hate the sin/love the sinner (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


erieangel -> hate the sin/love the sinner (4/9/2012 6:52:25 PM)

I was having a discussion with somebody today when he brought up the phrase "hate the sin, love the sinner" saying that he is a Christian and that he lives by this Christian dogma.

However, this phrase is not in the Bible--no place. And further, it was not even a Christian who first uttered this phrase, but Mahatma Gandhi.
Today, the phrase is used by fundies as an excuse to beat up on homosexuals, pro-choice supporters, immigrants, women who (gasp) dare to want their health insurance to provide their birth control as a part of their no-copay preventative coverage, and every other group that does not proscribe to the fundamentalist narrow view of the world.

Oddly, this guy claimed the phrase to justify being friends with somebody who is not good for him. Since becoming friends, the guy I was having debate with has been robbed, used, gotten suspended from school and nearly lost his housing because of this toxic friendship. But he hates the sin and loves the sinner. He also forgives and forgets. I told him I also forgive. I've forgiven my-now-ex husband for cheating on me. I also divorced his ass. Forgiveness doesn't mean going back for more abuse. And hating the sin/loving the sinner doesn't mean that either.




kalikshama -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/10/2012 11:02:20 AM)

quote:

Forgiveness doesn't mean going back for more abuse.


Ya, I'd had a gf for 15 years but stopped seeing her when she got hooked on crack and started stealing from me.

[image]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/__HQWKX8g3_0/SAQI36hpYkI/AAAAAAAAAXE/td7U_my9ODI/s400/MindlessDogma.jpg[/image]




kalikshama -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/10/2012 11:05:04 AM)

I see that Gandhi's intent has been perverted:

[image]local://upfiles/1052865/D48C8506F3004BF49263D62BD15877A4.jpg[/image]




Lockit -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/10/2012 11:13:10 AM)

Actually, you may be right and wrong in concluding that the bible doesn't say this. It may not say it in those exact words, but there are many verses that use different wording to say the same thing. Christians have combined the meaning of these verses and often use... hate the sin, not the sinner.

I would get scripture references for you, but they are high up on my book shelf due to moving things around and I am not up to climbing to get to them. Nor up to googling it. lol

As for the rest of your comments... accountability is high or should be. Christains are called to be wise and are even told to walk away in certain situations. (I no longer believe, but believe there must be some common sense applied to the application of what one believes and believe there is a foundation for this in the bible.) One can be wise, love the sinner as they percieve them to be a sinner, without damaging their own life or faith. However... they ought to look carefully around a few logs in their eyes before they go out to save the world. lol In other words... watch your own back door before you mind someone elses.




needlesandpins -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/10/2012 12:40:16 PM)

sorry but anyone that toxic in my life would soon be booted out of it.

i don't care about the whys and what-nots. just no.

needles




risktaker9 -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/10/2012 12:46:53 PM)

I think it's always a fine line between not stereotyping someone and giving them room for making improvements....or paying attention to what they do and not being stupid by expecting something different. People show us who they are, if we keep holding out hoping they'll change then that is futile and actually not really fair to them in some ways.

I have no problem as well getting rid of drama, I detest it and won't be taken for a ride if I can help it.




littlewonder -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/10/2012 7:40:00 PM)

While he may be not be correct in who the quote was from, the bible states the same thing just not in those words. I for one can hate a sin but still love a sinner. There are people who I have really not liked some of the vices they had in their lives but I still could get along with that person and still be on friendly terms with them. I had no hate against them. While I would not preach to them about their vices and how I feel about them, I would probably talk to them about their vices and ask them if they are comfortable with it in their lives or ask them if they ever thought about others around them who may be hurt by their sins. If they said they were ok with it then I would just shut up from that point on. If they truly wanted to change it then I would talk to them further about those sins and help them to change them if they are willing.

Then again I can't even think of anyone that I can say I hate. To hate imo is just so negative and dark and not something I allow in my life. I either like you or feel indifferent to you.




sunshinemiss -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/10/2012 9:33:51 PM)

Savior complex, pure and simple.




LizDeluxe -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/11/2012 6:11:21 AM)

Unless the sinner is a really good fuck.




FrostedFlake -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/11/2012 8:53:39 AM)

Hate is a sin.

And, point of order, the Bible requires that almost everyone be stoned to death. And first of all the man, woman or child who refuses to throw a stone.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+17&version=KJV

Get right down to it, reading the Bible is a sin. It has caused more destruction than any other piece of literature. It should be banned and burned.




