HOME   People do good because they are human, not because they are religious! 

Do not give God any credit for the good they do, they did it!

 

If judging is bad then religion makes it worse

List

 

Judging the sinner not the sin is a mask for judging the sinner

 

If humans are biased to do wrong then nobody can expect us to believe they judge sins not sinners

 

The idea of sin as something that disrespects God is judgemental for the idea of wrong will do

 

Bringing God into it contradicts innocent until proven guilty

 

Christians say our sins murdered Jesus

 

Christians say the worst sin ever was when Adam and Eve broke a rule though it did no harm and that if we sin we affiliate with them and participate in their rebellion

 

Christians say that sin is a rejection of God and thus will lead to an eternity away from him so it is very bad indeed and an insult to your loved ones who could be in Heaven without you

 

Christians condemn harmless actions as severe sins such as having sex with condoms with somebody you are not in a relationship with

 

If we are all prone to judge and judging is bad then religion goes too far.

 

Religion advocates rabid hate in all but name.

 

Analysis

 

The Christian teaching that we must judge sins and not sinners needs translation. The translation is, "Sins are perfectly bad and sinners are perfectly good."

 

Hypocrisy often describes a person with double standards.  A better way to understand it is referring to how people pretend to follow a standard they don't follow.  We all pretend to follow a standard we do not follow.  For example, to love a good person is to hate a bad one because to love x means to hate what is not x or that would destroy or corrupt it.  Love and hate go together for to hate one is to love that one's opposite.  To say you hate judging people is to lie for you are admitting to hating people who judge righteously.

 

Honest Christians reject the hypocrisy and lies about loving sinners and hating sins. They teach, "Sometimes it is said that God hates sin (impersonal) but loves the sinner (personal), but this attempt to mitigate the wrath of God is not really faithful to the biblical witness. Wrongdoing in the Bible is never dissociated from the wrongdoers, who are fully responsible for their actions. Retribution cannot be shifted to an impersonal level without it ceasing to be what it is. We cannot imagine a judge excusing a murderer who says he is sorry and offers to clean up the mess, as if the crime were all that mattered. However sincere his repentance might be, the murderer would still be held responsible for his sin, just as we are held responsible for our sins before God. But curiously, there are many people who for some reason fail to make this equation. Although they might agree in the case of the murderer, they do not accept that this principle can be applied directly to sins against God. By a process of reasoning sometimes disparagingly referred to as 'cheap grace', they believe that verbal repentance is enough to take away sin, and that if they confess to wrongdoing God will not exact any penalty from them. This procedure appears to be automatic and painless, causing the minimum of upset and inconvenience to the normal flow of everyday life. The truth, though, is that people who think like that have never really encountered the depths of the love of God in Christ. If they had they would have recognized that there is a heavy penalty to be paid for their sin - a penalty which Christ bore for us on the cross. Unless we understand that we are fully deserving of God's wrath, which he will certainly inflict on those who do evil - Romans 1:18-32, we shall never even begin to understand the depth of the love which has rescued us from our misery and from our just deserts" (page 222, The Doctrine of God, Gerald Bray, IVP, Illinois, 1993).

Jesus is said to have proven that judging sinners is a sin when he saved the adulteress from stoning. But he said to her, "Go and avoid this sin in future." He said it was a sin and her fault so he was judging her as guilty. He was condemning the sin as bad for he told her to avoid it. He did save her from being stoned but he didn't say this meant that God didn't have a punishment in store for her.  He did not mention forgiveness by the way.
 
Sin is a religious concept - it is defined as an offence against the law of God. The person is judged as immoral. That is enough and all that is needed in a secular world. But the believer goes further. The person is also judged as a sinner - an offender against God. This is a grave evil because it is going beyond what is necessary.
 
You cannot say that if you say somebody has sinned in doing x that you are stating it as fact and not judging. When you accuse them of sin, you are indeed judging.
 
When you judge a person as good, that means you have tried to judge them for the bad and found nothing. To judge as good goes with judging as bad. The believer has to judge God as deserving worship implying that if God behaved differently he would be judged as not deserving worship and he would not be given it. Its like, "I judge you as good God, but if I didn't you can go and rot. When I judge you as good, I potentially judge you as bad and am open to it." God is not man that he would be impressed with worship that contains a sting or nasty implication. We should not be judging beings that may not be there at all. We know criminals are around us so judging them is different. Belief in worshipping God then contradicts the fact that its evil to judge beyond need. Having a judgemental worship for a judgemental God is hardly inspiring to anybody who wants to take the notion that you can judge the sin and not the sinner seriously.
 
The Bible God says that most of what saved people do is sinful and unsaved people do nothing else and their good is sinful (Romans 3). With this cynicism, how can you not judge and not hate the sinner with the sin? To love the sinner would be really rewarding the sin.
 
Even if the believers cannot accuse me of anything specifically bad they believe that I am a sinner and they hate me. They hate me in the sense that they hate sinners for I am a sinner. I know I am a sinner so I have to hate me. If I hate me I will soon hate them and make them hate me. If I accept love from them I am deceiving them and stealing from them.
 
