Degrees of sin

[Benjamin Burch]

The point was made in another thread that equating sins that aren't equal otherwise makes sense, because they're both sin, and all sin is equal as sin.

Ok. I can track so far.

However, this raises a question in my mind. Now, setting aside the fact that we do believe that certain sins are worse than others - for instance, we do believe that homosexuality is worse than gossip. We might say we don't, but we're usually lying if our actions mean anything - are there in fact some sins that are worse than others?

I take Jesus' words on adultery and murder as my starting point here. I think Jesus was being rhetorical, but most probably won't go with me there. That is, I do believe lusting after someone is failing to love them, and hating someone is failing to love them and so both are sinful, but I don't think that Jesus meant one is actually guilty of murder and adultery. However, let's say he did mean that equation literally.

Is there not a point where we, as humans, have to say that an affair is worse than lust? Meaning, if I'm married and I have a coworker and things get to a certain point where I've thought about sleeping with her, but I collect myself, get my act together, and don't sleep with her.... isn't that a victory? Wouldn't it have been worse if I had actually slept with her? Shouldn't we say that having an actual affair would be worse?

Shouldn't we say the same for murder? I can hate someone and want to kill them all I want... isn't it a victory when I decide against killing that person?

To put it in more important terms....

Wouldn't it have been a victory if Hitler had only desired the Holocaust, but never carried it out?

[Steven Burton]

Shouldn't we say the same for murder? I can hate someone and want to kill them all I want... isn't it a victory when I decide against killing that person?

I think this is key to me when we decide against it does this mean the hate has left and our view of them has changed? Or do we still have this hate and let it fester inside us so much that we view them as less than human.

[Jim Chabot]

Good stuff Ben! And yes I agree, it's always worse when we actually carry it out, and it's always a victory when we turn away from sin.

But I don't think that has been the conversation here, the conversation is that some raise objection to how our response has been unequal in the instance of certain sin. Thus the point is made that sin is sin, regardless. And I can agree, if in the context of sin as hamartia, or missing the mark. I think that this is where Jesus is pointing to as he declares intent to be sin. And yet as humans we have no way of dealing with the sin of intent, as we lack perfect knowledge regarding the heart of another.

While all sin is indeed equal in that it misses the mark, we are not instructed to deal with sin in a consistent manner. While the equality remains, the remedy in human terms varies. There are some sins which we must confess one to another and ask forgiveness, and there are sins known only to God, where we ask forgiveness to Him alone. There exists also sin in which it is required that the people of God take action, we are instructed to turn the person out of the church and to cease in our dealings. The sin remains equal, the remedy varies.

[Shea Zellweger]

Jesus said on several occasions that not all sin is equal. For instance, blasphemy against the spirit is unforgivable. Causing a child to stumble is worse than sinning against an adult. Leading others into sin is worse than committing personal sin. And so on. All sin separates us from God, but God apparently does not view all sin with equal levels of severity. That is, assuming Jesus speaks for God... does anyone here have a problem with that assumption?

[Gene Tatsch]

Thanks for raising this issue!
Thus far, I see these categories:

1. Temptation - lust grabs for us, we successfully fight it off
   => not sin
2. Temptation savored - Jesus said this is sin. It's not externalized, no one sees it, it may (not) be actualized
   => sin to be resolved between me & God alone. Without the external complications.
3. Temptation actualized -
   = sin, sometimes visible to others. May now include resolution/restitution with others, with external complications down through generations.

Other ways to slice & dice?

I do believe that our corporate ease at categorizing "major" and "minor" sins is linked to the relative impotence of the visible church - I can't see that murder is at all "different" than gossip - in fact Jesus states they're equal.

[Jon Bemis]

Too be honest I've never been able to wrap my brain around the "all sins are equal" concept, except perhaps that sin causes separation. Shea pointed out that Jesus differentiated between kinds of sin. One thing is clear though, the consequences we experience in this life are not equal for all sins. The consequences of having an affair are far worse than lusting - just ask anyone who has had an affair or who has been betrayed by someone who had an affair. The consequences of murder are far worse than wishing someone were dead - just ask the loved ones of the murdered person.

