 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Tearing down walls > homosexuality in your face | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 3/19/2002 12:01 PM (GMT -6) |   | Rb is right whan he said that Paul says we should judge. But I have no idea what he means because he didn't pick a verse. Then, there is individual "judging" and "judging" by the Church.
Individually, we should flee sin, and flee those who would lead us to sin.
The Church should clearly show waht is sin.
But the Church welcomes sinners, while leading and encouraging, AND HELPING them to resist their passions, and put them to death. ("...putting to death the passions of the flesh..." -Paul)
It really, truly doesn't matter which sin. They are all missing the mark. And Christ gives liberty from all of them. So, dispite how we carry this "body of death" that does not also mean that anything is beyond Christ's help. There have been, even, saints.
Look at Enoch.
(I'm off. Take care1) | | Back to Top | | |
 |
trosie
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 550
| Posted 3/19/2002 12:04 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Well, Paul stated that we should judge, but, I guess Paul was wrong.
I still maintain that we should judge SIN but we are not to judge the SINNER. Judging people is left up for God to do. We can judge the fruit that a person produces, however, but this is different than judging the person.
Anyway, this is what I believe Paul was referring to.
What do you think?
trosie
| | Back to Top | | |
|
GregBoyd
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818
| Posted 3/19/2002 7:33 PM (GMT -6) | | My turn
Hope: I don't share this often. It has been extremely painful and life changing for my family. But you know what? I could tell my non christian friends so much easier than I could ever share this with most people in the Christian community.
Doc: I really appreciate your gutsy honesty Hope. Thanks for sharing that. We need to hear stories like this.
Icon: How many of us judge ourselves to be better or worse Christians based on how well we follow the law? Do any of us notice this "judger" within us, this "accuser". The accuser within us doles out points and takes points away. It keeps score either for or against (ourselves and others). And so, if we do keep score this way, where are we really getting our life from? From God? Or from our "Accuser"? From God? Or from "ha-satan"?
Doc: Eating of the tree of the knowledge of GOOD and EVIL. Well said Icon. But BOY does this turn things upside down. Gotta chew chew digest regurge chew some more eat digest regurge etc.
Kyle: what is truly more important, building a relationship with a homosexual through love, or actively telling them how wrong they are? Option A builds a good relationship, Option B turns them off, even if done with good intent.
Doc: Slam dunk. Personally, I think the numbing effect of gossip, self-centered materialism, self-rightousness, idolatry, and gluttony – all mentioned far more times than homosexuality – is a far greater concern. (Do you know that recent research says that 60% of Americans are OVER WEIGHT? We OVER eat more than the malnourished in the world UNDER eat!)
Semieia: Some years ago I was listening to a beautiful sermon, but at some point homosexuality was brought up, included in a typical "list of sins", something like this: "adulterers, thieves, murderers, homosexuals..." I immediately stiffened at the judgment, and I noticed that several people in front of me got up and left at that point.I wondered to myself if they were gay, because I thought, if I was gay I would leave.
Doc: Semeia, I believe you know I empathize emotionally with your thinking on this. But you highlight a struggle I have, so I’d like to introduce it if I may. Would you be offended if adulterers or theives or murderers got up and left because of what the preacher said? The fact is that PAUL mentioned "sin lists". I think we share the conviction that this is inspired stuff. What should a church that stands on the Word DO with these? Is the solution to never read them or preach from them? PLEASE understand, I’m raising this simply as an honest inquiry. Doesn't the gospel offend -- all of us, at some point, IF we are listening.
Semeia: My job description as a Christian is quite simple: love God with all my heart, and love my neighbor as myself. My sin is a log, my brother's sin is a speck. How do I know that? Because Jesus tells me so, in unambiguous terms: Log vs Speck. My own sin keeps me from even seeing my brother's sin. If I could see my brother with God's eyes, I would see that his sin is only a speck, and I would love him with the love of the Father.
Doc: See, I couldn’t agree with you more on this Semeia. AMEN. But I don’t see how this rules out having the Word read and preached in a communal context where it confronts ALL of us, including us gays!
Empiress: I wish I could've heard Doc's sermon...it sounds like it was beautiful.
Doc: Beauty is in the ears of the beholder – urhh, listener. But I know of one person who walked out (only one... it was a good morning ). See, the Word always offends.
Hope: It is so sad, but it gives me hope to hear it so well articulated by Iconoclast. What a heart.
Doc: Who can disagree with this?
Trosie: We are told quite elaborately through Jesus NOT to cast the first stone. We are told NOT to look at the speck in our brothers eye, hence we are NOT to judge A PERSON. Sin, on the other hand, is talked against all through the bible.
Doc: This seems to be the balance needed – which relates to my earlier raised concern to Semeia. To speak against sin is necessary. How could anyone ever experience grace unless they first experience their sinfulness. But the minute you say this – and this is Icon’s main point, I take it – you realize that YOU stand condemned. YOU have a giant two-by-four sticking out of your eye. Its not just that you shouldn’t judge the speck in your brothers eye. Its much worse. If you REALLY see your situation, you understand that you CAN’T see past the two-by-four in your own eye to see the speck. What you THINK you see is just a reflection of your own TWO-BY-FOUR.
The problem with personalizing it to someone OTHER THAN YOURSELF is that a) we violate Jesus’ command; b) we become God, playing the role of judge; c) we stop being a doer of the law (which is a full time job) and rather deflect our task by being a judger of the law; d) we dissipate the pressure of our own carnality by reassuring ourselves that ‘at least we don’t do THAT (other persons) sin; e) we thereby become Pharisaical; f) we alienate people from the gospel instead of loving them into the gospel.
Rb1963: Well, Paul stated that we should judge, but, I guess Paul was wrong.
Doc: Well, Jesus said not to judge. But I guess Jesus was wrong.  Paul verses Jesus, round 1. DING. (footnote: Many scholars argue that Paul is quoting a Corinthian slogan to refute it, as he does frequently in the letter to the Corinthians).
Concluding Question: What about Paul’s judgement of the man who was sleeping with his step mother. Paul says "put him out" (2 Cor. 5). How does this fit with the "don’t judge the sinner" motif?
Concluding Comment: Yes we’ve been over this many times. But I, for one, don’t mind it because I feel like each time we come back to it I learn something. It’s a process, and a tough one at that. Thanks beachgirl for raising the issue, once again.
IN all things, above all things
LOVE
Doc
ps. Irrelevant comment, but interesting observation. I've noticed over the last few months that God has given me a distinct deep love for gay people. I'm at the air port and, bang, a person out of nowhere catches my eye and I have a heart for them. I pray for them. I go out of my way to talk to them. etc. (of course, you're probably saying, "how do you know they' re gay? It doesn't matter, and I wouldn't wager my life on it [principle of fallibilism you know], but I am quite certain. Maybe its a gift of discernment]. Why is God giving this to me? Don't know, except I know we should have this toward all people all the time. Maybe he's educating me one people group at a time.
"Three is the magic number, oh yes it is, it's the Magic Number" - De La Soul | | Back to Top | | |
|
Seymour
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 105
| Posted 3/19/2002 10:36 PM (GMT -6) | |
Today's title is:
If every sermon that offends is inspired, then every sermon from any point of view on homosexuality ever preached anywhere has been inspired
quote:
PLEASE understand, I’m raising this simply as an honest inquiry. Doesn't the gospel offend -- all of us, at some point, IF we are listening.
[...]
Beauty is in the ears of the beholder – urhh, listener. But I know of one person who walked out (only one... it was a good morning). See, the Word always offends.
Yes the word is a two-edged sword, it cuts, it hurts, maybe it even ought to hurt.
