Hate the Sin and Not the Sinner?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mike182d
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mike182d

Guest
What does this really mean? Are our actions entirely seperate from our being? If the evil acts of a person can be seperated from who the person is, would that not also entail, necessarily, that the good acts of a person can be seperated from who the person is?

It would seem to be a logical conclusion then, when the converse is phrased, that God loves the good works, not the worker.

Christ says you shall know a tree by its fruit. Yet, this cannot be true if the fruit is not of the tree.

I’m not sure what to think about this yet; it just popped in my head. 🙂
 
…don’t be too distracted, and certainly don’t take me too seriously… i know where you are coming from… it’s all too often i see a post start out with the “hate the sin” disclaimer, only then to watch a few pirana rip to shreds someone who doesn’t quite agree to the “degree” that the helpful christians think they should…

i do see where you are coming from… no, i don’t think our actions are at all seperated from us, i think like the fruit they draw a pretty accurate picture of just who we are… i guess it comes down to the context of the phrase, and your interpretation…

Peace my friend:thumbsup:
 
I’ve always been uncomfortable with that expression myself. Maybe it should be “hate the sins committed and not the repentant sinner?”

How’s that?
 
40.png
Wildgraywolf:
I’ve always been uncomfortable with that expression myself. Maybe it should be “hate the sins committed and not the repentant sinner?”

How’s that?
Click to expand...
Ah, but what if the sinner is not repentant?
 
space ghost:
…don’t be too distracted, and certainly don’t take me too seriously… i know where you are coming from… it’s all too often i see a post start out with the “hate the sin” disclaimer, only then to watch a few pirana rip to shreds someone who doesn’t quite agree to the “degree” that the helpful christians think they should…

i do see where you are coming from… no, i don’t think our actions are at all seperated from us, i think like the fruit they draw a pretty accurate picture of just who we are… i guess it comes down to the context of the phrase, and your interpretation…

Peace my friend:thumbsup:
Click to expand...
lol, actually that’s how I got started thinking about it. I saw it in a post about homosexuals demanding the Church change and naturally “hate the sin, not the sinner” came up.

Its not that I would endorse hating people but rather that sin is not an entity in and of itself to be hated. It is not a tangible thing seperate from a concious being with free-will. Therefore, you really can’t hate sin on its own. It seems to be logical nonsense.

Now, wildgreywolf brough up a good point that I failed to mention, which is that there is a substantial difference between a sinner and a repentant sinner. One person embraces the sin they commit, while the other detests it. Clearly the “hate the sin, not the sinner” could be understood in the latter case but I have a problem reconciling it in the former.
 
40.png
mike182d:
lol, actually that’s how I got started thinking about it. I saw it in a post about homosexuals demanding the Church change and naturally “hate the sin, not the sinner” came up.

Its not that I would endorse hating people but rather that sin is not an entity in and of itself to be hated. It is not a tangible thing seperate from a concious being with free-will. Therefore, you really can’t hate sin on its own. It seems to be logical nonsense.

Now, wildgreywolf brough up a good point that I failed to mention, which is that there is a substantial difference between a sinner and a repentant sinner. One person embraces the sin they commit, while the other detests it. Clearly the “hate the sin, not the sinner” could be understood in the latter case but I have a problem reconciling it in the former.
Click to expand...
…true, i guess we all embrace the sin until we repent… we are all just trying to get to the other side… i think we should try to help each other get there, but i am reminded of the woman at the well, she wasn’t chastized by Christ, she was forgiven and asked to sin no more… now, which one of us have sinned no more… NOT ME!.. splinters and timbers as i see it … splinters and timbers…

Peace:thumbsup: http://www.silverbulletcomics.com/img/product_images/propic-00000288-01-full.jpg
 
40.png
mike182d:
Ah, but what if the sinner is not repentant?
Click to expand...
Good one, I shoulda seen that one comming…

Assuming we’ve tried to get this particular sinner to repent, but to no avial then I’d say “hate the sins committed and pray this stupid fool repents before he croaks.”

You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink or you can lead a sinner to the pool of forgiveness, but can’t make him repent.
 
40.png
Wildgraywolf:
You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink…
Click to expand...
Oh, I beg to differ. We have ways of making them drink…MUAHAHAHAHA!
 
Take God’s view in this. We are all sinners. As long as we are human, we are prone to sin. Jesus died for our sins BEFORE we were repentant. Not after. God loves us. But he definately hates our sins. Our sins keep us from God, which is why we need confession and all.