[Ryan Scott]

I believe all sin is the same, but the consequences of individual sins vary wildly, often in ways we never realize.

[John Reilly]

Historically the church has dealt with this issue and determined sins might be venial sins and mortal sins. Certainly the consequences for sins varies.

[Todd Erickson]

I think that we like to break sin down into 'stuff between us and God' and "stuff between us and other people', but God doesn't seem to operate that way. I.e., sins against other people are a sin against God because they're a sin against other people. Relational.

If I bear hatred in my heart to another, it builds walls between me and everybody. Once it's safe for me to hate somebody, then everybody becomes a possible enemy.

Adherent's of the Mosaic law were judged righteous by the things they didn't do. But Jesus said that people who followed after Him would have hearts that would eschew holding onto anger for others, lust, etc that they would pursue holiness with others in the same way that they did with God, or they could not be holy with God.

To even break things down into individual acts is to say that some things are outside of the law of love, which is dangerous.

[Jim Chabot]

I may be learning something through this thread. The teaching that all sin is equal has been taught in the church since I can remember, and I've accepted it. Excepting (thanks John Reilly) back in the days when I was raised Catholic. I'm starting to wonder if this "all sin being equal" teaching may be flawed, I need to look deeper.

[Shea Zellweger]

I may be learning something through this thread. The teaching that all sin is equal has been taught in the church since I can remember, and I've accepted it. Excepting (thanks John Reilly) back in the days when I was raised Catholic. I'm starting to wonder if this "all sin being equal" teaching may be flawed, I need to look deeper.

be careful, or you may find out just how deep the rabbit hole goes.

[Steven Burton]

I may be learning something through this thread. The teaching that all sin is equal has been taught in the church since I can remember, and I've accepted it. Excepting (thanks John Reilly) back in the days when I was raised Catholic. I'm starting to wonder if this "all sin being equal" teaching may be flawed, I need to look deeper.

I actually grew up hearing the opposite and moved toward the equality.

[Jim Chabot]

be careful, or you may find out just how deep the rabbit hole goes.

Hey, I followed the "a holy God cannot look upon sin" rabbit hole all the way to the bottom didn't I? And don't rabbits actually live in warrens rather than holes?

[Paul DeBaufer]

I may be learning something through this thread. The teaching that all sin is equal has been taught in the church since I can remember, and I've accepted it. Excepting (thanks John Reilly) back in the days when I was raised Catholic. I'm starting to wonder if this "all sin being equal" teaching may be flawed, I need to look deeper.

I'm with you here Jim.

[Dale Cozby]

Salvation is a gift that covers all sins big or small.
Reward is clearly seen in scripture as being merit based. but based on what?
Each will receive for what he has done(or not done) based on what he/she knows to be right or wrong it would appear. So one could say it is relative to knowing the truth and the teachings about righteousness.
So if we love fully and become the servant of all then our reward will be great in the life hereafter. It would make sense that punishment would also be merit based.

Eternal life is a gift, eternal death a condemnation. Reward and punishment is based on what we do or not do.

To the one much is given much is required....and the one who knows his master will and doesn't do it is beaten bad while the one who does not know will still be beaten but...it won't be as bad. Punishment then is relative as well as reward.

[Pete Vecchi]

John 19:10-11 (NIV, 1984): “Do you refuse to speak to me?” Pilate said. “Don’t you realize I have power either to free you or to crucify you?” Jesus answered, “You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.”

I guess that all sins aren't equal.

I'm not sure that we as humans, though, have the right to decide which sins are worse than others. Really, does it make a difference? Which sin--regardless of how great or small it may or mat not be--does not separate us from God?