But a quick point. What if someone preached a sermon based of texts in scripture which argued that the "sin" of homosexuality was cultural, or dismissed it for another reason.
WHOULD YOU BE OFFENDED BY THIS? ARE YOU AFRAID TO BE OFFENDED BY THE TRUTH IF THIS IS THE TRUTH?
Just about every sermon on homosexuality is going to offend somebody. I think you are too quick to assume that your words were inspired because they offended. If being offensive were the only prerequisit for inspiration then trust me I could quickly become the most inspired preacher you've ever heard.
If you don't believe me we should chat sometime. I'll give you an earfull. I hurt you like you've never been hurt. I have a knack for verbally killing someone's spirit, even very self-confident people react to my cutting blows. All my non-violence talk is just talk, words are my wepons and I'm a mass murderer.
Does that make me inspired?
I'm trying to put this thought into your head: You may be a mass murder without knowing it. You may think your inspired and that that's why your driving people off, or you may not really know how deeply your hurting them. Just plain hurting them.
I assume you are heterosexual. If so then this issue is assymetrical for you. What is not a big deal for you to say is a big deal for someone who is gay to hear. Your molehills are their mountains, and these mountians are looming burdens.
You know not of which you speak. Beware, you might be really really really REALLY wounding people.
So much for inspiration.
"When Zarathustra had spoken these words he beheld the people again and was silent. 'There they stand,' he said to his heart; 'there they laugh. They do not understand me; I am not the mouth for these ears."
Edited by - Seymour on 03/20/2002 03:36:42 AM
Edited by - Seymour on 03/20/2002 03:39:36 AM | | Back to Top | | |
|
trosie
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 550
| Posted 3/20/2002 4:33 AM (GMT -6) | | POW:quote:
The Church should clearly show waht is sin.
But the Church welcomes sinners, while leading and encouraging, AND HELPING them to resist their passions, and put them to death. ("...putting to death the passions of the flesh..." -Paul)
AMEN, brother! The church welcomes sinners since we are all sinners. There wouldn't be a "church" if it were for only the sinless ones.
Doc:quote:
If you REALLY see your situation, you understand that you CAN’T see past the two-by-four in your own eye to see the speck. What you THINK you see is just a reflection of your own TWO-BY-FOUR.
I don't think we SHOULD look at the speck in anothers eye since we have our own log. I DO think that we can preach the truth that's presented to us in the bible. When I speak about sin, I do so universally NOT individually.
Doc:quote:
Irrelevant comment, but interesting observation. I've noticed over the last few months that God has given me a distinct deep love for gay people. I'm at the air port and, bang, a person out of nowhere catches my eye and I have a heart for them. I pray for them. I go out of my way to talk to them. etc. (of course, you're probably saying, "how do you know they' re gay? It doesn't matter, and I wouldn't wager my life on it [principle of fallibilism you know], but I am quite certain. Maybe its a gift of discernment]. Why is God giving this to me? Don't know, except I know we should have this toward all people all the time. Maybe he's educating me one people group at a time.
Perhaps because we've been talking about this topic so much in the past few months on this board and Semeia has done a GREAT job at opening up the other side.
Seymour:quote:
ARE YOU AFRAID TO BE OFFENDED BY THE TRUTH IF THIS IS THE TRUTH?
The bible tells us what is sin. Are you going to start twisting the word to fit with whatever you want it to fit with? BTW, according to the sin list in the bible we all sin (most likely daily) are we going to start twisting the word so that we can excuse what we do so that it doesn't appear as sin? Of course not.
Peace
trosie
| | Back to Top | | |
|
hope
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 14
| Posted 3/20/2002 4:41 AM (GMT -6) | | Seymour:Your molehills are their mountains, and these mountains are looming burdens.
Doc:Yes we've been over this many times. But I for one don't mind it because...I learn something...It's a process
Hope:Thank you...Thank you...Thank you. I felt a little disappointed that it was talked about as beating a dead horse. It's like the racism issue. It's oly a dead horse if you don't have to face it on a daily basis.To my family it is a overwhelming mountain.
Doc: This seems to be the balance needed...to speak against sin is necessary.
Hope: Doc, I've been in your service where you have mentioned homosexuality during your log vs. speck sermon. It was along the lines of Christians saying I'm okay because I'm not as sinful as others, I can pick out their specks because...I'm not GAY like THEY are etc. I took that as a very loving sermon in which you acknowledged your/biblical stance on homosexuality( at least I picked up on it because it was listed among other sins), yet in no uncertain terms it was made clear that it is not a issue we as believers should be grandstanding as the SAFE sin to be judgemental about. If you asked me outright if I believe that homosexuality is a sin, right now where I am at in this journey I would say a very meek and humble yes. But..I have had to leave it in God's hands and not judge my brother's heart felt feelings/experience with the Lord. I have to admit my limitations in understanding God's grace and I choose not to stand in judgement of my brother. I have heard sermons that cut to the bone on this issue, and then I have heard sermons like yours Doc and others that say there are gay people in this service right now, and we need to extend Christ's love and grace towards them. It depends on the heart of the pastor, his own phobias, and judgements, and his/her true intentions and motives behind raising the issue. I would have no fear in bringing my brother to Woodland Hills, and that says it right there. That is my main concern for my brother, my parents etc. It is the Spirit in which it is presented.
Iconoclast, I still smile when I think of your post. You are my hero.
Hope
1 Corinthians 13:13 "And now these three remain: faith,hope and love. But the greatest of these is love." | | Back to Top | | |
|
Empiress
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 363
| Posted 3/20/2002 6:09 AM (GMT -6) | | I find it thoroughly odd that people lump homosexuality as a sin with other "sins" like adultery, thievery, lying, etc. Today we know, after much scientific and psychological research, that homosexuality is not a concsious CHOICE made by people in some kind of revolt against God or man, it is a combination of genetic and environmental factors that arise early in a person's sexual development. Regardless of "how" homosexuality develops, it is very clear that being a homosexual is NOT something people actively choose the way people actively choose to commit "sin." It is not simply an addiction either, it is a part of WHO someone is, whether they like it or not (and most have hated themselves at one point for it). Just as heterosexuals did not CHOOSE their sexual orientation, neither did homosexuals.
How can we continue to casually and unthinkingly list homosexuality as a sin alongside that which is chosen freely out of rebellion? How can we equate the two? Too many believing homosexuals testify that despite some of the most urgent and heart wrenching prayer on earth, God simply didn't "change" them. It seems obvious we need to re-think homosexuality in the Church...enough is enough. Being a homosexual cannot be a sin anymore than any other biological/psychological factor outside of someone's control. Additionally, sin implies CULPABILITY. How can we (and why would God) hold people accountable for something which people did not actively choose? The very DEFINITITION of sin implies choice and culpability. Homosexuality is NOT in that category. How can people so flippantly put it there? At the very LEAST we have to say that homosexuality is in a fundamentally different category. I would argue that it is a sin for us, who are no longer ignorant to the facts and the plight of homosexuals, to continue to treat it as "sin." Being "different" (race, gender, birth defects) is not sin. Actively choosing to revolt against God is sin. Why is it so difficult for people to see this distinction?
Here's a question for people who believe homosexuality is a "sin." Do you at least see that homosexuality is different somehow...that it simply cannot be treated in the same "category" as sin that is freely chosen?
~E
| | Back to Top | | |
|
hope
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2002
Total Posts : 14
| Posted 3/20/2002 7:12 AM (GMT -6) | | Empiress, I really appreciate your input on this subject. Obviously you are raising the issues that make this subject so complex and difficult. If I seem wishy washy on this whole issue, I freely admit it! It is so confusing to me, and I've been mulling it over for ten years. 