Here in Topeka we have a group that is a prime example. It is is “church” group. The “minister” and leader is a man named Fred Phelps. You may have heard of him. He is definately anti-homosexual. Some of the signs he and his group carry are sickening. Oh, to be more clear, their one and only “ministry” is to picket at different places. He has even gone to other states to picket.

Remember a few years ago there was that story about a homosexual young man who was beaten and tied to a post, then died? Fred and his group picketed the funeral. Like I said, some of their signs are sickening. They even include their children in this.

“God hates fags.” “A fag dies, God laughs.” “God hates america.” “God caused 9/11.” And these are some of their NICER signs!!
 
40.png
mike182d:
What does this really mean? Are our actions entirely seperate from our being? If the evil acts of a person can be seperated from who the person is, would that not also entail, necessarily, that the good acts of a person can be seperated from who the person is?

It would seem to be a logical conclusion then, when the converse is phrased, that God loves the good works, not the worker.

Christ says you shall know a tree by its fruit. Yet, this cannot be true if the fruit is not of the tree.

I’m not sure what to think about this yet; it just popped in my head. 🙂
Click to expand...
One (odium abominationis, or loathing) is that in which the intense dislike is concentrated primarily on the qualities or attributes of a person, and only secondarily, and as it were derivatively, upon the person himself.

The first-named species of hatred, in so far as it implies the reprobation of what is actually evil, is not a sin and may even represent a virtuous temper of soul. In other words, not only may I, but I even ought to, hate what is contrary to the moral law. Furthermore one may without sin go so far in the detestation of wrongdoing as to wish that which for its perpetrator is a very well-defined evil, yet under another aspect is a much more signal good. **For instance, it would be lawful to pray for the death of a perniciously active heresiarch with a view to putting a stop to his ravages among the Christian people. **Of course, it is clear that this apparent zeal must not be an excuse for catering to personal spite or party rancour. Still, even when the motive of one’s aversion is not impersonal, when, namely, it arises from the damage we may have sustained at the hands of others, we are not guilty of sin unless besides feeling indignation we yield to an aversion unwarranted by the by the hurt we have suffered. This aversion may be grievously or venially sinful in proportion to its excess over that which the injury would justify.

newadvent.org/cathen/07149b.htm

Those piranas…
 
This is a more complex subject than I had originally thought and a lot of excellent points were raised here that I had not considered.

God hates sin and He went/goes to great lengths to give us a means by which sins can be forgiven. The catch is that the sinner must cooperate with God to obtain His forgiveness. We can’t seperate the sin from the sinner, but God can remove the sin from the sinner.

I’m not sure it’s possible for God to hate the sinner, but rather the sinner says “I hate you God” by not repenting and accepting the forgiveness God continually offers. Sin is more that just doing things God forbids or doesn’t like, it also affects our relationship with God. When we choose to sin then we damage that relationship. When we confess and repent, God forgives and we restore that relationship and God wants to have an active personal relationship with us in this life as well as in the next. An unrepentant sinner then is saying to God “I don’t want to have anything to do with you.”

God does not give up or write-off the sinner, but keeps reaching out, calling time and time again in a many different ways until we die. At that point the decision of the sinner to remain unrepentant and un-forgiven is permanent and we reap what we sow.

Hate the sin and not the sinner… Until today I used to agree with that now I think it’s the biggest load of **** because it doesn’t address the necessity of the sinner to repent and seek God’s forgiveness. That’s something we should be doing for ourselves and our brothers & sisters.
 
Sometimes, the love that you show for a person who is sinful, might be the only exposure that person has to what Jesus’ teachings, as well as His death & resurrection are all about.
I once read where somebody said, " You may be the only Bible that a sinner ever reads".
But I don’t think that anybody has ever suggested that this kind of thing would be easy…
 
40.png
mike182d:
What does this really mean? Are our actions entirely seperate from our being? If the evil acts of a person can be seperated from who the person is, would that not also entail, necessarily, that the good acts of a person can be seperated from who the person is?

It would seem to be a logical conclusion then, when the converse is phrased, that God loves the good works, not the worker.

Christ says you shall know a tree by its fruit. Yet, this cannot be true if the fruit is not of the tree.

