, at times telling us what love does not look like:
If I speak with human eloquence and angelic ecstasy but don’t love, I’m nothing but the creaking of a rusty gate. If I speak God’s Word with power, revealing all his mysteries and making everything plain as day, and if I have faith that says to a mountain, “Jump,” and it jumps, but I don’t love, I’m nothing. If I give everything I own to the poor and even go to the stake to be burned as a martyr, but I don’t love, I’ve gotten nowhere. So, no matter what I say, what I believe, and what I do, I’m bankrupt without love.
Love never gives up.
Love cares more for others than for self.
Love doesn’t want what it doesn’t have.
Love doesn’t strut,
Doesn’t have a swelled head,
Doesn’t force itself on others,
Isn’t always “me first,”
Doesn’t fly off the handle,
Doesn’t keep score of the sins of others,
Doesn’t revel when others grovel,
Takes pleasure in the flowering of truth,
Puts up with anything,
Trusts God always,
Always looks for the best,
Never looks back,
But keeps going to the end.Love never dies. Inspired speech will be over some day; praying in tongues will end; understanding will reach its limit. We know only a portion of the truth, and what we say about God is always incomplete. But when the Complete arrives, our incompletes will be canceled.
When I was an infant at my mother’s breast, I gurgled and cooed like any infant. When I grew up, I left those infant ways for good.
We don’t yet see things clearly. We’re squinting in a fog, peering through a mist. But it won’t be long before the weather clears and the sun shines bright! We’ll see it all then, see it all as clearly as God sees us, knowing him directly just as he knows us!
But for right now, until that completeness, we have three things to do to lead us toward that consummation: Trust steadily in God, hope unswervingly, love extravagantly. And the best of the three is love. (1 Corinthians 13, The Message)
A very wise woman (my wife) once said that to ‘hate the sin but love the sinner’ is often just double speak meant to obscure the fact that we usually do both; hate the sinner along with his sin. At the very least this little ditty gives us permission to act like we hate the sinner, while professing to do so out of love.
So, if you think it is loving to deliberately offend and insult those whom you believe do not ‘get’ the Gospel, well then perhaps it is you who does not ‘get it’. Unless, of course, you can somehow justify ignoring the (admittedly uncomfortable) message in the above two scriptures.










Great post Christian. I hate that “hate the sin, love the sinner” line. I don’t get it. I think there is clear disagreement over how to show love to someone else. I am like you. Others hate the sin so much that the sinner feels their hate… loud and clear.
By: ric booth on November 6, 2008
at 12:12 pm
Good post Christian. While I agree that many speak the ditty and then act like they never uttered it, I believe the ditty rings true…and I used to have to remind myself of it a lot.
I believe God hates sin even while loving us all. And I’m sure very thankful for it.
~Janice
By: Janice on November 6, 2008
at 1:28 pm
Thanks Ric.
And you too, Janice. Good to hear from you. As far as the little ditty, I think it can depend upon the person saying it. Based upon what I’ve learned of you over the past year or so I think you probably can get away with it. Ric, too, for that matter.
But too many of us are so prone to spiteful invective for us to get away using this quaint expression without sounding self-righteous.
Part of the problem seems to be that many strident Christians are very selective about the sins that they have chosen to hate. Often they are the ’sins’ that they are least likely to be tempted to commit themselves. Or conversely, as has been revealed by the indiscretions of numerous high profile preachers, the ones that are in denial about.
By: Christian Beyer on November 6, 2008
at 1:50 pm
Christian, I think the real problem is that most people truly can’t really separate the sin from the sinner. The person ‘takes on’ the sin, becomes it, they forget that they have their own sin. I think my sin stays pretty present before me so its hard for me to hate someone else. Not that I don’t have a hard time loving, but thats a whole other story.
Reminds me of the political process our nation just went through – people can’t separate their friendships from their politics and in some cases dissolve relationships over a choice of candidate. My son (age 7) was talking about someone who voted differently than he would have (isn’t that cute? as if he voted) and he said something negative and I told him he needed to learn to agree to disagree no matter HOW wrong someone else is. (haha. I did say that but we talked about agreeing to disagree and still loving etc)
And thanks, its good to be heard. Life has been rough over the past few years and I had to take a step back recently…..and take a break from some things. Realized that much of my ‘christian jaunts’ weren’t that beneficial for me, pared down a bit, and now am back, although still not online as much as before. Blogger has a tool called ‘follow’ now and so you’re on my list, I keep a blogger window open and it updates all my favorite peeps. How’s it feel to know you’re being followed…….? dee dee dee dee dee (*twighlightesque music*)
Janice
By: Janice on November 6, 2008
at 5:27 pm
Creepy. Anyway, thanks. I try to keep up with you but you don’t always make it easy. Weren’t you on Hocoblogs? Too much Christianity can certainly get in between us and God, can’t it? Some times the faith becomes an idol.