The example of the gay guy who used to or still is a frequent guest on Dobson who has been preaching for years that he has come out of the gay lifestyle, that God delivered him of it, only to have him "fall" back into homosexuality. Now I know that any sin can be correlated here such as adultery, lying etc. but I truly haven't heard of even a few people who have said they have been totally delivered of the gay life, whether it even just amounts to fantasy etc. Try as they might to pray it through etc. And here is the guy who has been the champion of the Christian community "proving" that one can come out of that lifestyle and not deal with it anymore. For years he has been saying that I did it YOU can do it. My brother said all those years, there is no way he is truly out of it, and then guess what???
Well, I think we can sure find a lot more people who truly have been delivered from adulterous affairs, and have a wonderful committed marriage in the end, have repented and no longer struggle with those thoughts and feelings. It seems that homosexuality is something that is prayed "out" of people, sometimes they even get married , they fake a normal life, they want to serve God, but those feelings just don't go away. Many also report these feelings as young as 4-5 yrs old!!?? How can this be explained? I don't think too many 4 year olds are having fantasies about adultery or premarital sex. I don't get it! I have questioned God on this so many times as I've seen my brother struggle over the years. Why him and not me? I went through the whole thing that God must have chosen my brother not to go to heaven in the first place, and that tortured me. I agonize if I even "go there" that my brother could go to hell for eternity because of this issue that he has begged to be delivered from and it can almost make me crazy.(and obviously I don't necessarily believe this is going to be the case)I often ask why this, and why him? Why something that seems impossible for him to overcome. He asked me why in the world anyone would think he would choose to feel like an outcast in the majority of society. He prayed for a change, he tried to change out of his own willpower, had a girlfriend for years, tried just abstaining from relationships, tried it all. Gave up on God, then turned to God, he's done it all.
What's with it? Can you feel my frustration E, because I understand where you are coming from believe me. How do I still feel it's a sin? I don't know exactly other than I have prayed and prayed and God has never removed the conviction at a very deep level in my heart. As far as homosexuality listed as a sin, there are those who strongly believe that those verses specifically relate to homosexual rape when interpreted. I know this is also strongly refuted on the other side.
Still struggling,
Hope
P.S. I hope this is clear as I just wrote it from my heart.
1 Corinthians 13:13 "And now these three remain: faith,hope and love. But the greatest of these is love." | | Back to Top | | |
|
trosie
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 550
| Posted 3/20/2002 8:45 AM (GMT -6) | | Hope:quote:
I hope this is clear as I just wrote it from my heart.
Hope, you write so well from your heart. God bless your heart I kind of know what you mean by being convicted at a deep heart level.
Miss E:quote:
How can we continue to casually and unthinkingly list homosexuality as a sin alongside that which is chosen freely out of rebellion?
We can continue to list homosexuality as a sin because the bible does.
Drunkenness is listed as a sin too even though I know many alcoholics that try again and again to straighten up and keep falling back into their old lifestyle. You may not want to equate the two together but they both do stem from biological and genetic factors. They both are in some ways beyond the person's ability to change yet the bible speaks of both of these things as sin.
The bottom line, sin is sin and it isn't our place to try to rationalize it. The part that I think is our place is to have love and openness to people who struggle with issues like homosexuality or alcoholism. It is NOT our place to judge others since each person has so many variables and because we are commanded not to. I thank God time and time again that I don't have to decide who goes to heaven... The one thing I think we cannot escape from (if we're honest) is that homosexuality IS listed along with MANY other sins.
You know the truth is I don't like being on opposing sides on this issue. I like so many of the people on this board and I dislike when we disagree. I think we all can agree that loving a person RIGHT WHERE THEY ARE AT is what we are ultimately called to do.
Blessings,
trosie
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Empiress
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 363
| Posted 3/20/2002 8:55 AM (GMT -6) | | Thank you Hope for speaking so honestly and sincerely. I do trust that you are seeking to know and do God's will.
Hope said:
quote:
Can you feel my frustration E?
Yes I do...I've been there too.
Hope said:
quote:
How do I still feel it's a sin? I don't know exactly other than I have prayed and prayed and God has never removed the conviction at a very deep level in my heart.
It's odd how earnest people can pray and end up with very different convictions. Case in point, I feel God desires that we pray that the Church, which has sadly been laden with cultural/social biases, will be able to finally distinguish between cultural taboos and true sin. This is something the Church has consistently failed to do.
Hope said:
quote:
As far as homosexuality listed as a sin, there are those who strongly believe that those verses specifically relate to homosexual rape when interpreted. I know this is also strongly refuted on the other side.
Yes...the concept of homosexuality in ancient cultures was VERY different from what we are dealing with today (at the very least). Of course, promiscuity and rape are problems regardless of culture.
While I believe that most of the people who view homosexuality as sin on this board do so with sincerity and good intentions, I simply do not see such views as fundamentally different from sexism, classism, or racism. In each case, differing aspects (that are not chosen) of a certain group of human beings are used against them to oppress and subjugate them by others. No one who justifies racism, for instance, views their reasons as being less than "righteous" than those who oppose racism. Most racists use the Bible to uphold their views (KKK and Neo-Nazis). It's VERY easy to make a case for sexism using the Bible for instance. In that sense, I think we need to go deeper than text-deep.
Peace,
~E
Edited by - empiress on 03/20/2002 1:57:39 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Empiress
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 363
| Posted 3/20/2002 9:15 AM (GMT -6) | | Trosie said:
quote:
Drunkenness is listed as a sin too even though I know many alcoholics that try again and again to straighten up and keep falling back into their old lifestyle.
While alcoholism is a genetic factor, drunkeness is NOT. Anyway, I knew someone would equate these, which is why I said homosexuality is not an addiction. Addiction is it's own issue and is a complex one. But that's not what I'm arguing. I'm asking people to simply see the distinction between homosexuality and the list of "sins" being thrown in together.
Can you at least acknowledge that homosexuality seems to have more in common with race and gender than choosing to sin??
Trosie said:
quote:
We can continue to list homosexuality as a sin because the bible does.
The Bible also condones a slew of things Christians don't feel compelled to follow or see as authoritative, so I really have to wonder what causes people to choose certain passages over others. (I tend to think it's cultural bias, family upbringing, or prejudice mainly.) So this response gets us nowhere.
Examples:
The OT tells us to stone adulters, kill witches, not wear clothes made of two types of cloth, not eat animals with cloven hooves, not touch women when they're menstruating, etc. ad nauseum.
The NT says that men should not have long hair and women should not cut their hair, wear jewelery, or pray with their heads uncovered.
We don't follow any of the above...the list could go on and on.
The Bible flatly condones racism, sexism, and slavery at many points. People use the Bible to justify their own interests, phobias, ignorance, and biases. Christians pick and choose what they want to apply and what they don't want to apply. Like I said to Hope, we're going to have to go more than text-deep here folks. Let's look at the evidence on this issue because people's lives are literally at stake.
quote:
I think we all can agree that loving a person RIGHT WHERE THEY ARE AT is what we are ultimately called to do.
Yes Trosie, we can all agree on that. Thanks for your response.
Peace,
~E
Edited by - empiress on 03/20/2002 2:19:39 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
rb1963b
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 93
| Posted 3/20/2002 12:09 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Doc: Well, Jesus said not to judge. But I guess Jesus was wrong. Paul verses Jesus, round 1. DING.
Oh, REALLY? Well who said "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment."?
You guys who quote Matthew 7:1 and try to put the meaning that the WORLD puts on it are seriously mistaken. They justify their drunkeness because Paul stated to drink a little wine.
WE as the CHURCH WILL judge the world. It is a copout to say that we are not to judge sin. If we cannot judge in these matters then how in the world can we put away from us those that do not put open sin away from themselves. What do the children of LIGHT have to do with children of darkness? We are to preach the gospel, part of the gospel is that man is deformed by sin, that there are none who are righteous righteous outside of Christ's righteousness.