Now, I can understand that there are sins that may tend to make greater differences in interpersonal relationships and/or with "society" in general. But I submit that perhaps our various "societies" don't always have it right--even "church" societies. Just look at history.

Many "church" societies in this nation believed that slavery was not sinful less than 2 centuries ago; that means for over 1800 years after Christ's atoning work on the cross, some christians believed that slavery was not a moral evil.

Until just a couple of decades or so ago, many Christian denominations looked at divorce as the almost unforgivable sin--even though many women suffered physical abuse at the hands of their husbands.

I have often said that we tend, in our various cultures, to have "sins du jour." These tend to vary from time to time and culture to culture.

But in reality, is it really important for we in the church to rank sins? Sure, in the civil cultures in which we find ourselves, we might have to abide by legal systems so that we can have a semblance of order in our societies; we wouldn't want to have the same punishments for driving 67 miles-per-hour in a 65 zone as we would for someone using weapons of mass destruction in a crowded metropolitan area.

But in the church, should we find it important to "rank" sins? Is it truly what God wants us to be concerned with, or is it something that we are concerned with institutionally primarily so that we can judge others?

[Benjamin Hobbs]

The point was made in another thread that equating sins that aren't equal otherwise makes sense, because they're both sin, and all sin is equal as sin.

Ok. I can track so far.

However, this raises a question in my mind. Now, setting aside the fact that we do believe that certain sins are worse than others - for instance, we do believe that homosexuality is worse than gossip. We might say we don't, but we're usually lying if our actions mean anything - are there in fact some sins that are worse than others?

I take Jesus' words on adultery and murder as my starting point here. I think Jesus was being rhetorical, but most probably won't go with me there. That is, I do believe lusting after someone is failing to love them, and hating someone is failing to love them and so both are sinful, but I don't think that Jesus meant one is actually guilty of murder and adultery. However, let's say he did mean that equation literally.

Is there not a point where we, as humans, have to say that an affair is worse than lust? Meaning, if I'm married and I have a coworker and things get to a certain point where I've thought about sleeping with her, but I collect myself, get my act together, and don't sleep with her.... isn't that a victory? Wouldn't it have been worse if I had actually slept with her? Shouldn't we say that having an actual affair would be worse?

Shouldn't we say the same for murder? I can hate someone and want to kill them all I want... isn't it a victory when I decide against killing that person?

To put it in more important terms....

Wouldn't it have been a victory if Hitler had only desired the Holocaust, but never carried it out?

I think I'll stick with Lewis and say that the greater sins are just the greater loves slightly perverted. And that those sins which effect the heart are worse than those which effect the body.

[Jim Chabot]

But in the church, should we find it important to "rank" sins? Is it truly what God wants us to be concerned with, or is it something that we are concerned with institutionally primarily so that we can judge others?

Perhaps not so much that we should rank them, and certainly we shouldn't be relying upon our own emotions and sense of wrong. After all our sense of wrong comes at least in part from our own depraved heart, we need guidance from the One who is perfect.

And we are told that there exist certain categories of sin, to which our responsibility, if we are to be obedient, is to turn these folks out of the church, and to cease Christian fellowship with them, we are to treat them as unbelievers.

But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

There it is, six categories by which we should be sure do not exist within our fellowship. I think that we generally do a pretty good job with the last category, although we rarely see them, we tend not to tolerate extortioners. Would we tolerate a drunk or a railer? I would suggest that we might for a time, but not very long. How about an idolater, someone who actively promotes a false worship within our church? Nope, not very long. Someone who is covetous? Not so easy, but in the extreme, I think that we would eventually turn our shoulder. But fornicators?

[Hans Deventer]

No, all sin is not the same.

47 “The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. 48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. (Luke 12) (That was your text, Dale)

So the holier you pretend to be, the heavier the beating for your sins.

39 Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind.” 40 Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, “What? Are we blind too?”
41 Jesus said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains. (John 9)

If you have eyes to see, read ..........