I think you are right about the separation thing. Especially since you mention that since you have not forgotten your own struggles with sin that you cannot allow yourself to judge others. Good point.
By: Christian Beyer on November 6, 2008
at 5:40 pm
Unfortunately, many evangelicals, including myself, are long on compete and short on love.
What is love? What is it?
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 6, 2008
at 8:16 pm
I don’t know what it is but I know it when I see it. Like every time you stop by the school this feeling comes over me…..
By: Christian Beyer on November 6, 2008
at 9:22 pm
Ooh. How you do make me blush.
Anyway, now that I’ve shown I can include myself in this accusation–I will say that in the 26+ years I was a faithful attendee of evangelical churches of several stripes, I will say that genuine Christian love was found few and far between. In fact, I find more love among some Jews and nominal Roman Catholics than among the so-called Bible Believing Christians.
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 6, 2008
at 9:57 pm
In fact, probably the kindest person I have ever met I believe to be Jewish, not Christian (except in her love towards other people).
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 6, 2008
at 9:58 pm
Ya but!
Ya but!
Ahhh, what the hell. Wanna go grab a beer
Good post by the way…
By: brent(inWorship) on November 6, 2008
at 11:30 pm
did someone say beer?
Great post! Great scripture!
By: Brandy on November 6, 2008
at 11:36 pm
I do believe I’ll be back! Nice pics btw.
By: Brandy on November 6, 2008
at 11:37 pm
“A very wise woman (my wife) once said that to ‘hate the sin but love the sinner’ is often just double speak meant to obscure the fact that we usually do both; hate the sinner along with his sin. At the very least this little ditty gives us permission to act like we hate the sinner, while professing to do so out of love.”
You have a wise and wonderful woman! Great post!!
By: Selena on November 7, 2008
at 12:33 am
Great post. I think Janice nailed it. The Christian community today is so busy ‘hating the sin’ that they forget two things. First, there is a real live person attached to that sin. Second, we are so self-righteous because we aren’t committing certain particular sins that we forget we are sinners ourselves and no better than those we are condemning.
Of course we have managed to convince ourselves that our sins are somehow more acceptable to God than the sins of ‘those other people’.
By: Mark on November 7, 2008
at 12:42 am
I don’t think it helps that “love” has so many meanings in English.
“Hate the sin, love the sinner” assumes that a person can be separate from their deeds which I don’t see.
By: hoverfrog on November 7, 2008
at 1:50 pm
hoeverfrog, that is an interesting statement – not separating their deeds from their person. I posted up top that I think the problem is often that people can’t separate what they see people ‘do’ from who they are…..you are coming at it from the opposite. Can you expand more on your thought? If a person can’t be separate from their thoughts, what would be a better statement?
I must admit that I am struggling BIG time right now with a family member…..an IV heroin user. If I can’t separate what she does from who she is…..
I dunno. Help me understand what you mean. ? I can use all the insights and perspectives that I can get.
Thanks
Janice
By: Janice on November 7, 2008
at 3:48 pm
oops, not separate from their thoughts. If they can’t be separate from their ‘deeds’ or actions or sins…..what would be a better statement? sorry, brain fog.
By: Janice on November 7, 2008
at 3:49 pm
Great post,
As I mature in my walk with the Holy Spirit, I find more and more that God’s love for His children is pure and our love for God and others is limited only by our lack of ability to physically understand that love. However, spiritually the Spirit will show us His love and implant it in our hearts. That is one of my major problems with organized religion… the fact that we have a tendency to adopt the Church’s idea of love, which is carnally impure.
As far as hating the sin and loving the sinner is concerned, that is a religious term and not biblically consequential. We are not instructed to hate the sinner or the sin. We are instructed to love all people even our enemies and those of different faiths, and to pray for sinners like ourselves, for we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. In other words we must see all human beings as God now sees them after the sacrifice of Christ… there is no sin because there is no longer any law… He only sees us as those who know Jesus and are born again and those who are not. Any judgement on that matter is His alone.
By: netprophet on November 7, 2008
at 4:22 pm
Well, I don’t see our actions as our sins. Sin is when our egos remove any care we might have for the wellbeing of others or even ourselves. Selfishness. We put ourselves before others and God. in fact, whenever we put ourselves before others we always put ourselves before God. This state of mind (or heart) pushes us do the things that many call ’sins’.
So addiction can be ’sinful’ but it also can be just an illness. Other negative impulses, habits and thoughts may be the result of this ‘original sin’ but they also may be the result of circumstances, both internal and external, that “but there but for the love of God go I”.