We are not to judge amongst OURSELVES who is a BETTER CHRISTIAN, but we are to recongnise when a brother or sister is FAILING in such a way as to bring others into their sin.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
GregBoyd
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818
| Posted 3/21/2002 1:42 PM (GMT -6) | | Seymour, you are usually so logically astute, your last posting was a bit surprising. The point I mentioned was that the Gospel offends all of us. From this you somehow seemed to have derived the conclusion that I was suggesting that if something offends, it is the gospel (or inspiring).
Thats like someone saying "The president gives commands" and someone else drawing the conclusion, "if someone commands, they are the President."
It was an odd post. Anyway, I don't know anyone who would think that being offensive is inspirational. But I think many of us would agree that inspired sermons frequently offend people.
Empiress: Sin is "missing the mark." Do we not all somewhat miss the mark for reasons that we do not choose? Genes, culture and who knows what are, in a fallen world, some of the factors that contribute to our missing the mark.
Having said this, I think you are very right to distinguish between THIS sort of sin and sins we consciously choose. But rather than conclude that these sins are not sins, it seems more biblical to me to grant that they are indeed sins, but then use this awareness to make us more intently aware of our need for God's mercy and grace -- and more appreciative of the fact that, in Christ, we have received it.
my two cents
Doc
"Three is the magic number, oh yes it is, it's the Magic Number" - De La Soul | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 3/21/2002 3:54 PM (GMT -6) | | Doc: But rather than conclude that these sins are not sins, it seems more biblical to me to grant that they are indeed sins, but then use this awareness to make us more intently aware of our need for God's mercy and grace -- and more appreciative of the fact that, in Christ, we have received it.
Jesus: Take up your cross and follow me. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Seymour
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 105
| Posted 3/21/2002 5:59 PM (GMT -6) | |
quote:
Seymour, you are usually so logically astute, your last posting was a bit surprising. The point I mentioned was that the Gospel offends all of us. From this you somehow seemed to have derived the conclusion that I was suggesting that if something offends, it is the gospel (or inspiring).
Thats like someone saying "The president gives commands" and someone else drawing the conclusion, "if someone commands, they are the President."
It was an odd post. Anyway, I don't know anyone who would think that being offensive is inspirational. But I think many of us would agree that inspired sermons frequently offend people.
That's funny. The logic above was exacltly what I saw in YOUR last post. I was just playing around with it.
Since we both agree that inspired sermons often offend,
AND
I think it would be fair to say that any sermon on homosexulaity is bound to offend somebody
THEN
we shouldn't draw any conclusions about inspiration based on said offence.
It seemed like you were saying that you were inspired because you offended. That's all I was responding to.
EMILY: “Oh, earth, you’re too wonderful for anybody to realize you. Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it?--every, every minute?”
STAGE MANAGER: “No. The saints and poets, maybe--they do some.”
| | Back to Top | | |
|
trosie
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 550
| Posted 3/21/2002 6:28 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
WE as the CHURCH WILL judge the world. It is a copout to say that we are not to judge sin
Seymour, I agree that we are to judge sin as far as stating that things that oppose what the bible teaches is indeed SIN. What I am not clear on is if you think that we are free to judge the sinner who commits the sin?
There are WAY TOO MANY VARIABLES for us to be able to judge the sinner.
I still maintain that we, as Christians, are to judge SIN but we are also instructed not to judge the SINNER since we know not from where they come from -- we have not walked a mile in their shoes.....
quote:
I think you are very right to distinguish between THIS sort of sin and sins we consciously choose. But rather than conclude that these sins are not sins, it seems more biblical to me to grant that they are indeed sins, but then use this awareness to make us more intently aware of our need for God's mercy and grace -- and more appreciative of the fact that, in Christ, we have received it.
AMEN DOC! Sin is sin whether it is consciously choosen or not! I am so thankful for God's mercy and grace!!! Thank God for gently accepting and loving each of us RIGHT WHERE WE ARE AT IN OUR SIN.
That's my two cents,
trosie
| | Back to Top | | |
|
goodgrl
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2002
Total Posts : 5
| Posted 3/22/2002 4:13 AM (GMT -6) | | I just happened to be reading and studying Matthew 7 last night. I found it to be very interesting in light of this discussion.
My conclusion was: we are to help our brothers and sisters take the speck out of their eye - but not until we have looked at our own life, repented of our sin, moved into a place of humility and compassion, and then we can see clearly to take the speck out of our brother's eye. That would be love.
Anyway... like I said... just my conclusion.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Semeia
Registered Member
Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 522
| Posted 3/22/2002 7:36 AM (GMT -6) | | goodgrl,
Here is an essay I wrote on the Sermon on the Mount that I posted many months ago over on this thread: Women, Homosexuality, and Slavery
The rest of the essay and many other aspects of this discussion can be found on that thread. I have much more to say about your conclusion, but I will come back to it in another post.
____________________________________________________________
Doc said: But must we not distinguish this falling short of God's ideal, either in the mind or in remarriage, from committing ACTUAL adultery (I don't know how else to express this distinction)?
Semeia: Isn’t the whole purpose of the Sermon on the Mount to erase this distinction? While Jesus was speaking did he do a “wink, wink, nod, nod,” and it got lost in the translation? When he said if you even say “thou fool” to your brother you are in danger of hell fire, did he really mean campfire? Jesus very clearly, unequivocally, erases that distinction. If you miss that point, you have missed whole point. When Jesus says, “Do not judge, so that you may not be judged. For with the judgment you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. Why do you see the speck in your neighbor’s eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye? Or how can you say to your neighbor, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor’s eye. what does he mean?
Let’s stay with this passage a minute. Everyone has read it a hundred times and thinks the meaning is obvious. The first sentence is a command: “Do not judge, so that you may not be judged.” For centuries people have tried to weasel out of this one. What most people come up with is: discernment is what I say about you – judgment is what you say about me. Actually, the first sentence is both a command, “Do not judge” and a reason, “so that you will not be judged.” Jesus, having mercy on our lack of comprehension, goes on to explain: “For with the judgment you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get.” If at this moment every bible in the world burst into flame, and all that was left of God’s word was this charred sentence, it might just be enough. Out of the layers of meaning in this line, one thing that emerges clearly is that we are in complete control of the judgment we will receive. We in fact create the judgment we receive. We “make” the judgment we receive. As we judge others, for their sin, for what they do wrong, for their self-righteousness, for what we “see” as their evil, we are “making” our own judgment. People should tremble before this line. This is the description of hell, and it is of our own making. Oh, if only God would judge us, merciful God. But Jesus tells us something different and horrifying: “For with the judgment you make you will be judged” God have mercy on us. Here is the full weight of the Sermon on the Mount resting on our shoulders. We look for an escape from the terror of that line. Jesus says, “and the measure you give will be the measure you get.” For a moment we feel better, for surely we give to people, we’re nice, we write checks to the church, to the charities, we help Grandma across the street. But soon an uncomfortable feeling comes, and we start to squirm. Compared to what we’ve heard about heaven, what we do is really pretty paltry. When we add up everything good we’ve done over the course of a lifetime, it doesn’t look much like heaven. But Jesus says, “and the measure you give will be the measure you get.” Suddenly this too is a burden. Jesus tells us we make our own reward. We would much rather that God made our reward. God in all his generosity. Suddenly freedom closes in on us.