Christian doctrine is that because of original sin we have a bias to sin.  Catholicism says baptism weakens the bias.  Not only is there no evidence for that but it does not want any. One wonders why God will not fix the bias in baptism properly.  It is just a scam.  It is gross evil for if this bias is so terrible and if man can be so harmful then any quack treatment for it deserves to be spat on and is feeding the problem.

 

A religion that says we prefer to be sinful cannot really mean it when it says it does not judge. The person who hates you for having harmed them knows you might have a weakness that was not your fault that led you to do what you did but they still hate you. They think you probably meant to do it and did it wholly freely and religion thinks the same thing for it says we have a bias towards sin.
 
The rule pollutes your love
 
Hatred like all bad and damaging emotions comes from fear. If you fear a person and believe they freely could do you harm then you hate that person to some degree. To harbour something that will lead to hate is an act of hate in itself. It’s having feelings that make you want to see harm come upon a person. Loving the sinner and not the sin is impossible and abnormal and if you inflict something abnormal on yourself or try to you cannot love anybody else at all. The love you have to have to enter the kingdom of God is a mental disorder. So God wants our heads screwed up even though in many cases this will lead to violence and murder. God is violent and a murderer. The God doctrine calls God’s ministers to be our enemies.
 
Examples of the danger of the doctrine of judge sinner not sin
 
The combination of God and free will implies that on hospital waiting lists anybody who has unsafe gay sex and who is fond of the cigarette or bottle and becomes ill because of it should be relegated to the end for they had something to do with their illness. The Church must stop being silent about these evil implications just to impress people. They might say they cannot judge but they cannot take the risk that the innocent are being pushed to the back of the queue at times.
 
How does the Catholic Church answer those who oppose it for saying that AIDS is the result of sin and that its ban on condoms is not to blame for helping to spread the plague? It is saying that condoms are sinful even though they save lives for the lives would not need saving this way had it not been for sin. That is certainly judging most people who have allegedly sinful sex. If they are just weak people but not sinners or if they mistakenly think the sex is ethical then the Church cannot use its answer.
 
The doctrine of judging sin not sinners leads to great silliness. Take a pro-life woman who has had an abortion. She will say something like, "Abortion is a great evil. Abortion took my baby." Sorry sister abortion did not take your baby. You did. The doctrine brings religion some benefits but as it is ludicrous it only opens the door to hypocrisy and even moral relativism - the Church's most formidable enemy.
 
People tell you to be cautious around strangers. They add that this is not the same as having suspicions about the strangers. That foolish dose of hypocrisy is an example of judge sins not sinners. A child will be totally confused by such incoherent advice and tragic consequences can ensue.

 

Religion wants people to sin so that it can "love" them
 
The Catholic holds that we must hate the sin and love the sinner and love the sinner because we hate the sin. But it follows then that the person you judge as the worst is the person you love the most. It would take great and miraculous love to be really able to hate the sin while loving the sinner. This teaching would suggest that Catholics should be grateful if they are categorised as great sinners! But Catholics have no time for that notion as they know fine well that love the sinner and hate the sin is really hating the sinner and are refusing to admit it.
 
If I should judge the sin and not the sinner, does it follow that I am morally worse than the sinner I judge? Yes. Hating the sinner and the sin would be always wrong.  Loving the sinner and hating and judging their sin is a basic commandment and the one the other ones depend on. So it is worse to defy a core principle than a sub-principle that flows from it. For example, to condemn the commandment to love is more fundamentally evil than committing adultery.
 
Moreover, I would be guilty of using the person's sin as an excuse for hating them. As far as intention goes, I am glad deep down that they actually gave me an opportunity to hate them. In my black heart I am more evil than the black heart that did the sin. Remember we are talking about intentions and ill-will here and not about the fact that the sinner you judge may have wreaked more havoc than you.
 
Some say I am to judge myself and nobody else. If they are right then it follows I must love others more than myself. That is only a recipe for hating others for the resentment will burn inside you. And you will hate yourself for it. And if people follow your example there won't be any sinners alive for anybody to judge.

 

If hate is bad for its dangerous and irrational then love the sinner and hate the sin serves only to make it even more dangerous and irrational. All hate and anger risks going out of control and invites loss of control. It is partial loss of control. It is even more reckless when you tell yourself that the hate and rage is not about the sinner but the sin. Then you take away the boundary between administering justice or going beyond it too far. There is no hope of finding that boundary if you ignore the needs of persons. Hating a sin or being angry at it implies that you know to what degree an "immoral" action committed by a free agent may be hated or be the cause of your anger. It exposes the hypocrisy and deceit of saying ,"I believe in judging the sin and not the sinner." You are judging the sinner when you cannot know their degree of guilt or responsibility. Religion says only God knows exactly how bad a person meant to be. You are acting like God.


Finally

 

Religion makes hate more irrational and dangerous than it might be.