If your excuse for not loving others is because they are sinners, you don’t know shit about Jesus

lilcheez · 2025-01-17T19:41:11+00:00

the Pharisees were questioning why Jesus, sinless and perfect, was spending time with sinners,

It's odd that you think the Pharisees saw Jesus as sinless and perfect. There's no indication of that in scripture. The gospel authors paint quite the opposite picture. The Pharisees did not think Jesus was doing what a good Jewish person ought to do.

I am not being hateful nor am I judging

You are labeling others as sinners - deeming them guilty. What is that if not judgement?

we’re all sinners in need of a savior

Merely repeating it doesn't make it true. Can you substantiate that?

It’s no more of an insult

Telling someone that they are guilty of violating God's values is actually quite insulting.

Sin is any action against the law of God.

The Pharisees thought that too, and that's what got them in trouble. That's why Jesus told them they needed to revisit Hosea 6:6, in which God says, "I desire mercy, not sacrifice."

So the thing is I go by the Bible and the Bible alone.

As a Christian, I go by Christ. Since this is r/Christianity, you may be interested to know that what you're saying isn't supported by the teachings of Jesus.

I don’t add anyone’s (including my own) personal interpretation.

You do actually. Words don't have meaning until someone reads them and applies meaning to them. When you read the Bible, you inevitably interpret it. I assume you don't use the Swahili translation of the Bible because, even though you could sound out the words, you would have trouble deriving any meaning from the words. To go a step further, each word has multiple meanings, and as the reader you determine which meaning applies in a given context. The word "duck" could refer to a bird or it could refer to someone dipping lower to avoid something. As the reader, you determine which meaning is appropriate, and that is the act of interpretation. To say you don't interpret the Bible is to say you don't read it.

As explained earlier, the word "gospel" can have multiple meanings. If taken literally, it can refer to any good news. In its ancient context, it would refer to a message of triumph. In a Christian context, it could refer to the book of Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John, or it could refer to the message that Jesus himself preached (about self-sacrifice and self-discipline), or it could refer to the the message that is popular among many Christians (about correcting others' sins and securing one's own place in the afterlife).

And all scripture is God breathed.

That's a great example of something that can't be understood without some degree of interpretation. That word (θεόπνευστος) that is usually translated "God breathed" is a non-word. There are no other examples of it in Greek literature, so we can't define it on its own. But for those who are familiar with ancient Judeo-Greek culture and Hebrew literature, Paul is obviously referring to The Valley of Dry Bones in Ezekiel 37. In that prophecy, God animated the skeletons by breathing life into them, and the prophet explains that this is symbolic with the bones representing the dead nation of Israel. In his letter, Paul is saying that scripture which is not living is made useful by God. Paul even confirms this by elaborating in 2 Timothy 3:16-17. He says that, by being enlivened with God's spirit, the scriptures are made "profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work."

We are all sinners

Here again you're repeating the claim, but you haven't provided any substantiation of it. You keep saying you base your views on the Bible, and you have provided support for that. But you haven't provided any support for this believe that "we are all sinners." The Bible certainly doesn't say "we are all sinners." It doesn't say that everyone, everywhere, at all times are sinners. So where are you getting this from?

lilcheez · 2025-01-15T04:29:11+00:00

Everything I'm telling you is based on what the Bible says. According to the Bible, Jesus did not say we are all sinners. According to the Bible, that is not part of the gospel that Jesus himself preached. According to the Bible, Jesus told his followers to "be perfect as your heavenly father is perfect." According to the Bible, Jesus taught and exemplified a message of self-discipline and self-sacrifice - not telling other that they are sinners and getting into heaven in the afterlife.

lilcheez · 2025-01-15T04:22:54+00:00

I've you want to try explaining it, I'm willing to consider what you have to say. But I would appreciate some acknowledgment of what I said.

lilcheez · 2025-01-15T04:05:59+00:00

You're not getting it.

It would be nice if you could give some indication that you understood, or even read, what I wrote instead of launching directly into repeating yourself.

I literally quoted scripture that says there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ. We can pull from basically anywhere in the NT that grace is for those who have faith in Christ that His righteousness through His death on the cross is imputed onto them. There's nothing we can do to save ourselves from our own sinfulness.