Jesus continues. He asks, “Why do you see the speck in your neighbor’s eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye? Or how can you say to your neighbor, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while the log is in your own eye?” This is so brilliant. Our mouths just have to drop open at the word of God. What is Jesus telling us here about the importance of our sin compared to the importance of someone else’s sin? He gives us a great visual: our sin is a log; the other person’s sin is a speck. This is the ratio. This is how our sin is measured. This is how we should perceive our sin in comparison to others. If you put two piles of sin next to each other, one is as big as a log, the other is as small as a speck, which one demands attention? Which needs to be addressed? Remember, Jesus has already answered our objections. He has already answered the question, “But what about the murderer? I only kicked the cat! How can my sin be bigger than his?” Jesus has dismissed that argument. He has said, lust in your heart is the same as adultery; the angry thought is the same as murder. Now it starts to dawn on us what he meant. We have to get the proportion right. If we “see” the murderer as worse than us, we will never “see” the true proportion of our own sin. We will never hear the urgency of God’s message, that any transformation that happens in the world happens ONLY as a result of the transformation that happens within. In our whole life, could we ever get rid of this “log” of sin, so that we could take the attention off of ourselves, and turn our attention to the sin of others? Is this a “project” that we can complete, and as we chip away at our sin, can we reduce it bit by bit, so that finally we could turn our attention to the next guy, the ax-murderer and the litterbug? Remember, the other guy’s sin is a speck. So that means our sin needs to be less than a speck before we shift our attention. Jesus says, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly father is perfect.” It’s interesting that he says that shortly after saying we should love our enemies. So if we are perfect, then we can judge. The question is, if we were perfect, would we judge? Or would we love our enemies?
The last line is a sleeper. Jesus says, “You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor’s eye.” I am dumbstruck by the genius of this. Jesus has taken me step by step, and now he shakes me hard. I feel like Saul on the road to Damascus. I can see. He starts by addressing us as “hypocrite”, a nasty label if there ever was one. It would be nice to think he was referring to the Pharisees, but this is to the crowds, this is to humankind, this is the Sermon on the Mount, the core message of his whole ministry. So I cringe. “You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor’s eye.” And then it hits me. Our own sin blocks us from seeing our neighbor’s sin. We don’t even know what our neighbor’s sin is, because we are blocked by the obstacle of our own sin. Our own sin makes it impossible for us to judge what is good and evil in another. Our own sin makes us blind. What we see, when we look at others in judgment, is through the darkness of our own sin, which is opaque. We do not truly see others. Jesus says so, “take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor’s eye.” When we take the log out of our own eye, we will see that our neighbor’s sin IS ONLY A SPECK. We judge the world through the veil of our own sin, and it makes us blind. Our judgment actually causes us to do evil, when we intend good. We judge the people around us as if their sin is in need of our help, and in so doing we create more sin. If we were to get rid of the sin that blinds us, we would see people with the eyes that God sees people with, the loving eyes of wisdom, understanding, and forgiveness, and as he tells us he loves each one of us, we too would see with love, and each person’s sin would be but a speck. How easy to love our enemies, if we could see them as God sees them, with their sin as just a speck.
Doc said: As I read it, Jesus was exposing the self-righteousness of the those who were trying to establish "justified grounds" for divorce.
Semeia: No. Throughout this whole passage Jesus was exposing the self-righteousness of those who would point to someone else’s sin as worse than their own. He goes through various commandments and raises the standard, demands perfection, not because people are capable of perfection, but in order to get people to focus on their OWN sinfulness, not that of others.
Doc said: While neither of us has problems with (say) a pastor who has been remarried, would we not both have problems with a pastor who was married to someone but still having sex with someone else?… Isn't "living in sin" different in these cases?
Semeia: This is the big question, isn’t it. This is the reality check. Of course we would have a problem with a pastor who was committing adultery, because that is a situation in which there are victims—the spouse and the mistress. Although we cannot judge another person’s sin, it’s certainly appropriate to stop someone from hurting another. How a church would handle the situation would depend on different factors — whether or not it was known to the congregation, what the spouse wanted, whether or not the pastor was seeking help, whether or not it was ongoing, or a one-time deal, whether or not the pastor was repentant and sorrowful or blatant and flagrant about it. But there is no similarity here between an adulterous straight minister and a monogamous gay minister, because the gay minister is not victimizing anyone.
Why did Jesus come down so hard on us for judgment, and yet say nothing about homosexuality? Did it slip his mind? Why was he so angry with the Pharisees? They were the “good people” of their day. They followed the scripture. Hey, it says right in Genesis and in the Ten Commandments, rest on the Sabbath. Jesus didn’t rest on the Sabbath. Clearly that was not sin. Maybe we don’t know everything there is to know about sin. Maybe sin is only something we can do something about in ourselves. Maybe it’s between us and God.
Semeia
"The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith."--Soren Kierkegaard
Edited by - Semeia on 03/22/2002 5:57:41 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
trosie
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 550
| Posted 3/22/2002 8:28 AM (GMT -6) | | Semeiaquote:
If we were to get rid of the sin that blinds us, we would see people with the eyes that God sees people with, the loving eyes of wisdom, understanding, and forgiveness, and as he tells us he loves each one of us, we too would see with love, and each person’s sin would be but a speck. How easy to love our enemies, if we could see them as God sees them, with their sin as just a speck.
Beachgirl's original question was: "i am so afraid of the numbness that is going to set in. how do we take a stand?"
I agree with you, Semeia, in that we ARE NOT to judge another PERSON. The issue I am not sure we agree on is that we ARE to judge what IS SIN. It is not because we don't have love in our heart that we judge what is sin -- NO, rather love that is not based on the truth is only partial love. In both the Old and the New Testament homosexuality is addressed as sin -- hence I don't think it was one of those type of issues that was only meant for the people of that time. We Christians can speak truth in love by exposing what is sin. Homosexuality is one of the MANY sins listed in the bible.
My biggest hangup (and probably why I have so much passion on this topic even though I do NOT like to disagree with people I like) is that I fear the younger population is getting exposed to so much that opposes scripture that the truths and values taught in the bible may become totally contingent on "what feels right"
WE ARE NOT TO JUDGE ANYONE!!!! BUT WE ARE EMPOWERED WITH THE WORD OF GOD AND THE HOLY SPIRIT TO KNOW AND DISCERN WHAT IS GOOD AND PLEASING TO GOD.
I think we both agree that judging a person is NOT what God wants us to do. I wonder if where we disagree is on the issue of what is sin?
Peace,
trosie
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Semeia
Registered Member
Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 522
| Posted 3/22/2002 8:53 AM (GMT -6) | | goodgrl said:
My conclusion was: we are to help our brothers and sisters take the speck out of their eye - but not until we have looked at our own life, repented of our sin, moved into a place of humility and compassion, and then we can see clearly to take the speck out of our brother's eye. That would be love.
Semeia:
I'm a little confused about your conclusion. It seems to me that in order to be justified in pointing out the speck in someone else's eye, we would need to have reduced the log in our own eye to LESS than a speck, right? Because anything we did with more than a speck in our eye would make us hypocrites - which is just what Jesus calls us.
My problem is in trying to imagine getting my sin down to less than a speck. I mean, lust in my heart is the same as adultery - according to Jesus. Saying "thou fool" to my brother puts me in danger of hellfire. The angry thought is the same as murder. Jesus tells us to not have so much as a careless thought. Unfortunately, that's mostly what I seem to have.
I mean, I guess I'm just not that good a girl. And I don't know anyone else who measures up either.
No offense, but it seems delusional to me to think that anyone could succeed in getting their sin down to less than a speck, which is the necessary condition for pointing out someone else's sin. And to point out someone else's sin from the position of having even more sin is the definition of hypocrisy.
Are you trying to say that your sin is less than a speck?