In many respects, we are all broken and the visible results of this brokenness are what we call sins. None of us are without these cracks in our souls, we all have them to varying degrees. But it is so easy to pat ourselves and each other on the back when have ‘turned from sin’. What behavior, though, what sin, are we not admitting to? Not noticing, because we are so fascinated by the sins of others? What if the die of life had been cast a bit differently….?
So I think we can separate the sinner from those things that they do, those things we call sins. But what about that brokenness that drives the sin? We cannot separate ourselves from that, though some of the cracks can be healed. The funny thing is, that it is through these very cracks that we encounter the means to be healed. I’m reminded of a line from a Leonard Cohen song:
“There is a crack, a crack in everything That’s how the light gets in.”
By: Christian Beyer on November 8, 2008
at 12:43 am
And its a darn good thing you’ve learned to control your ego, Napoleon!
What is meant by “love the sinner hate the sin” anyway?
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 8, 2008
at 1:58 am
Not quite, but you have no idea how much of a bigger monster it used to be. Seen that movie “Cloverfield”? That ain’t nothin’.
Good question; what does it mean? Net makes a great point; where are we called to hate the sin? Is there a scriptural justification for this?
By: Christian Beyer on November 8, 2008
at 8:47 am
Oops. I neglected to welcome Selena. My wife thanks you for the compliment, although I would request you keep further opinions to yourself.
Anyway, welcome to the “Love-In”. (Inside joke.)
By: Christian Beyer on November 8, 2008
at 8:51 am
Okay. Especially when I attended C. C., a common saying was about LTSHTS. Anyway, it seemed a great way to condemn someone, or to have the “pastor” condemn someone who was critical of the ahem, management.
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 8, 2008
at 1:26 pm
” although I would request you keep further opinions to yourself.
Anyway, welcome to the “Love-In”. (Inside joke.)”
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!
Seriously, I burst out laughing on that one! hahaha!
By: Brandy on November 8, 2008
at 3:43 pm
This post is too “lovie Dovie” for me !! We say we ‘love’ – but when it comes to action that is where we get the reality check – mama & i are looking that square in the face right now – we want to be Christians w/love as a verb !!!
By: Indian Lake Papa on November 9, 2008
at 8:35 pm
Hey, Papa. Welcome. You make a great point about putting love into action. What’s that look like to you?
But as far as the post being too ‘lovie Dovie” – don’t shoot the messenger. I didn’t write all that stuff about love – John and Paul did.
By: Christian Beyer on November 9, 2008
at 11:05 pm
Hi, I hopped over from Indian Lake Papa’s site . . . sorry to disagree with the first thing I read in your blog . . . but I don’t think it’s so bad to hate sin, in fact, I think we’re suppose to. It’s bad when we judge others because of their sin, because that’s God job, and it’s bad to gossip about sin in the name of “honesty”, but to recognize sin and to be aware of sin and to assign feelings of hate to sin is not sin. We all need to spend more time loving, agreed. My son has an expression whenever someone is upset in our house, “Don’t be haten’!” I hope you don’t mind my “two-cents”, I seem to be on a roll tonight. Be blessed.
By: Life Adapted on November 9, 2008
at 11:39 pm
Welcome L.A. Don’t apologize for disagreeing. How else can we learn from each other? Certainly not by constantly nodding our heads in agreement over everything.
You make good points. You said “…but to recognize sin and to be aware of sin and to assign feelings of hate to sin is not sin…”
But how do we do this and not end up hating some sins while ignoring others, sins that we, or the group we are a part of, might be very visibly displaying those who we are rebuking? Aren’t we in danger of hating sin very selectively?
My suggestion is that this ‘hating’ of others ’sins’ is a distraction. We should certainly hate sin in our own lives, and we certainly should despise obvious evil (such as the murder, rape, slavery, genocide etc.) but the tendency to look for the sin in others, point it out and condemn it conflicts with how we are ‘working out our own salvation’.
By: Christian Beyer on November 10, 2008
at 7:48 am
Janice asked about separating the person from their actions. I’m not a mind reader so I can only gain my awareness of what another person is like from their words and their actions. People have a tendency to promote themselves verbally and in writing so the best way to judge a person is by what they do. If I ignore what a person does in judging them I am limiting my understanding of the whole person quite dramitcally.
Your family member is a heroin user, that is both what they are and what they do. It obviously isn’t the totality of what they are but I imagine that it is a significant part. The hate the sin but love the sinner idea means that you end up hating their drug use (the sin) but loving them but it ignores what the drug use can make them do. They might steal and lie to support their addiction, they might behave erratically and be prone to mood changes and even violence. They might be untrustworthy and irresponsible. They might not, it all depends on how much of problem it is for them.