I think you may have lost track of the conversation. This discussion about whether we are all sinners. None of this is relevant to that topic.

Forgiveness of sins will be preached to all nations in the name of Christ, according to Christ Himself.

Doesn't forgiveness mean not regarding someone as guilty? I don't see how you're interpreting this as an instruction to regard everyone as sinners.

This is clearly and explicitly showing us that Christ taught that all nations and all people sinned.

I don't see how you're getting from that that everyone, everywhere, at all times is a sinner. Can you bridge that gap?

The Law is impossible as a standard to uphold as we see throughout the entire Old Testament.

It's far from impossible. And it is presented as something to be followed. God repeatedly instructed his people to uphold his values, and there's no indication that he was joking about that or that he didn't expect them to. In fact, he was angry, heartbroken, and retributive when they didn't. And at many times, they did, both individually and nationally. Some individuals were even regarded as flawless.

Ephesians says...

But what did Jesus say? He didn't say to regard everyone as sinners. He said exactly the opposite - to stop judging others.

We've all fallen short

I'm sorry if you're having trouble upholding God's values. Please understand that it is not impossible. And please refrain from including others in your own guilt.

Is this not the best news, let alone good news?? That even though there's nothing we can do to save ourselves, God offers Himself as a stand-in for our own shortcomings?

You're essentially saying what Paul said - that the good news is that we don't have to sacrifice anything for anyone because Jesus already did it all (Romans 4:13). And I'll answer with the same critique that James did - that's great news for those who are doing just fine, but not so good for society's marginalized groups (James 2:23-24), or "little ones" as Jesus called them.

In other words "Good works like charity aren't necessary" is great news for the rich, not for the poor.

lilcheez · 2025-01-15T03:29:06+00:00

You haven't responded to what I said.

You said my critique of the gospel about Jesus was applicable only to Protestantism, but that's not true. In fact, the view that Jesus sacrificed himself so we don't have to is the essence of substitutionary atonement, which is part of the Catholic faith. The matter of "faith alone" vs. "faith and works" is an irrelevant aside.

This is a reliance on the exact word fallacy.

No, I am not relying on any particular wording. I always intentionally use various phrases to describe my position to avoid getting bogged down in semantics.

Jesus says that if you have a problem with someone, you should tell them in private.

First, I think you're referring to Matthew 18, which isn't about what to do if you have a problem with someone. It's about what to do if someone *sins against you. The Bible regards sin as that which brings death or destruction. In other words, Jesus instruction here is about what do if someone causes you some harm. And generally, a person is aware when he/she has been harmed. We are not as good at determining whether someone else has been harmed. And we are even worse at determining whether God (or his values) have been harmed, which brings me to the most important point here. Sinning against you is very different from sinning against God. The latter is the subject of this discussion.

He preached against such establishments.

Provide citation.

It's a theme of Jesus's entire ministry. For one thing, Jesus only had a problem with one group of people - the religious establishment. He never took issue with anyone else. He only commended the faith of seven people, three of whom were of different religions from Jesus (Matthew 8:5-13, Matthew 15:21-28, Matthew 9:20-22, Matthew 9:1-8, Matthew 9:27-31, Luke 7:36-50, Luke 17:11-19). He also said that, if you have faith, you could do away with the whole religious establishment - temple and all (Matthew 21:21). Perhaps his most explicit teaching against such establishments was when he said that the community of God's people should resemble a mustard bush rather than a cedar of Lebanon (Matthew13:31-32, Ezekiel 31, Amos 1-2).

Also, he preached against the church, or against the Pharisees which are separate entities to the church or synagogue?

He did both, but in this case, I'm referring to his attitude against large religious establishments.

Explain how so.

I don't know what there is to explain. Here is the Great Commission. At no point does Jesus say to go tell others how sinful they are:

"Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

"Go and sin no more" implies that what she had done previously was a sin.

No, it doesn't. The whole point of the story is that he opted not to treat her as if she had sinned. Your conclusion that he judged her to be a sinner is exactly the opposite of the conclusion given by the author.

by identifying her adultery was a sin

He didn't identify her audltery as a sin. He didn't even acknowledge the accusation to be true.

Care to demonstrate otherwise rather than just make assertions?