And for those who have said (such as Trosie) to hate the sin but love the sinner - how exactly does one do that when the sin is something that is an ongoing part of that person's life - such as the ongoing sin of adultery is for remarried people - at least according to Jesus? Remember the discussion over on the other thread about your Dad's divorce and remarriage - and how he suffered because of the judgment he felt from other Christians about his situation? How do you hate a sin that is a part of another person, and not harm them by that hate? How do you know what God thinks of that sin, or if it even IS sin? The bible says that gluttony is a sin. Do you hate the "sin" of obese people - or the sin of the majority of Americans who are overweight? How do you hate the sin without judging the person? When one of our overweight or divorced pastors gets up to preach, do you think about your hatred for the sin of gluttony and the sin of divorce and remarriage? Do you look at them and think about how being overweight is WRONG according to the Bible, and about how being divorced and remarried is WRONG according to the Bible? Do you think about how, when you finally get your sin down to a speck you are going to "speak the truth in love" to these other sinners?
Does anyone else see something wrong with this thought process? Does anyone else feel, like I do, that their own sin is such that they can never overcome it sufficiently to worry about pointing out the speck in someone else's eye? And is it possible that if we were to be sitting in the audience listening to, say, an obese, divorced pastor, that if we were preoccupied with thoughts about hating their sin - that perhaps THAT is exactly the kind of "careless thought" that Jesus is concerned with?
Here is another essay originally posted many months ago on another threadLink
One post from that thread was deleted which makes it a little difficult to read.
_____________________________________________
What did Jesus do about sin? He healed people. There are instances of him saying, “Go and sin no more.” Gently, after showing love, from a position of perfection which only Jesus has.
His anger was saved for people who judged others. The Pharisees were the “good people” of the day. They went to synagogue, and knew their scripture like the back of their hand. They knew how people fell short, and they were not afraid to point it out. Even to Jesus, who broke the Sabbath. The Pharisees knew it was important to point out to people their sin: if they didn’t, who would? Jesus certainly wasn’t--that’s one of the reasons they didn’t trust him. How would people do God’s word, if their sin weren’t pointed out to them? Didn’t God demand it? This is the thinking that made it impossible for the Pharisees to recognize God when they saw him.
What did Jesus do about sin? He died on the cross. Let’s go over that one more time. What did Jesus do about sin? He allowed himself to be nailed through his wrists and his ankles to a wooden cross, to let the full weight of his body hang excruciatingly from his torn flesh for hour after hour while being taunted and jeered, as his body fluids settled and slowly filled his lungs, eventually drowning him in an end to what must have felt like an eternity of suffering. Before he died he begged the Father, “Forgive them, for they know not what they do.”
That’s a compelling statement in any context, but from the mouth of a man who is in the process of being murdered it reverberates through history, it convicts us with its simplicity: its integrity in the mouth of the murdered man grabs us and will not let us go. All of our sin, our woundedness, our failure, and our judgment is dashed on the rock of that scripture.
Did he mean, “Forgive them, because they do not know I am God”? Or did he mean something deeper and exact: “Forgive them, for they know not what they do”?
Jesus ministry was not one of going around and telling individuals what their shortcomings were, lovingly or not. It was mostly stories and parables. He rarely gave a straight answer. Few Christians model their ministry on Jesus. Most model their ministry on Paul, or at least what they think Paul was saying. That seems a little strange to me. Paul was a flawed human being who spent quite a few years murdering Christians. Jesus was the Son of God. Jesus’ most comprehensive discussion of sin takes place in the Sermon on the Mount. In that sermon Jesus erases now and for all time any distinctions we would like to make between one sin and another, between our sin and our brother’s. He unequivocally declares that the angry thought is the same as murder; lust in the heart is the same as adultery. No one escapes. “Be perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect.” He indicts each and every one of us, for all time.
And yet He said, “I come not to condemn the world but to save it.” So his indictment of us is not a judgment. It is simply a fact, from which none of us can flee. He makes it clear in the Sermon on the Mount that we are all full of sin all the time.
How does he save us then? Does he save us by lecturing us on our individual sin? I see no evidence of that in the Gospels, except for the sins of the people like the Pharisees and the Lawyers who thought they were righteous. If you are merely a prostitute or someone who has been married five times or a reviled tax collector, you get no lecture. If you claim in any way to be righteous before God, watch out. He constantly tricks us into knowledge with stories that upset our view of the world. When people want specific advice, He says, “Why ask me to settle your dispute for you? Settle your own dispute.” He frequently answers a question with a question. He does say to rebuke a brother who is sinning against you, but he says to forgive as many times as the brother offends, as long as they repent. (And of course none of the homosexuals I know are sinning “against” me, so I do not see that I have a position to rebuke them from.) Jesus says, “If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples; and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free… …Very truly, I tell you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not have a permanent place in the household; the son has a place there forever. So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.” Jesus has already shown us how high the bar is-—how impossible it is for us to claim we are without sin. Here he tells us that if we sin (which he has already shown us we always do) we are slaves to sin. My understanding of a “slave” is that of a person that does not have control over his life. Something outside of him controls him. A slave cannot “choose” to be free. A slave cannot “will” himself out of slavery. A slave cannot free himself from slavery through “good works”. A slave by his own doing has no way out. Jesus tells us we are slaves to sin. This metaphor powerfully suggests that we do not on our own have control over our sin. On the contrary, it is sin that has control over us. From what position do we judge our brother, whom Jesus says is a slave to sin? From what position does our brother judge us? Think about slavery in American history. Does anyone looking back blame or judge the slave for their condition? What does he mean by calling us slaves to sin? If you were to come across an enslaved person, chained to the wall, would you rebuke him? Would you call out the sin of his enslavement? Would you try to talk him out of his slavery? Would you point out to him that he has chains on and if he worked harder at being good he would not be enslaved? But of course, you yourself have sin, and according to Jesus you too are enslaved, so it would seem a little odd to rebuke the slave chained next to you on the wall.
But Jesus holds out hope, “The slave does not have a permanent place in the household; the son has a place there forever. So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.” Jesus can do what you cannot. Jesus can set you free. Our slavery is temporary — if we believe in the Son of Man we will be free, simply because Jesus makes it so. But there is an issue here: when are we enslaved, and when are we freed? And what exactly does freedom mean? There are two ways to look at this, and both are true.
Were we enslaved before we knew Jesus, and then were free? Or was humanity enslaved before Jesus lived, and freed through Jesus’ death on the cross? And furthermore, does freedom mean that we have no more sin?
Believing in Jesus Christ makes us free. To the extent that we can “continue in his word” we will know the truth and the truth will set us free. To the extent that we will admit him into our heart is the extent to which we will recognize the truth, and in truth is freedom. Does this freedom mean we will be without sin? No, the kingdom of God is like a mustard seed, from a tiny beginning comes a huge, living, growing result. But it happens slowly, in small increments. Knowing Jesus gives us a chance at knowing our own sin, and changing. It does not, however, teach us much about someone else’s sin, because freedom only comes through Jesus Christ, not through human beings. It is not something we can bestow on someone by calling out their sin. The only currency of exchange is love—that is our only contribution to the freedom of others. We are all slaves to sin. We cannot bestow freedom on someone else, when we ourselves are enslaved. Only Jesus can-—He says so. In this sense our freedom starts small and grows.
