Comments on: Hate the Sin. Love the Sinner.

By: Mike Potter

Mike Potter — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 04:17:07 +0000

Yes, Brian, I can find other things to post about (and I will) but I don’t agree that the post is moot. This post was written as a response to those who loosely throw out the statement “love the sinner and hate the sin” yet continue to be judgmental and unloving toward those in sin. This statement is often used by Christians these days when talking about homosexuals, adulterers, and the like. The blog was read by many, and my hope is that it will cause those who did read it to hesitate and look inward before opening their mouths…myself included.

By: Brian

Brian — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 22:10:05 +0000

Oops I meant “moot” and not “mute.” I need to proof before submiting! Please, again, hate the error and not the error maker.

By: Brian

Brian — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 22:04:41 +0000

I think the whole post is a bit mute. We all agree that we, as followers of Jesus, are to hate sin. And we all agree that we, as followers of Jesus, are to love sinners. Done, readily accepted. If we do indeed hate sin and love sinners in spite of our own sin or in a patronizing, I’m better than you attitude then our sin is evident. However, that doesn’t preclude the reality of loving sinners and hating sin – the statement standing on it’s own is right, true and wholly biblical. If you don’t want to use the statement yourself, fine. But don’t disqualify it simply because some may forget it’s context and the log in their own eye.
I will go on seeking to love all sinners and hate both their sin and my own. This will be a life long journey, but I am committed to it. Surely you can find something else to post about. Are you not straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel?

By: Mike Potter

Mike Potter — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 19:12:50 +0000

Brian:

I will grant that my statement “no where in the Scriptures are we given license to allow hate to be a part of how we view other people” may be too strong in light of Revelation 2:6 which is a commendation from the Lord of the Ephesian church’s hatred for the works of the evil Nicolatians.

However, I still am not convinced that this should be seen as a mandate to “love the sinner, hate the sin” especially when we have such a hard time doing this without feeling disgust, disdain, and hatred for the person as well. Also, we must not forget that the commendation comes after a condemnation by the Lord of their own sin (forgetting their first love) which is my point exactly. We should never feel license to exclusively hate another person’s sin without at least hating our own sin. If the Ephesian church read these words and only walked away with the commendation of hatred for someone else’s sin without feeling repulsed by their own sin and falling on their knees in repentance, then they would have totally missed the point (and run the risk of severe discipline by the Lord – verse 5).

I think it would do us well to exercise our license to hate our own sin and worry a lot less about other people’s sin…which is my point. When we allow ourselves to “hate” the sin of others while forgetting to hate our own sin, it produces legalism, jugdmentalism, disdain for others, and just plain crusty-ness.

By: Jesse

Jesse — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 19:00:38 +0000

Brian,
I’d love to see a good response to Evonne’s thoughtful postings. Perhaps you could dialogue rather than deflect. Thanks for the verses and the counter thoughts. A little more content and a little less adhominem flavor would be great.

By: Evonne

Evonne — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 16:04:45 +0000

Thank you, I only feel corrected and not rejected as a person. I appreciate your kindness especially since spelling errors cannot be classified as life-dominating sins, although in my case…well.

By: Brian

Brian — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 15:23:53 +0000

“Sited” should actually be “cited” yet I am hating the spelling, not the speller.

By: Evonne

Evonne — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 22:51:43 +0000

Nope! I cannot tell you what hermeneutic I am applying…and I said, “almost as an aside” anyway, not implying that it wasn’t a point–just not the main point. My point being that the theme of the chapter is a rebuke because the Ephesians have “abandoned the love” they had at first. The passages in Psalms are obviously not to be disregarded. They are imprecations. The curses are God’s to fulfill and they are directed at those who hate God. They are an appeal to God to demonstrate His righteousness.
One cannot read Scripture without recognizing how God feels about sin. And the Cross says it all. Jesus demonstrated astounding and remarkable love to the adulterous woman. He didn’t berate her further–in fact the lesson was to “God’s people”. He declared that He didn’t condemn her and instructed her to “sin no more.” Our deepest desire as Believers must be to see people come to Christ for His glory. Jesus taught us to love God and love our neighbor as ourselves. Perhaps if we at least began there we would understand more and our hermeneutics would not be a mystery. I desire to understand God’s word in context. I am not sure that the verses sited are in keeping with the point of Mike’s blog.

By: Brian

Brian — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 17:09:25 +0000

Oh and can you tell me what hermeneutic you apply in deciding what message of Jesus is an “aside” and which ones are the real “messages?”

By: Brian

Brian — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 16:58:30 +0000

Psalm 26:5
Psalm 101:3
Psalm 139:21-22
Just to mention a few….