[Pete Vecchi]

Perhaps not so much that we should rank them, and certainly we shouldn't be relying upon our own emotions and sense of wrong. After all our sense of wrong comes at least in part from our own depraved heart, we need guidance from the One who is perfect.

1 Cor 5:11
But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

And we are told that there exist certain categories of sin, to which our responsibility, if we are to be obedient, is to turn these folks out of the church, and to cease Christian fellowship with them, we are to treat them as unbelievers.

There it is, six categories by which we should be sure do not exist within our fellowship. I think that we generally do a pretty good job with the last category, although we rarely see them, we tend not to tolerate extortioners. Would we tolerate a drunk or a railer? I would suggest that we might for a time, but not very long. How about an idolater, someone who actively promotes a false worship within our church? Nope, not very long. Someone who is covetous? Not so easy, but in the extreme, I think that we would eventually turn our shoulder. But fornicators?

So, are we to tolerate certain amounts of some sins but not of others? The alcoholic who becomes a Christian but who "falls off the wagon" and triggers chemical dependencies in his/her system that causes the person to think irrationally and continue drink alcohol should be shunned?

How about the person who is new to Christ and has been co-habiting with another person for years. Neither is nor has been married to anyone else, they are not legally married to each other, they are committed to one another, yet something in one or both of their pasts gets them to not trust the legal system and what legal marriage would do and the legal responsibilities it would place on them. That would make them legally "fornicators." Should the church work with them or shun them?

I'm not trying to argue, but to ask honest questions. My sense is that it is at least possible to interpret 1 Cor. 5:11 as Paul addressing a specific congregation at a specific time due to specific circumstances surrounding a specific culture within a specific community rather than making this an absolute statement for everyone in every congregation. I especially say this in light of the 6th verse where Paul alludes to their "boasting" (NIV, 1984). I'm not saying that this is what Paul meant, but am pointing to the possibility that he meant it for a specific situation rather than in general way.

Well, I must leave this morning, knowing that our congregation which generally has about 20-25 people per Sunday morning worship service is likely to be down by 14 people this morning due to various family schedule conflicts. Does my sometimes wishing that the congregation to which God has me currently assigned was bigger and more financially stable and sometimes thinking that it might be nice to have a couple of those "rich" people (whom the President wants to pay more in taxes) would be members of our congregation and tithers to boot make me covetous?

[Dale Cozby]

No, all sin is not the same.

47 “The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. 48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. (Luke 12) (That was your text, Dale)

So the holier you pretend to be, the heavier the beating for your sins.

39 Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind.” 40 Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, “What? Are we blind too?”
41 Jesus said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains. (John 9)

If you have eyes to see, read ..........

I think Jesus' words apply to everyone with equal force but in a relative manner. A person who has come from a life of ease among a people of ease and has chosen to ignore the poor(they see not) will still guilty but will they punished more or less for thier lavish lifestyle in a people of lavish lifestyles or punished more or less because they have not been taught rightly about caring for the poor? Does God reveal all one's sins from the beginning or just the ones He wants you to change now?

It is easy to pass judgment on others for thier sin when it so easy to see them from your experience and knowledge of that sin from your point of view often for sins one has already over come but more so for sins one has never done personally. But it is hard to pass judgment on your own because often your own sins do not seem to be sins at all. I think one thing is certain, God is always showing a sin we need to change(repent of) before us. How we choose to deal with it will determine our punishment for it.

Perhaps the sins that He has shown to us that we turn a blind response to are the one's we will be most punished for while sins He has yet to reveal to us we are free from thier guilt. Jn 9:41

Pretending can be pride showing itself, but Ignorance(blindness) can also result in pretentiousness as we see in the scripture for this week about James and John(Mark 10) wanting to sit on Jesus' left and right side.
It is best not to pass judgment on the ignorant thinking they are hypocrites when they may in fact not see what they do is wrong. Just MHO.