In another sense our freedom came in a cataclysmic event, and all at once. Jesus took our sin and nailed it to the cross, and with his flesh paid ransom for many. He paid with his life for the salvation of the world, including his murderers. His plea: “Father forgive them, for they know not what they do.” I think about what Jesus did, and why he did it, and for whom, and it changes everything I think about myself and others, forever. Because this was Jesus response to our sin: to die on the cross. He took the sin of the world on himself, so it could die with him, so we could live. He took the pain of the world on himself, so it could die with him, so we could live. He said, “I come not to judge the world, but to save it.” So how do Christians go from the blood of the cross to the belief that it is their job to help their neighbor see his sin? Jesus asks us, “Are you willing to take up my cross?” What is his cross? His cross was to take on the sin of the world, ON HIMSELF, so that others may live. In what way is our evaluation and weighing of other people’s sin anything like what Jesus did? Jesus took our pain on himself. The only way we can ever make a baby step in that direction is by loving our neighbor and our brother and taking the suffering of their sinfulness on ourselves, without judgment, to allow them to live. How do we take up the cross? How do we take on that sin? By absorbing it without judgment or condemnation or retaliation and through loving people into a freeing relationship with God. Jesus died so we could repent and be forgiven. How do we “die” in this life for a brother? We die by taking ourselves out of the equation-—our judgments and evaluations and egos and resentments and self-righteousness and arrogance and criticism and inspection and pride. We take ourselves out of the equation so we can meet our brother where he is. We take ourselves out of the equation so we can love our brother where he is right now. This does not mean we are indifferent to sin. We are not indifferent to something we are willing to die for. What it means is that we recognize that the only one who has the power to free anyone from being a slave to sin is Jesus Christ himself. What it means is that we are willing to do the only thing that brings Jesus into anyone’s life, and that is love. What it means is that we are willing to take ourselves out of the equation so that Jesus Christ can work in us and through us to love the world. Pointing out someone else’s sin is not love, even if it is said in a soft Christian voice. Love is putting yourself in someone else’s shoes and seeing the world through their eyes. Love is seeing the person the way God sees them, hurting and in need. Love is taking someone else’s pain, and all the sin that flows from that pain, and withstanding it without judgment or condemnation. Love is asking God to forgive your murderers as you are nailed to the cross and drowning in your own blood.
How do we get from Jesus sacrifice to weighing the sins of others?
I search the Ten Commandments for any sign that God wants me to fix my brother, but all I find are commands for me.
I search the Lord’s Prayer for any sign that God wants me to fix my brother, but all I find are my requests for God to do his will and take care of me. The only thing I promise to do is forgive my brother’s trespasses.
I search the Sermon on the Mount for any sign that God wants me to fix my brother, but all I find are commands and warnings for me.
I search Jesus death on the cross for any sign that God wants me to fix my brother, but all I find is love and forgiveness for all.
I know Jesus saves. I just need to get out of the way so he can do it. I need to find within me a fraction of that love and forgiveness so that my heart may be cracked open to let freedom reign.
Love God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself. It’s not as complicated as we make it out to be. But like everyone else, I fail miserably at it, every day.
After church one day we spent the afternoon with friends who are gay. I asked my friend about his job as a social worker working with troubled teens. I asked him if the kids he worked with knew he was gay, and if they ever reacted negatively about it. Oh yes, most of them knew, and he had been called ***got and lots of other things, and he had been spit on, and had several episodes of fairly violent behavior. I was kind of shocked, and I asked him if he continued to work with the kids who did that. Yes, he said, because they’re the kids that need me the most. He was able to take himself out of the equation, and absorb the sin, in order to love and to heal. I wish I could get to where he is. I’ve got my work cut out for me.
Semeia
"The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith."--Soren Kierkegaard
Edited by - Semeia on 03/22/2002 5:58:46 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Empiress
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 363
| Posted 3/22/2002 9:41 AM (GMT -6) | | I'll be honest...this thread mystifies me. People are saying that which is not consciously chosen is still sin? I thought sin has always implied culpability as far as the Biblical and theological traditions are concerned. This is how I see it being defined. I think it gets us in a whole heap of trouble to begin saying people are sinning when they have no ability to choose otherwise.
Perhaps what we need is a discussion that more thoroughly defines sin. This seems to be the crux of the issue here.
Sin, as an act to be judged, assumes some semblence of responsibility or blame can be placed, but in order for this to apply, culpability must apply. Sin cannot be a function of a birth defect, for example.
I don't see homosexuality as a birth "defect"....I believe it is a natural part of human creation. It occurs at a steady percentage rate among people of all cultures and homosexual behavior is very common in the animal kingdom. It is due to genetic factors. It seems an "amoral" part of creation. We could argue whether or not homosexuality is "beneficial" or "harmful"...but that seems a very different subject than judging it as "sin" or not.
Anyway, given people's thinking on this issue, I'd like to ask a few questions. Please note I am not equivocating homosexuality to these issues....these are separate questions about sin:
1. A person is clinically depressed and suicidal due to a chemical imbalance and cannot give thanks for their life or praise God. Are they guilty of sin? Are they under God's wrath and judgment?
2. A baby is born addicted to crack that craves crack and needs crack in order to survive because their mother was a crack addict. Is this baby guilty of sinning because it has a drug habit? Is the baby under God's wrath and judgment for this?
3. A person has Terret's Syndrome and continually curses and swears uncontrollably. Is this person guilty of sinning? Are they under God's wrath and judgment for their actions?
All of these situations could be considered "missing the mark" I guess. But I think, in all these cases, GREATER love, compassion, grace, and mercy ought to be extended by people. Clearly this is NOT what sin is about! Sin implies culpability! I don't see any way around this point.
Can we talk more about what constitutes sin? I'm baffled at the responses thus far.
Thanks,
E
Edited by - empiress on 03/22/2002 2:45:24 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Semeia
Registered Member
Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 522
| Posted 3/22/2002 10:08 AM (GMT -6) | | Trosie said:
I think we both agree that judging a person is NOT what God wants us to do. I wonder if where we disagree is on the issue of what is sin?
Semeia:
Yes, we disagree about the issue of what is sin. I think we also disagree on what to do about sin. What I will attempt to show is that the standard Christian view of sin is pharisaical. Our judgment of good and evil is the very essence of our fallenness - and it is the very thing that kept the pharisees from recognizing God as he stood in front of them. Our hatred of what we think (judge) is someone else's sin is the essence of our fallenness. And the only possible redemption is to let go - and through Christ be made whole - NOT so that we can now see our brother clearly to "judge" (see, speak the truth in love, point out, etc) their sin (evaluate for ourselves where we think they are falling short) - but ONLY so that we may see them clearly to LOVE THEM, as God has loved us - in all our sin.
At the heart of this debate is the issue of what actually helps people to have less sin.
In my opinion the prevailing views accomplish the opposite of what they intend.
Over the past many months I have focused on the hypocrisy of the church's views toward homosexuals. I have pointed out the obvious double standard in how we treat this "sin" as different from others. For example, we do not prohibit divorced, remarried, or obese people from becoming pastors of our church - even though the Bible very cleary speaks out against those sins - and yet we prohibit gays from any leadership positions at all, AND even prohibits them from being Covenant Partners if one takes the "lead life according to scripture" to mean "lead life according to the prevailing view of what scripture has to say about homosexuality".
But I am about to shift my approach. I am going to go after the issue of sin. I am going to examine what it means to call homosexuality a sin. I share Empiress's frustration on this. If we define sin as "missing the mark" on God's ideal, than I would only call homosexuality a sin if we agree to call blindness a sin, or obesity, or birth defects (not God's ideal, right?), or an angry personality, or ignorance.
In fact, when you think about it, Hitler's desire to build an Aryan nation is taking a particular perception of what "God's ideal" is to its fullest limits. Now we may disagree about his methods and his criteria - but isn't this on some level what we all do when we go through the Bible with our fine tooth comb (useful for splitting hairs) looking for evidence about sin so that we can apply it to the world to somehow achieve this ideal?
It seems to me that Jesus central message is that we all sin all the time - and the only way out for us is through his love and forgiveness. Anything we try to do on our own in this regard is works - which mean nothing at all without God's forgiveness.