DesFIP -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/11/2012 9:30:00 AM)

When it comes down to cases though, it has to be two disinterested eyewitnesses. No hearsay and no one who can in anyway benefit. So if your two best buds swore they snuck into your tent and saw your wife having sex with someone else, that testimony would not count.

In actuality, there are no recorded cases of stoning because of adultery.




MrBukani -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/11/2012 9:34:50 AM)

Sounds like a celibate rabbi.




kalikshama -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/11/2012 12:54:39 PM)

St. Augustine's letter 211 (c. 424) contains the phrase Cum dilectione hominum et odio vitiorum, which translates roughly as "With love for mankind and hatred of sins."




erieangel -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/11/2012 5:52:14 PM)

Thanks for the replies everybody. That was just something I had to get off my chest. I had a long with the kid's mother today. She just shook her head at her son's idiocy.





LookieNoNookie -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/11/2012 7:00:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel

I was having a discussion with somebody today when he brought up the phrase "hate the sin, love the sinner" saying that he is a Christian and that he lives by this Christian dogma.

However, this phrase is not in the Bible--no place. And further, it was not even a Christian who first uttered this phrase, but Mahatma Gandhi.
Today, the phrase is used by fundies as an excuse to beat up on homosexuals, pro-choice supporters, immigrants, women who (gasp) dare to want their health insurance to provide their birth control as a part of their no-copay preventative coverage, and every other group that does not proscribe to the fundamentalist narrow view of the world.

Oddly, this guy claimed the phrase to justify being friends with somebody who is not good for him. Since becoming friends, the guy I was having debate with has been robbed, used, gotten suspended from school and nearly lost his housing because of this toxic friendship. But he hates the sin and loves the sinner. He also forgives and forgets. I told him I also forgive. I've forgiven my-now-ex husband for cheating on me. I also divorced his ass. Forgiveness doesn't mean going back for more abuse. And hating the sin/loving the sinner doesn't mean that either.



Yeah but....what better thing to use in life, than an innocuous phrase which can't be linked to their own religion, to debase homosexuals?




LanceHughes -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/11/2012 7:20:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

When it comes down to cases though, it has to be two disinterested eyewitnesses. No hearsay and no one who can in anyway benefit. So if your two best buds swore they snuck into your tent and saw your wife having sex with someone else, that testimony would not count.

In actuality, there are no recorded cases of stoning because of adultery.


Oh, I so very, very wish you were not so very, very wrong.....


http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/africa/8366197.stm
 
That is, yes, the BBC has recorded "cases of stoning because of adultery."






Edited to fix link - sorry had numbers screwed up.




DesFIP -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/11/2012 7:33:34 PM)

Link doesn't work. However, I'm assuming you're referencing modern Arab states. I was referring to ancient Israelites.






FrostedFlake -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/12/2012 1:46:23 AM)

Desfip.

25 years ago I met a lady. In minutes it became apparent that she is gay. At that point I said something that, very fortunately, I cannot now accurately recall. Being the very bright and capable person that she is, in seconds those words were stuffed back from whence they came. I was invited to chew them over as long and as thoroughly as I liked, and decide for myself whether to spit or swallow. Today, this lady is my best friend. She is moving back to Seattle from Pennsylvania, along about May, and has invited me to live with with her.

I am going to tell you something. I don't like what you have said. I don't like it because you have made clear that you do not understand the religion you support. But that you nevertheless support it. In addition, you have shown that you believe that the reason I do not support Catholicism is because I do not understand it. I suspect that these notions have been handed you en bloc by your forbears, and that you have never actually sat yourself down and thought these important ideas through. We are going to do that, now.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+7%3A53-8%3A11&version=KJV

quote:

John 7:53-8:11
King James Version (KJV)
53And every man went unto his own house.

John 8

1Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.

2And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

3And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

4They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

5Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

6This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

7So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

8And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

9And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

10When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

11She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.


Jesus wrote in the dust of the ground a new law. A law in opposition to the old law, said to be handed man by God. Said by priests. This was his purpose in visiting this planet. Not to reign in might and glory, but to inspire change. It is important to me that you understand what change it was that he was attempting to create, because I have to live with you.

Jesus Christ did not rely upon the power implicit in claiming to speak for much less actually speaking as God. He did not rely either upon the law or its' letter. Nor did he rely upon cleverness, flattery or evasions to win his point. Jesus Christ did not even go so far as to even make a point. What he did was reach into each persons heart and lead them to decide for themselves what the right thing was and whether or not to do it.