[Hans Deventer]

Dale, could you please rephrase two sentences? They make my head ache

A person who has come from a life of ease among a people of ease and has chosen to ignore the poor(they see not) will still guilty but will they punished more or less for their lavish lifestyle in a people of lavish lifestyles or punished more or less because they have not been taught rightly about caring for the poor?

It is easy to pass judgment on others for their sin when it so easy to see them from your experience and knowledge of that sin from your point of view often for sins one has already over come but more so for sins one has never done personally.

[Dale Cozby]

There is a difference between those who are ignorant of the law and those who ignore it.

[Marsha Lynn]

I think we're discussing several different issues here.

1. Sin, a violation of the law of love. Sin separates us from God. When I harbor hate in my life, it doesn't allow me to come freely to God because I might have to deal with that hatred. It intrudes upon my relationship with God just as certainly as murdering the person I hate.

2. Crime. My hatred toward another is not a crime. Murder is.

3. Harmful acts toward others. If I voice my hatred, I may do emotional damage to the one I hate well before I cross the line into criminal activity. Something within them may even die in response to my hatred. And I may influence others to share my hate. This is more of a concern to society than the hate in my heart, but it is no more sin than that hidden hatred.

The same differentiation can be made for other sins that start in the heart (such as lust), move out in ways that do harm to others (such as adultery), and may or may not violate criminal law (such as bigamy).

Even if we agree that all sins are equally damaging to our relationship with God, that doesn't mean they are equally offensive to society and equally harmful to those around us.

Marsha

[Hans Deventer]

I think we're discussing several different issues here.

1. Sin, a violation of the law of love. Sin separates us from God. When I harbor hate in my life, it doesn't allow me to come freely to God because I might have to deal with that hatred. It intrudes upon my relationship with God just as certainly as murdering the person I hate.

2. Crime. My hatred toward another is not a crime. Murder is.

3. Harmful acts toward others. If I voice my hatred, I may do emotional damage to the one I hate well before I cross the line into criminal activity. Something within them may even die in response to my hatred. And I may influence others to share my hate. This is more of a concern to society than the hate in my heart, but it is no more sin than that hidden hatred.

The same differentiation can be made for other sins that start in the heart (such as lust), move out in ways that do harm to others (such as adultery), and may or may not violate criminal law (such as bigamy).

Even if we agree that all sins are equally damaging to our relationship with God, that doesn't mean they are equally offensive to society and equally harmful to those around us.

Marsha, at least myself I have not been talking about crime or harmful acts towards others, and I do not believe all sin as a violation of the law of love is equal, though I agree that sin is a violation of that law. If God judges our sins differently, I'm not the one to say they are all equal.

[Bill Morrison]

I don't wish to wink at any sin or deny that any "willful transgression of a known law" is a bad thing that, save being under the blood, will be judged by God.
But, when thinking about the matter of "degrees of sin", we might want to consider the issue of perspective.
I can absolutely assure you that I would much rather have one of my students hate me (with or without cause) than to have them murder me.
From my perspective, or that of my wife, or hopefully that of some of my Naznet friends, the former sin would be much less severe (a different degree) than the latter......and I would also hope God would not judge the former sin in the exact same way He might judge the latter.

BILL

(These thoughts may have been inspired in part by the challenging muscle exam I have prepared to give to my Human Anatomy class tomorrow morning, and the feeling I may indeed be hated by some, but hopefully murdered by no one, during the coming week.)

[Marsha Lynn]

Marsha, at least myself I have not been talking about crime or harmful acts towards others, and I do not believe all sin as a violation of the law of love is equal, though I agree that sin is a violation of that law. If God judges our sins differently, I'm not the one to say they are all equal.

So how are they judged differently? Are there degrees of heaven? Or of hell? Do we spend more or less time in purgatory?