The only power we have in regard to the sin of our brother is love.
And love does not require us to identify our brother's sin. Usually it requires us to overlook it.
And if you think about it, how does God save us? I mean, I know a lot of Christians, and I haven't met a single one that had a significant, obvious, decrease in their level of sinfulness when they accepted Jesus Christ into their hearts. Christians are not any nicer people than atheists.
But God tells us that we are saved if we believe in him. And yet he neither requires us to reduce our sin by one iota to be saved, nor does he seem to eliminate any sin from us once we are saved. So what has changed? What has changed is that we admit that we need God, and we open ourselves to receive his love, which transforms us.
Does it make us less sinful? Truthfully, even the old Christians I know are full of sin. I just don't see any evidence that it does. But it does make us aware of how beautiful is God's love, that he would love the likes of us.
Do we need to look at ourselves and work on our own sin? Of course. And don't we all know that our worst sins are hidden from others? I mean, people might judge me for what they THINK is wrong with me, but the truth is that the darkest part of me is hidden. God knows what I REALLY need to work on.
Doc, I will return to your questions as I have time.
Empiress, I look forward to your participation in the discussion about sin. Up until now I have been unwilling to go down that path. But I think I am ready to go after this issue. I believe that our judgment of good and evil is the ESSENCE of our fallen nature, and that Jesus' death on the cross tells us what we need to do about sin.
What does organizational psychology and science (especially complex adaptive systems theory) tell us about sin?
Thanks,
Semeia
"The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith."--Soren Kierkegaard | | Back to Top | | |
|
Semeia
Registered Member
Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 522
| Posted 3/22/2002 10:11 AM (GMT -6) | | Empiress, I just speed read your post. I've got to go pick up my kids, but I'll come back later. I think I'm very much in agreement with you, but I have taken a different approach in trying to influence so far.
I look forward to continuing this - I am SO GLAD you are participating.
Thanks,
Semeia
"The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith."--Soren Kierkegaard | | Back to Top | | |
|
Empiress
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2002
Total Posts : 363
| Posted 3/22/2002 11:06 AM (GMT -6) | | Semeia said:
quote:
Does anyone else see something wrong with this thought process? Does anyone else feel, like I do, that their own sin is such that they can never overcome it sufficiently to worry about pointing out the speck in someone else's eye? And is it possible that if we were to be sitting in the audience listening to, say, an obese, divorced pastor, that if we were preoccupied with thoughts about hating their sin - that perhaps THAT is exactly the kind of "careless thought" that Jesus is concerned with?
I am in total agreement with you Semeia..and with everything you've written on this thread thus far. You strike me as someone with deeply pastoral gifts...and amazing patience too. You speak the words that are in my heart, and frankly, I'm too lazy to put down in words because I've tried so many times without it effecting a single change in people's minds/hearts. I suppose that's one reason I'm taking a different tact this time on the issue.
I thought you might appreciate a little encouragement from some quotes I've collected from Buddhist sources that understand the point Jesus was making. I find them personally very convicting:
"The faults of others are easily seen. The faults of my own person go unknown. If there exists a fault (of your own) that becomes known to you, then you should think "it must be something so bad that I could know of it" and have a change of heart. One should simply and carefully rely on what others say. It was thus said because my faults go unknown."
-Rennyo Shonin
"Those who do not reflect on their own evil nature are likely to exaggerate the little good that they do. "
-Muyuge
It was said of Shinran Shonen:
"The only person he believed worthy of hell was himself as a passion-ridden being, totally incapable of the necessary purification for enlightenment."
--------------------------------------------------------------
As far as working towards a definition of sin, it really seems that we need to involve psychology, science, cultural anthropology, and sociology into the discussion.
I was fascinated to read, for example, about what occured in an African tribe that converted to Islam and how the Islamic definitions of sin/evil eventually took hold in the tribe:
In the example of nudity: wearing clothes eventually became considered prestigious, then it became a matter of respectability, then a matter of public decency. Eventually, not being clothed was a matter of shame and sin for members of the tribe.
In the example of pork: A shift occured in the tribe whereby not eating pork was not just required for being a good "Muslim," eventually not eating pork became a requirement for being a good "person" and was associated with sin.
When we look at cultural history...it is amazing to see how much sin is affected by one's culture and social ethos.
Here's an example we can look to today in which a certain group's sense of good and evil has shifted:
In many feminist circles people have been lead to view heterosexual sex as "evil" because it is the case that heterosexual sex has often been the means, historically and culturally, by which males have dominated and subjugated females...it is understood as an act of control, domination, rape, and aggresive posturing, often, if not always, victimizing women. In these circles, people have concluded that the only type of sexual intimacy that is not overtly evil is same-sex sexual intimacy where this problem is removed. Now obviously this is a very extreme view (I don't agree with it), but it goes to show how a culture/society can shift to define and understand sin. For a woman who is a "believer" in this context, she would consider it evil to have intercourse with a male. I have to wonder then, if Paul is right, if such a woman had intercourse with a man, an act that wouldn't stem "from faith," and anything that doesn't stem from faith is sin, if it would in fact be legitimate to say that act would be sinful for her.
If sin is a condition of the heart, and not an act per se...that seems to make a world of difference.
This is just being thrown out for discussion...hopefully it is food for thought.
Peace,
~E
| | Back to Top | | |
|
trosie
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 550
| Posted 3/22/2002 11:23 AM (GMT -6) | | YIKES, I had no idea what I was heading into. I think I am heading into troubled waters!!!  I REALLY like you guys -- darn it I don't like to disagree!!!!!!!
I know some very good and noble gay people! I know some awesome atheists. I know MANY people who are promiscuous lifestyles. I AM SO GLAD I DON'T HAVE TO JUDGE THEM!
Semeia: quote:
And love does not require us to identify our brother's sin. Usually it requires us to overlook it.
AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!!!!
I am NOT talking about any particular person's sin when I speak about sin. I realize that WE ALL have sin in our lives! Oh my goodness, I truly can relate with you when you speak about your inner most deep dark sin -- I thank God that he is SOOOO gracious and patient!
People struggle enough with knowing their weaknesses and failings I don't believe others pointing them out is going to AT ALL be productive. No one knows where the other has been, the issues the other is or has struggled with... I think we will agree that until we walk a mile in another's shoes we CANNOT and MUST NOT judge the person!
I realize that there are biological, physiological, emotional reasons for a person being gay. I also realize that a person who overeats or a person who cannot control drugs and alcohol have physiological and biological reasons for their behavior. I recently watched a movie on the human brain and the basic thing I found is that not all brains operate the same way (thus people are born with "thorns" in their flesh) However, regardless of what thorn we live with (defect in our genetic and physiological makeup) we are instructed through the word of God to strive toward living a life that is pleasing and acceptable to God. I thank God for sending Jesus to die on the cross because without this redemptive act not one would stand worthy, no not one. The question to ask ourselves is this: are we working at trying to move away from the lifestyles that we live in that are not according to the bible?
I don't care if the area a person struggles with is pornography, homosexuality, infidelity, obesity, alcoholism ... all of these are talked about throughout the bible as SIN. Of course we are NOT perfect and we all fall into sin BUT as we move and grow in our relationship with the Lord these obstacles and struggles should be addressed.
I don't think that a person who is sleeping around, or who is abusing drugs, or who is beating their kids, or who is living in a homosexual lifestyle should be leading the flock until they've dealt with this particular issue. I know that some of these are very difficult, if not almost impossible, to master. If a person struggles with such a deep structured sin that they are not able to move away from it then perhaps "professional" ministry is NOT what God has created them for.
Okay, come back at me
trosie
| | Back to Top | | |
| 103 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 1:42 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|