Money is power and power is money. The Pharisees had a lot of each of these and Christ was telling people to listen to their hearts. And letting them. This had a lot to do with why Christ wound up nailed to a tree. Not everyone agreed with him. It is still that way today. Two of the major branches of Christianity are the followers of John and the followers of Peter. Peter wound up nailed to a tree, upside down, on Palatine Hill. Because that is where the money, power and influence was, and he wanted it. John went in the other direction. Johns' followers spent a lot of their time getting wiped out by Peters' followers. See : Catharism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharism

The difference between Peter and John is that John would try to help people and Peter would try to control them. The followers of John would "Not Kill". The followers of Peter would burn people at the stake, in order to terrify people, into doing what they said, which they claimed was equivalent to the voice of God.

Stop following Peter. Start following John. I mean, if you cannot follow your own example.

Thank you.

Note to Admin ; Don't remove this post. Instead, move this thread to Politics and Religion. Thank you.




searching4mysir -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/12/2012 2:52:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake

Desfip.

25 years ago I met a lady. In minutes it became apparent that she is gay. At that point I said something that, very fortunately, I cannot now accurately recall. Being the very bright and capable person that she is, in seconds those words were stuffed back from whence they came. I was invited to chew them over as long and as thoroughly as I liked, and decide for myself whether to spit or swallow. Today, this lady is my best friend. She is moving back to Seattle from Pennsylvania, along about May, and has invited me to live with with her.

I am going to tell you something. I don't like what you have said. I don't like it because you have made clear that you do not understand the religion you support. But that you nevertheless support it. In addition, you have shown that you believe that the reason I do not support Catholicism is because I do not understand it. I suspect that these notions have been handed you en bloc by your forbears, and that you have never actually sat yourself down and thought these important ideas through. We are going to do that, now.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+7%3A53-8%3A11&version=KJV

quote:

John 7:53-8:11
King James Version (KJV)
53And every man went unto his own house.

John 8

1Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.

2And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

3And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

4They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

5Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

6This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

7So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

8And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

9And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

10When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

11She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.


Jesus wrote in the dust of the ground a new law. A law in opposition to the old law, said to be handed man by God. Said by priests. This was his purpose in visiting this planet. Not to reign in might and glory, but to inspire change. It is important to me that you understand what change it was that he was attempting to create, because I have to live with you.

Jesus Christ did not rely upon the power implicit in claiming to speak for much less actually speaking as God. He did not rely either upon the law or its' letter. Nor did he rely upon cleverness, flattery or evasions to win his point. Jesus Christ did not even go so far as to even make a point. What he did was reach into each persons heart and lead them to decide for themselves what the right thing was and whether or not to do it.

Money is power and power is money. The Pharisees had a lot of each of these and Christ was telling people to listen to their hearts. And letting them. This had a lot to do with why Christ wound up nailed to a tree. Not everyone agreed with him. It is still that way today. Two of the major branches of Christianity are the followers of John and the followers of Peter. Peter wound up nailed to a tree, upside down, on Palatine Hill. Because that is where the money, power and influence was, and he wanted it. John went in the other direction. Johns' followers spent a lot of their time getting wiped out by Peters' followers. See : Catharism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharism

The difference between Peter and John is that John would try to help people and Peter would try to control them. The followers of John would "Not Kill". The followers of Peter would burn people at the stake, in order to terrify people, into doing what they said, which they claimed was equivalent to the voice of God.

Stop following Peter. Start following John. I mean, if you cannot follow your own example.

Thank you.

Note to Admin ; Don't remove this post. Instead, move this thread to Politics and Religion. Thank you.


We don't know exactly what Jesus wrote as Scripture doesn't tell us. it could have been a new law (though Jesus claims not to abolish the Old Law but to fulfill it). Some believe it was the names of the men in his presence who had been with the adulterous woman [;)]




sunshinemiss -> RE: hate the sin/love the sinner (4/12/2012 4:43:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake

Desfip. <snip>


I am going to tell you something. I don't like what you have said. I don't like it because you have made clear that you do not understand the religion you support. But that you nevertheless support it. In addition, you have shown that you believe that the reason I do not support Catholicism is because I do not understand it. I suspect that these notions have been handed you en bloc by your forbears, and that you have never actually sat yourself down and thought these important ideas through. We are going to do that, now.


Celeste is Christian? Huh. I always thought she was Jewish. Not that I care either way... but I thought I saw something about matzoh ball soup or ... Well whatever.

I'm gonna go study Buddhism now with my Jewish homeboy Jesus... cause you know, while he loves you, I'm his favorite! [;)]




Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.2333984