If not more or less reward or punishment in eternity, you're left with differing consequences in this life. And that is certainly true. The consequences of murder in this life, both internally and externally are much more severe than those for hatred. For crimes, we are answerable to the state. For harm done to others, we suffer broken relationships and judgment from those around us. Internally, we suffer more or less guilt and self-hatred for what we have done, depending on how inexcusable it is in our own eyes. But maybe all turning away from God affects our relationship with God in exact proportion to how far we turn. If that is the case, it may be that harboring hate for someone is just as destructive to my soul as murdering them. Perhaps that was what Jesus was saying in the Sermon on the Mount.

Just thinking. This is a new direction for me to take on this subject, but it's also the next step in a developing thought that the wages of sin and the gift of eternal life are not entirely reserved only for the next life.

Marsha

[Doug Ward]

Good stuff Ben! And yes I agree, it's always worse when we actually carry it out, and it's always a victory when we turn away from sin.

But I don't think that has been the conversation here, the conversation is that some raise objection to how our response has been unequal in the instance of certain sin. Thus the point is made that sin is sin, regardless. And I can agree, if in the context of sin as hamartia, or missing the mark. I think that this is where Jesus is pointing to as he declares intent to be sin. And yet as humans we have no way of dealing with the sin of intent, as we lack perfect knowledge regarding the heart of another.

While all sin is indeed equal in that it misses the mark, we are not instructed to deal with sin in a consistent manner. While the equality remains, the remedy in human terms varies. There are some sins which we must confess one to another and ask forgiveness, and there are sins known only to God, where we ask forgiveness to Him alone. There exists also sin in which it is required that the people of God take action, we are instructed to turn the person out of the church and to cease in our dealings. The sin remains equal, the remedy varies.

Jim, while I am not in opposition to you, let me quibble with you a little. You state that all sin is equal in that it misses the mark. I am sure this comes from your understanding of the greek word hamartia, which means to miss the mark, and it is a synonym for sin in the NT. However, Paul tells us in Romans 5 that "hamartia" was in the world before the law. However, Paul is also very clear that "hamartia" is not charged to one's account before God. Paul tells us that the law changes "hamartia" to "paraptoma" or willful misstep. It is only "paraptoma" which are charged against us.

So, right away we have a major difference. Sins which we are aware and incur guilt, and sins from general weakness, which have a different response, and are not charged against us.

Let me also add that I am solidly behind Ben. Jesus taught many things, but He was not teaching that lust = the act of adultery. He was trying to teach that the external rules do not necessarily keep one from sin. The disease lies within - your externals only hide the rot.

[Sarah Smith]

My personal understanding of all sins being equal is that all sins are sins against God, Who's majesty is so great the offense is great even when the earthly consequences are not so great.

But that said, I believe how we deal with sin will depend on the degree of hurt it causes ourselves and other humans.

I need a Savior even if my sin is "merely" (poor word but best I can do) a heart sin that only He and I know of, hurting no one else.

I need a Savior to the same degree if I go out and murder someone. But in this life, that last sin will surely net me more severe consequences than being angry without cause and not expressing it will!

The argument could be made from the NT that all sexual sin, involving the uniting of the temple of the Holy Spirit with another unlawfully is worse than other sins done outside the body.

My personal take is that homosexual behavior is no more sin than any other sexual sin. Surely we need to be as vocal about all sexual sin being sin as we are about homosexual sin.

And we need always to remember the proper use of the law is not condemnation but leading people to seek the Savior.

If all of us get a free pass for whatever our own besetting sin is, we won't come to Him for forgiveness and cleansing.

So rather than water down what exactly is sin, my own take is we maintain that "hard line" even though it will probably stomp on all our toes somewhere when it comes to defining sin.

And move on to the gospel.

[Pete Vecchi]

My personal understanding of all sins being equal is that all sins are sins against God, Who's majesty is so great the offense is great even when the earthly consequences are not so great.

But that said, I believe how we deal with sin will depend on the degree of hurt it causes ourselves and other humans.

I need a Savior even if my sin is "merely" (poor word but best I can do) a heart sin that only He and I know of, hurting no one else.