I would suggest that you don’t separate the sin from the person but consider it alongside everything else that the person does. You can love someone for their kindness and compassion but be wary of their honesty without separating them out into neat categories. You can love the totality of a person as the bible instructs and still hate the thief, the liar or the drug addict. You can love the criminal but still consider their crime when you see how far you would trust them. Love doesn’t have to make you stupid and mercy doesn’t have to ignore a person’s history.
By: hoverfrog on November 10, 2008
at 7:58 am
Absolutely.
Frog, you raise some good points and I think they can be used to address another Christian concern. While I don’t see any Biblical injunction to hate the sin AND love the sinner, there is a command to love our enemies. Too often this has been used to promote pacifism.
But there are some pretty bad people out there; those who would deliberately inflict pain and suffering on other people (heck, even animals) for no other reason than that it gives them pleasure to do so. Do we stand by and allow this? Or do attempt to stop them, using terminal force if necessary, to protect the lives of innocents? We need to recognize that their ’sin’ cannot be allowed to cause more suffering, Can there be no “Christian” cops or soldiers?
Or, should there be more Christian cops and soldiers?
By: Christian Beyer on November 10, 2008
at 9:44 am
I “love” this post Christian! I get fired up over God’s love – why? Because i struggled too long with my “Rod of Correction,” which i am afraid was way too short on God’s love – now he has ‘cursed’ me (smile) with tears. a heart that breaks easy – in a good sense! We need more posts on His love – your a great messenger.
By: Indian Lake Papa on November 10, 2008
at 11:14 am
Christian, isn’t the call to love your enemy simply a call to treat them as you’d expect to be treated, to not dehumanise them? At the moment we are at war in Afghanistan and Iraq and every day our soldiers have to decide whether a person they encounter is an enemy or a civilian. Every few months we hear a story of how a soldier has beaten, raped or mistreated an Iraqi or insulted their religion by taking pot shots at their holy book or otherwise insulting them. We treat them not just as the enemy but as something other than human. When we do so we fail to uphold the principles of our nations and the lessons of your faith.
If we treat them as human beings, as our cousins, even if we disagree with them or mark them as an enemy then we uphold our humanity and set an example for our fellow human. Loving your enemy means treating him with respect and equanimity. We must bear in mind that our enemy has hopes and dreams and a desire for life just as we do even if we must fight them.
If a soldier has to kill an enemy then he should do so with the knowledge of what he takes from them. It is better than thinking of the enemy as a target, or worse, thinking of a people as targets.
I don’t think we should have more or less Christian soldiers and police but I do think that the basic idea that everyone is as deserving of life and liberty could be better ingrained. If Christianity helps someone to do that then they should certainly use it.
By: hoverfrog on November 10, 2008
at 12:42 pm
Coming from you Papa, that is high praise indeed. Thank you , but I think in this case you are being too kind.
By: Christian Bey on November 10, 2008
at 12:53 pm
Frog, I agree with you, up to a point. When I talk of more Christian police or soldiers I am not saying that I think more “Christians” should join up or more police or soldiers convert to a religion. Only a very small minority of soldiers are complicit in those ‘un-Christian’ acts that you speak of. It could be that these men are no better than any terrorist, and we are responsible to try and punish them if necessary. This is not something that is condoned by their leaders or their brothers in arms. There is a great paradox of conscience when it comes to war and the use of deadly force.
I’m reminded of something I read in the book “One Bullet Away” by Nathaniel Fick. He tells of the tragedy of two young boys who were shot by men in the platoon he was leading. An order (a wrongful order, in Fick’s mind) had come down to consider an airfield hostile, which meant that the rules of engagement had been raised. Because of this, in the heat of the battle, these boys were mistaken to be enemy soldiers and were shot. Lt. Fick had just secured medical attention for the boys, by going around and over his superior officer’s heads:
By: Christian Beyer on November 10, 2008
at 1:14 pm
I think the short answer is conviction from the Holy Spirit. If we are truly walking with Christ, are truly filled with the Holy Spirit we will be sure to respond to sinners in love (which we can only do through the power of having the eyes of Jesus) and yet be discerning enough to hate sin. It’s a balancing act that we must perform each and every day. It is only through knowing and loving Christ that we have a heart to love sinners – which by the way, we all are. Maybe the point is that we assign certain “sins” as being worse than others. Is all sin equal? Do we hate the sin of using God’s name in vain as much as we hate the sin of murder? Should we?
Be blessed
By: Life Adapted on November 10, 2008
at 1:34 pm
Good question. What is the sin of saying God’s name in vain? Is it the expletive often deleted when we stub our toes or hammer our thumbs? Or is it using God’s name to make a buck or justify injustice?