I’m not sure what to think about this yet; it just popped in my head. 🙂
Click to expand...
In a song by the late famous Christian artist (died one day before his was to receive his first Catholic communion btw) called “Brother’s keeper” we have lyrics that I think are amazingly insightful:
"Now the plummer’s got a drip in his spigot
The mechanic’s got a clank in his car
And the preacher’s thinking thoughts that are wicked
And the lover’s got a lonely heart
My friends ain’t the way I wish they were
They are just the way they are
Click to expand...
And I will be my brother’s keeper
Not the one who judges him
I won’t despise him for his weakness
I won’t regard him for his strength
I won’t take away his freedom
I will help him learn to stand
And I will ~ I will be my brother’s keeper
Click to expand...
Now this roof has got a few missing shingles
But at least we got ourselves a roof
And they say that she’s a fallen angel
I wonder if she recalls when she last flew
There’s no point in pointing fingers
Unless you’re pointing to the truth
Click to expand...
And I will be my brother’s keeper
Not the one who judges him
I won’t despise him for his weakness
I won’t regard him for his strength
I won’t take away his freedom
I will help him learn to stand
And I will ~ I will be my brother’s keeper
Click to expand...
I will be my brother’s keeper
Not the one who judges him
I won’t despise him for his weakness
I won’t regard him for his strength
I won’t take away his freedom
I will help him learn to stand
And I will ~ I will be my brother’s keeper"
Click to expand...
The part I most wanted to point him out is “I won’t despise him for his weakness, I will not regard him for his strength.”

That blew me away when I first heard it, but it makes sense to me now.

Alan
 
when in doubt think as Jesus would!-He would love the sinner and love the good he does but of course He would not love the bad he does, even though He loves the one who does the bad. The person who does bad deeds is still connected to those deeds just as they are connected to good deeds-that’s where confession comes in!-to disconnect ourselves from the bad and reconnect with the good-yippee!!! 😃
 
Hey I’m new here…I’ve been wondering about this phrase a lot myself lately. Here is my view on it, but I’m probably way off as far as theology goes. After praying about what to do in these situations, this is what I came up with.

God created us all in His image and likeness. Before we came into physical being, God knew us. Before we commited our first sin, God saw our beauty and purity and loved His creation. When we sin, we distance ourselves from God. Evil is a lack of due good; therefore, when we sin, when we commit evil, we are not being who God created us to be. God wants us all to be saints, to be holy, to be with Him in Heaven. When we sin, of course He hates the sin, but He knows that we can always come back to Him in the Sacrament of Reconciliation and become closer to Him.

When I see my little brother going through hard times, I don’t see a horrible person. The reason I hate his sins is because when he commits these actions, he is moving further and further from the Truth, from God. He is disintegrating. Sin makes us empty.

Imagine this: You are looking into a lake. In the reflection, you can see the light of the moon. All of a sudden, a strong wind picks up and disturbs the water until you can’t even see the light even more.

The lake at its stillest, most peaceful moment is our soul in the state of grace. The moon is God, reflected in all persons. The wind is sin, and the consequence of the wind (sin) is that it muddles the vision of the moon (God).

What I hate about sin and its effects is that it keeps us from being who God made us to be. We become twisted and deformed. Of course, there is always the possibility of redemption and forgiveness, but until this is sought, I will continue to despise sin and the monsters it creates.

This being said, I do hate the sin. I also hate what sin transforms us into. Maybe this sounds harsh. What do you all think?

Peace and God bless,
nikki
 
I’ve always taken this phrase to mean that while the actions of the person are not acceptable, the person who commits them still has the ability at some future time to change.

Usually, this phrase is applied to a concious sin, one where the person committing the sin is able to turn away from it before he or she actually acts upon the impulse.

You cannot rely on historical evidence of the sin however. Just because this individual may have committed the sin many times in the past does not mean that he is unrepentant NOW. Perhaps he/she is trapped in an overwhelming urge to commit this sin, such as a recurring sexual urge, that the individual is finding extremely difficult to fight on his/her own, or simply dosen’t know how to fight these urges, so rather than suffer, they give in.

It may even be a sin that the individual themselves hate and want to end but again, dosen’t know how or hasn’t the strength to end on their own.

When we hate the sin but not the sinner, we are telling the individual we are there for them, to give them whatever support we can when they are ready to do battle with the sin that controls their life.

God Bless.
 
40.png
mike182d:
What does this really mean? Are our actions entirely seperate from our being? If the evil acts of a person can be seperated from who the person is, would that not also entail, necessarily, that the good acts of a person can be seperated from who the person is?

It would seem to be a logical conclusion then, when the converse is phrased, that God loves the good works, not the worker.

Christ says you shall know a tree by its fruit. Yet, this cannot be true if the fruit is not of the tree.

I’m not sure what to think about this yet; it just popped in my head. 🙂
Click to expand...
Here’s is something interesting, I saw this exact saying under quotes by Ghandi.

Nobody gives him credit for saying it if he was the person to coin the phrase. If so, it is interesting that such a Christian idea was first stated by a nonprofessed Christian and that now it is used frequently by Christians.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top