I need a Savior to the same degree if I go out and murder someone. But in this life, that last sin will surely net me more severe consequences than being angry without cause and not expressing it will!...

One of the best ways I have heard this described is that while our sins can indeed be forgiven, oftentimes the consequences of sin remain.

[Jim Chabot]

So, are we to tolerate certain amounts of some sins but not of others? The alcoholic who becomes a Christian but who "falls off the wagon" and triggers chemical dependencies in his/her system that causes the person to think irrationally and continue drink alcohol should be shunned?

Yes, that's what the good book says, is it not? We are to treat the person as an unbeliever, doesn't mean that we don't love them, yet we are still to be obedient ourselves.

How about the person who is new to Christ and has been co-habiting with another person for years. Neither is nor has been married to anyone else, they are not legally married to each other, they are committed to one another, yet something in one or both of their pasts gets them to not trust the legal system and what legal marriage would do and the legal responsibilities it would place on them. That would make them legally "fornicators." Should the church work with them or shun them?

Interesting, they sound married to me. While at the same time Jesus asked the rich young ruler to give up what he had, in fact he gave the same choice to the twelve as well. We give up our self determination and sovereignty of self when we follow Him. He asks all, each and every time.

I'm not trying to argue, but to ask honest questions. My sense is that it is at least possible to interpret 1 Cor. 5:11 as Paul addressing a specific congregation at a specific time due to specific circumstances surrounding a specific culture within a specific community rather than making this an absolute statement for everyone in every congregation. I especially say this in light of the 6th verse where Paul alludes to their "boasting" (NIV, 1984). I'm not saying that this is what Paul meant, but am pointing to the possibility that he meant it for a specific situation rather than in general way.

I hear you, but no I'm not necessarily open to the possibility that Paul was speaking only to a specific group and culture. To open that possibility is to say the same over all, including Jesus words. Paul makes himself pretty clear, it is shameful that the Church would allow these categories of sin to manifest themselves among their fellowship. Paul rightly calls the congregation arrogant, saying that they should mourn instead.

Well, I must leave this morning, knowing that our congregation which generally has about 20-25 people per Sunday morning worship service is likely to be down by 14 people this morning due to various family schedule conflicts. Does my sometimes wishing that the congregation to which God has me currently assigned was bigger and more financially stable and sometimes thinking that it might be nice to have a couple of those "rich" people (whom the President wants to pay more in taxes) would be members of our congregation and tithers to boot make me covetous?

Maybe just a little? But I doubt it, I'm guessing that your desire for a larger congregation is more about what you could do to serve them rather than for your own gain. Otherwise, I'm thinking that you would have moved on a while back.

I'm sure that you know the old adage. "God's work, done God's way, will never lack God's provision." I've got no problem trusting my finances to Him, I've got no problem trusting my church's finances to Him, I've also got no problem trusting Him to tell me what is sin, and I've got no problem letting Him tell me how it should be dealt with. In for a dime, in for a dollar.

[Hans Deventer]

So how are they judged differently? Are there degrees of heaven? Or of hell? Do we spend more or less time in purgatory?

No idea, Marsha. What exactly will happen in the afterlife isn't exactly worked out in detail in the Scriptures anyway. What I do know is that Jesus talks about differences, see http://www.naznet.com/community/show...l=1#post168766.

[Marsha Lynn]

No idea, Marsha. What exactly will happen in the afterlife isn't exactly worked out in detail in the Scriptures anyway. What I do know is that Jesus talks about differences, see http://www.naznet.com/community/show...l=1#post168766.

47 “The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. 48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. (Luke 12)

Where does it say that the beatings will be reserved for life beyond the grave?

[Hans Deventer]

Where does it say that the beatings will be reserved for life beyond the grave?

Sorry, Marsha, I'm not into end time theories. In the story, this happens when the Master returns. That's enough for me.

[Marsha Lynn]

Sorry, Marsha, I'm not into end time theories.