I’ve always struggled with the idea that God sees the teenage boy who swipes some candy from the K-Mart in the same light as the man who molests a child. The idea that he is so ‘holy’, so far above us, that all sins are equally repugnant in his eyes suggests a certain un-Godly short sightedness.
By: Christian Beyer on November 10, 2008
at 2:18 pm
Too deep for me.
Sheesh.
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 10, 2008
at 2:23 pm
All sin cannot be equal.
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 10, 2008
at 2:25 pm
I tend to agree. Imagine telling that to a Jew who has lost someone in the Holocaust.
By: Christian Beyer on November 10, 2008
at 2:31 pm
Didn’t God tell us not to take His name in vain? Doesn’t He warn us against sin? Look to God’s word to define sin. All sin may not be equal – but that’s not for us to say, that’s for God to say. I don’t want to fool myself into thinking that just because my “sins” are little sins or better than someone else’s sin, God will judge me better. That’s sound a little like pride and pride is judged severely in the Bible. My point (I think) is that we have to leave the judgement of sin to God, but we have to recognize sin as He sees sin so as not to be sinners ourselves. To bring this back to your post, yes, we all should love others unconditionally, not judging them, offering them the light and love of Christ.
By: Life Adapted on November 10, 2008
at 3:19 pm
“but we have to recognize sin as He sees sin so as not to be sinners ourselves.”
But isn’t that where we fall short? If you look at what is often preached from the pulpit or found in evangelical books or on evangelical radio programs you would think that God looks more severely on sexual sin than any others.
Conversely, the more progressive elements of the church tend to focus on societal sins, often seeming to de-emphasize personal sin.
Although I don’t think either view is correct (or at least complete), I’ll admit that I do lean towards the more progressive way of addressing sin outside of my own (although my personal sin usually contributes to the sins of my society).
When it comes to the one on one confrontation of sin, I agree with you. Rather than point there sins out to them (which is hardly necessary – who isn’t aware of their own sin?) it is better to remember where we have fallen short while “offering them the light and love of Christ.”
It is safer to err on the side of love.
By: Christian Beyer on November 10, 2008
at 3:52 pm
It is safer to err on the side of love.
yep!
By: Selena on November 10, 2008
at 4:17 pm
the hard part is loving one who offends but not being able to get passed the ridicule to get to a humane conversation to express love.
then what?
By: tam on November 10, 2008
at 5:14 pm
How about simply minding your own business unless you are asked?
That would cure 90% of the “love” issue problems in any church.
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 10, 2008
at 5:23 pm
logio – was that comment to me?
By: tam on November 10, 2008
at 5:46 pm
CB said:
Yes, you’re quite right, I should have made that clear. Thanks for pointing it out.
By: hoverfrog on November 10, 2008
at 6:07 pm
Not in particular–the point is that in churches I have attended for the past 29 years, that many of these “love the sinner hate the sin” are the result of gossip being guised as prayer. Therefore, most of the time, unless a person asks us for advise or confides in us, the best thing to do is take Paul’s advice from Romans chapter 14 and simply mind our own business.
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 10, 2008
at 6:11 pm
Bruce, I don’t think that’s exactly what Tam meant (although I do agree with what you said in your last comment.)
I think (correct me if I’m wrong Tam) that she is talking about a friend – not just a fellow church member – who’s behavior might be offensive and the behavior itself wont allow any discussion of it. It’s a great question. What can one do?
For example, I have some friends who are pretty decent folk but they also happen to be bigots and could care less if they offend people. When I try to discuss this with them they become irate and offensive to me, at times accusing me of being a “blank” lover.
I could just brush the dust off my feet, but unfortunately I happen to love these people. (And I do hate their ’sin’)
By: Christian Beyer on November 10, 2008
at 6:27 pm
“I have some friends who are pretty decent folk but they also happen to be bigots and could care less if they offend people. When I try to discuss this with them they become irate and offensive to me, at times accusing me of being a “blank” lover.”
I can relate.
By: Selena on November 10, 2008
at 6:32 pm
yes. That’s exactly what I meant. Perhaps I couldve worded it better. Not that logio doesn’t have a point on that separate matter, to which I agree as well.
Thanks for explaining it better C!
By: tam on November 10, 2008
at 7:02 pm
Not at all. I’m used to splainin t’ings to Lucio.
By: Christian Beyer on November 10, 2008
at 7:17 pm
Dammit, Tam, watches are my weakness. When did you start selling them? Do you give discounts? Take credit?
By: Christian Beyer on November 10, 2008
at 7:33 pm
C – have you lost your mind? what the heck are you talking about??