Hmm... me neither. Is that what this is?

[Billy Cox]

The point was made in another thread that equating sins that aren't equal otherwise makes sense, because they're both sin, and all sin is equal as sin.

Ok. I can track so far.

However, this raises a question in my mind. Now, setting aside the fact that we do believe that certain sins are worse than others - for instance, we do believe that homosexuality is worse than gossip. We might say we don't, but we're usually lying if our actions mean anything - are there in fact some sins that are worse than others?

I think that the "all sins are equal" idea relies on seeing sin primarily in terms of law breaking.

I see two additional dynamics:

1. Sins vary widely in terms of the relational damage that they cause and the difficulty in finding reconciliation.

2. The wages of sin is death - which is not just about spending the afterlife in Hell, but is also a present reality. I am convinced based on my reading of the Bible that breaking God's law tends to break you back sooner or later.

So for me, the relative moral damnation quotient of gossip versus same-gender relations is about as relevant as the question of whether peeing in the shower will turn the ocean yellow.

[Hans Deventer]

Hmm... me neither. Is that what this is?

Well, that's how I read it. I presume the master in the story is Jesus. Now it might also be possible to read it from the perspective of Jesus' first coming, looking for faithful stewards. But that does make the ending hard to place within history. And phrases like "You also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.” seem to point to the future. I know there are those who see everything Jesus talked about fulfilled in AD 70. I'm not one of those, though I accept that He refers to that point in history often.

[John O Comstock]

Great discussion! One place I know were sin is equal is the forgiveness of Christ for any and all sin if one will sincerely repents. I thank God that any sinner can be made clean.

[Marsha Lynn]

Well, that's how I read it. I presume the master in the story is Jesus. Now it might also be possible to read it from the perspective of Jesus' first coming, looking for faithful stewards. But that does make the ending hard to place within history. And phrases like "You also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.” seem to point to the future. I know there are those who see everything Jesus talked about fulfilled in AD 70. I'm not one of those, though I accept that He refers to that point in history often.

When I think of "endtimes theory," I think of the when and how of Jesus' return and the end of this world. In this case, I think we're discussing our eternal reward or punishment, a topic that has in the past seemed of interest to you. But, whatever. You believe that the differences in sin somehow make a difference in what happens after we die but don't want to speculate as to what that difference might be. I believe that the chief difference between the various manifestations of sin is how it affects our life in the here-and-now, that it is sin (singular) that separates us from God and that separation is just as profound for unresolved hatred as it is for murder.

On the other hand, I'm not particularly dogmatic about this. Beyond my rational thoughts is a hope that there's a special place reserved in hell for the scumbags who call elderly people pretending to be a grandchild in trouble who needs them to send money. I think there's a hunger for justice in all of us that loves the idea of an extra fiery hell for those who prey on the weakest among us.

Marsha

[Hans Deventer]

When I think of "endtimes theory," I think of the when and how of Jesus' return and the end of this world. In this case, I think we're discussing our eternal reward or punishment, a topic that has in the past seemed of interest to you. But, whatever. You believe that the differences in sin somehow make a difference in what happens after we die but don't want to speculate as to what that difference might be. I believe that the chief difference between the various manifestations of sin is how it affects our life in the here-and-now, that it is sin (singular) that separates us from God and that separation is just as profound for unresolved hatred as it is for murder.

Marsha, for the record, I certainly believe any sin has an influence in our lives now.

On the other hand, I'm not particularly dogmatic about this. Beyond my rational thoughts is a hope that there's a special place reserved in hell for the scumbags who call elderly people pretending to be a grandchild in trouble who needs them to send money. I think there's a hunger for justice in all of us that loves the idea of an extra fiery hell for those who prey on the weakest among us.

We certainly hunger for justice, though in my view justice is achieved mostly when the harm is being undone, and the criminal repents and receives eternal life. That doesn't mean that some form of punishment isn't appropriate. Still want to read this book.