By: tam on November 10, 2008
at 8:38 pm
Click on your avatar and you’ll see. Lost my mind! Hee-hee. Tee-hee-hee. Ha-ha. Jolly good. That’s rich. Ha!
By: Christian Beyer on November 10, 2008
at 9:39 pm
Not the old avatar. The new one, where you are catching flies. (I really do like it though)
By: Christian Beyer on November 10, 2008
at 9:41 pm
catching flies!!!! very. funny. mister!
click on it? nothing happens.
this just in: C has lost it.
By: tam on November 10, 2008
at 11:11 pm
Yes, C, you have lost it.
BTW, did you ever have it?
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 10, 2008
at 11:29 pm
hahaha!
By: tam on November 11, 2008
at 12:31 am
ok. i’ll check in tomorrow to see if youve “found” anything…
By: tam on November 11, 2008
at 12:32 am
You guys are all nuts! It’s all back to balance and boundaries for me. If we just mind our own business all the time and allow a brother or sister in Christ to continue in sin, then are we guilty of not fully loving someone enough to confront them to bring them closer to Jesus? There are times we are called to “brush the dust off” our feet to bring those we love to place a realization. But that is not always the answer – again, it’s all about balance and boundaries, doing whatever we do in love, always in love………….
Be blessed.
By: Life Adapted on November 11, 2008
at 3:20 pm
Christian/Tam – I saw it too…it’s because there’s a typo in the url wprdpress instead of wordpress.
@LA – balance and boundaries are important, but Jesus talked about removing the speck in your brother’s eye vs. the log. Which I think speaks to the fact that we often see our own sin issues most clearly when others are doing them. For me it’s a matter of focus in that so many of my sin issues are in my heart/head where nobody can “see” them but me (and God). I can breeze through life following a moral code or standard as far as external behavior is concerned (where I see much emphasis by believers on sin issues) and never even begin to acknowledge and/or deal with significant sin issues that break God’s heart and leave me in broken relationship with him. Getting beyond the visible sin of others (not ignoring it, but acknowledging that it is often symptomatic of a deeper problem) requires intentional relationship. It’s much harder than merely observing someone’s behavior and passing judgement; it requires knowing them and what drives them, what are their motivations, what are their hurts and issues that cause them to follow a certain path that is often expressed in overt behavioral issues.
That wasn’t all intended for LA, btw.
@Christian – I think God sees all sin as equal, but there are differences in the consequences that spring forth from the various sins committed.
Child abuse and molestation seem to have a special category of heinousness.
By: b4dguy on November 11, 2008
at 4:05 pm
Nuts? I’m sure you meant that affectionately.
“If we just mind our own business all the time and allow a brother or sister in Christ to continue in sin, then are we guilty of not fully loving someone enough to confront them to bring them closer to Jesus?”
And how is that supposed to play out? I mean, if we are talking about approaching a friend, someone we have developed a trusting relationship here – that’s a no brainer.
But to take it upon ourselves to confront someone in our community over what we consider to be their sin without first getting to know them is just a formula for disaster.
Sure, if someone is standing there and just walloping away at their child I might step in. But then I might not. What are the circumstances? Life isn’t black and white and those who think that a scriptural admonishment is sufficient to really help someone come to an understanding of God and his will are guilty of ‘drive by’ evangelism.
We need to stress God’s love, grace and mercy, let people know that they need not remain trapped in self destructive behavior, that there can be value to their lives. By first showing them Christ rather than telling them about Christ (unless asked).
The telling comes later, after we have established some Christian credibility.
By: Christian Beyer on November 11, 2008
at 4:30 pm
Bad, I agree. Well said.
When it comes to how God sees sin I also agree with you, but only if we are talking of sin as being that state in which we are apart from God. The wrong actions themselves are really not sins – but the choices people make when they are in ’sin’ (which we all are, to varying degrees).
I think there is this mistaken tendency to look at the harmful actions of people and say that this is their sin and they should just stop doing it. Easier said than done. Of course there is always another sin waiting to take its place. As long as we are concentrating on these visible symptoms of a heart and mind apart from God and not the cure, which is a life in Christ, then we will never progress. IMHO.
We also look at some of the choices that people make that we personally do not care for and love to chalk it up as ’sin’. Look at the list; dancing, drinking, sex, smoking, wearing skirts, drug use, questioning orthodoxy, swearing, non-tithing etc. etc. etc.
I’m reminded of a story my Dad used to tell of his time in the CIC during the US occupation of Japan. He met a Dutch missionary who belonged to the Roman Catholic organization known as the SVD- Society of the Divine Word (in Latin it is Societas Verbi Divini – hence SVD). They worked in hospitals and they were very strict about not allowing smoking on the premises, rather rare in 1946.
One evening my father was surprised that this missionary was drinking some sake at a club. Noticing my father’s reaction the Dutch priest said; “S.V.D. – Smoke Ve Don’t . So Ve Drink!”
By: Christian Beyer on November 11, 2008
at 4:52 pm
If we will look at how God sees sin and treats the sinner, we will have to conclude that there is no degree and little difference between the types of sin. He will forgive those who ask for forgiveness and repent. So, the issue is, we can see the sin in our brothers and sisters but if the sin is not directly against us, we have no reason to forgive the person and it is the Holy Spirit’s job to lead them to repentance, not ours. Like it has been said already, they know they are sinning and for us to bring it to there attention is to judge them. In this case it is best to “mind our own business”.
When you commit a stupid sinful error and feel no need or desire to repent you aren’t keeping Christ’s commandments and, like He said, you don’t know Him and He doesn’t know you. But keep His commandments and He and the Father will come and sup with you.
While we will always be sinners, God still loves us enough to forgive us. The only separater between the sin and the sinner is God’s love.
By: netprophet on November 11, 2008
at 4:54 pm
How can we possibly know God’s feelings about anything?
I think any separation based on sin is our own guilt overcoming our capacity to know God. But as far as me knowing the feelings of a transcedant God? Sheesh. Suuure.
Just a thought.
By: logiopathicnut on November 11, 2008
at 6:08 pm
All I’m saying is that there is a need to act sometimes, but in love. I wouldn’t admonish anyone, I’ve no right to (okay, maybe I admonish my kids sometimes, but they’re little vultures, jk, jk). The Holy Bible is filled with instructions and since I don’t have it all figured out, I go to God’s word for advice. God talks about all kinds of sin and how to deal with it. I don’t define sin, God does. I don’t think we are suppose to judge others, but God has given us discernment so we can recognize sin and stay away from it. I think we are capable of recognizing sin and still showing love, mercy and grace to the sinner, especially if the sinner happens to be us. As far as the verse on the speck in your own eye, I think Jesus is telling us not to overlook our own sin and then He goes on to say in the next verse, “first, remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” Matt 6:5 So, for me the instruction is, act in love and discernment and honest evaluation when dealing with sin. Btw, nuts is a term of endearment in my house.
By: Life Adapted on November 11, 2008
at 9:32 pm
Nut,
I’m suuure, because I believe in the scriptures that express perfectly well what God feels about certain issues. I didn’t say that sin separates us from God… but now that you mention it, it does… thus the need for Christ to die for our sins.
My comment was that sin is only separated from the sinner in God’s eyes by His love. When we add an ‘er’ to a sin such as murderer or adulterer, the sinner becomes the sin. How can we hate the sin and not hate the sinner? I think it is only with God’s love, which is in all who follow His Christ, that we are able to hate the sin and love the sinner.
By: netprophet on November 11, 2008
at 9:58 pm
Okay–let me ask you something. The Scriptures say not to eat what we call shellfish. They also say not to eat hybrid foods (like Nectarines and Tangelos), not to hybrid animals, such as mules, and not to wear blended fabrics. Do you really believe that these things are displeasing to God?
We can read what man projects onto God–but none of us can really know God’s opinions.
I had been one who believed in inspiration–although I cannot reconcile verbal (spoken) plenary (to all parts) inspiration–but now I don’t know. I think I meet somewhere between C. S. Lewis’s “Inspired Myth” and Wellhausen’s bottom-up origin of Scripture.
So, based on this, I don’t think that finite man, no matter how we think God thinks, can know how God thinks (pardon my use of Antimetabole and other tropes).
I mean, one minute Moses is in God’s will, going to Egypt to free the Hebrews, then a minute later, God is ready to kill Moses because the kids were uncircumcised. Is God confused? Can’t be. Well, maybe the human writers could have got a few things incorrect, like the claim to be speaking from God’s perspective.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to bed to lay awake and feel guilty about this response, and to ponder if we can really know what God actually thinks, or if it is all a canonical response, born in religious fervor, which constitutes inspiration (Brevard Childs) or if it is really a product of direct inspiration.
NUTZ
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 11, 2008
at 10:31 pm
BTW How does sin (which we often cannot define) separate man from God? I know, like a person we have broken fellowship from, or a child who has disobeyed his parents.
I just don’t see it that way any longer. I used to, but I think we use that as an excuse to wallow in our own guilt after we’ve committed big sin.
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 11, 2008
at 10:33 pm
Seems like we are awash with Net, nuts and nutz. All good stuff.
LA – good points. But can we EVER remove that plank from our eye? Or, if we can, isn’t there just another one waiting in the wings? In fact, I’ll bet the biggest plank is thinking that we’ve taken care of all the planks.
Bruce (Logionutz or whatever today’s flavor is), I think you are right if God is just the distant being you described. And that is one reason, of course, that he chose to become incarnated as one of us. We may not know what God is thinking but we may know God, through Christ. As when Jesus says that if we have seen him we have seen the Father.
So does eating shellfish upset God? Or pork? I would doubt it. But he might care about his people succumbing to saxitoxin or trichinosis.
By: Christian Beyer on November 11, 2008
at 11:18 pm
The incarnation I can bear–and Jesus said that if we see Him we see the Father–but how does that give us license to claim an insight into God’s perspective.
If the Incarnation is fully Human (with a Divine will and nature mixed in) then we see Jesus’s human perspective, not God’s perspective.
We see an immeasurably small fraction of God, as much as a human body can contain the fullness of the Godhead–but this does not give us front-row God vision, as many claim.
Whooz Nutz? I left the Booby-Hatch, Herr Durl-Lek-Tore, and you’re still inside the hatch.
BTW. I miss Mark’s roll call ceremonies, especially when we had like 40 people. Mr. Moore; Mr. Moore; . . . Miss Peterson . . . Mr. Zimi-Master
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 11, 2008
at 11:26 pm
Not God’s perspective – I agree. That would be kind of ‘nuts’. But we can get a glimpse of his nature, as we look at the life and death of Jesus. Which I don’t think is incomplete, as so many want to say. Jesus showed us God’s nature. Do we really think that there are other chapters that Jesus didn’t get to teach us? Is he merely the icing on the cake – with the OT revealing God’s ‘other’ qualities? Especially if those qualities seem to contradict the ones we see in Jesus/
By: Christian Beyer on November 11, 2008
at 11:38 pm
God’s “other” qualities? How can finite man even attempt to quantify God’s qualities?
What glimpse are you talking about? Those that verify our weak, mortal metaphors (and terministic screens) with which we attempt to categorize God with such sermons as “God has seven attributes, Love, Grace, Mercy, Forgiveness, Generosity, Engineering, and Wrath . . .”
How dare we.
More and more, I am siding with the Open-Theism view espoused by Clark Pinnock and others (See the Openness of God, by Clark Pinnock, et. al.,) against which I wrote and refuted with virulent, verbose, vehemence. Of course, they also project and presume penurous penultimates on the Divine nature.
BTW, you like-uh the alliteration?
By: logiopsychopathivorytowerdweller on November 12, 2008
at 8:16 am
That was my point: what “other” qualities can we ascertain? Is it even possible?
But Jesus said (and if we are “Christian” then this should be significant” that he has revealed God’ nature to us. What is that nature? Well, what is Jesus’ nature? Do we have an idea of what his nature is, as displayed by his life and death?
I think so.
(the alliteration is marvelous)
By: Christian Beyer on November 12, 2008
at 9:38 am
I still think it is presumptuous to presume we can know God’s nature.
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 12, 2008
at 9:21 pm
Allright. I can understand that. But can we presume Christ’s nature? I don’t mean his cosmic nature but in the same way that I know that you are a great big lovable over-educated curmudgeon who’s bark is worse than his bite?
By: Christian Beyer on November 12, 2008
at 10:27 pm
Christ’s nature? His dual nature?
Uh. Hmm. Look in the mirror, eat a lamb-sandwich on pita bread, with a little horse radish, wash it down with weak tea made with dusty yellow water (no cheese, please). Then walk down a dusty road in flat leather sandles, and build a small table from a juniper tree–then you will become quite familiar with Christ’s nature. Like Hebrews 2:16–”He took on the nature of Abraham’s seed . . .”
In other words, the Word became a man, man (and I just wrote 2 antanaclasises).
As to His Divine nature, its over my head.
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 12, 2008
at 10:46 pm
Actually, you don’t need the Middle-East McDonald’s to see Christ’s human nature, just look in a mirror. I recommend the one in the student restroom at your place of employment–as I recall it is already cracked.
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 12, 2008
at 10:47 pm
BTW–Isn’t that an overeducated curmudgeon whose bite can be quite serious? Just ask my wife.
By: logiopsychoambrosiaivorytowerpath on November 12, 2008
at 10:49 pm
[...] Steve. He Didn’t Make Little Green Apples, Either.God is to Orthodoxy as Nature is to LepidopteryLove Check for EvangelicalsFormal versus Informal ReligionNon Partisan Prayer for the ElectionMy Real Ghost Story, [...]
By: Love the Sinner, Forgive the Sin « SHARP IRON on November 16, 2008
at 10:26 pm