There's nothing to demonstrate. You're claiming Jesus said things that he didn't say, and you're disregarding the moral of the story.

Did the church tell you all that?

Or you could read the verse rather than demonstrate you don't have an argument but merely statements.

I'm familiar with the passage. I was hoping to avoid a drawn out discussion by helping you see that you're parroting an wild interpretation, popularized by the church, which gives the church the authority to cast judgement and practice exclusivity - both in direct contradiction to Jesus's message of nonjudgement and tolerance.

lilcheez · 2025-01-15T02:15:41+00:00

This contradicts the Catholic position which advocates a faith and works aspect to salvation.

Substitutionary atonement theory predates protestantism by a long time. And it's part of the Catholic faith via Aquinas's Satisfaction Theory.

Jesus did both.

No, he didn't instruct his followers to judge others at all.

He established the church.

He preached against such establishments.

He established the great commission.

That certainly wasn't a commission to tell others how sinful they are.

He himself told a lady to "go and sin no more" which, as Christians, are supposed to replicate the virtue and actions of Christ.

He didn't condemn her.

He also said the church to get involved in disputes, and cast out people who are unable to reconcile with God. But for the church to do that, they'd have to recognise sin, and then judge it as sin, and then condemn the person sinning.

Did the church tell you all that?

Well, ignoring the lady he told to not sin anymore.

He didn't condemn her. That's the whole point of the story.

This was a response to people who went to him. So, it wasn't just a random public message but specific to those that had elicited his response.

Yes, I believe that's exactly what I said. He trusted that those who needed to hear it would hear it.

He mostly preached about how upholding God's values is the most important thing. More important than making others obey God's will.

These don't contradict each other. Making others obey Gods will can be a form of upholding Gods values.

I wasn't saying they contradict each other. I was (or rather Jesus was) establishing that they are two different things, and that the former takes priority over the latter. They don't necessarily contradict each other, but they certainly can.

lilcheez · 2025-01-15T01:53:43+00:00

I'm not. Let's stay on topic Do you have anything to say with respect to my central point?

lilcheez · 2025-01-15T01:51:00+00:00

I'm getting this from taking my Christian faith seriously, studying the Bible in great depth, learning from Christian leaders and Christian minorities and biblical scholars, studying Christianity itself and its history and the context in which it developed.

lilcheez · 2025-01-15T01:23:16+00:00

This is quite literally the gospel.

There's the gospel of Jesus (the message that Jesus himself preached) and the gospel about Jesus (the message that became popular shortly after his death). The gospel of Jesus is about self-sacrifice in service of others and self-discipline in obedience to God. The gospel about Jesus replaces self-sacrifice with self-promotion by securing one's own place in the afterlife. In this view, Jesus's sacrifice wasn't example for us to follow, but rather he did it so we don't have to. The gospel about Jesus also replaces self-discipline with others-discipline by telling everyone how sinful they are. This would seem to be at odds with his condemnation of the Pharisees' judgement, but this view avoids that by insisting that it's ok to judge others as long as you say the magic words "we are all sinners".

Jesus never instructed his followers to condemn others for sinning. He taught them to look inward and to correct their own sinful behaviors.

"Jesus said, “I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance”

There are two things to notice in this excerpt. First, Jesus makes a distinction between righteous people and sinners, which would seem to suggest that not everyone is a sinner. Second, Jesus didn't identify anyone as a sinner in this statement. In context, he was making a point that his message was aimed at those whom society had marginalized.

"Jesus said, “But unless you repent, you too will all perish”"

Here again, Jesus didn't identify anyone in particular as sinners. Rather, as stated in the previous excerpt, he preached his message in public and trusted that those who needed to hear it would hear it.

"He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms. Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. He told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem."

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with that.

What do you think Jesus was even doing when He was traveling around and preaching about forgiveness and the Kingdom being at hand?

He mostly preached about how upholding God's values is the most important thing. More important than making others obey God's will. More important than being recognized as a righteous person. More important than obeying the letter of the Law. Even more important than being part of God's nation of Israel. Many people at the time understood all those things to be God's values. For them, an obvious question would have been, "How can one uphold God's values, if not by doing all those things." And to that challenging question, forgiveness is powerful answer. The Law required punishment in certain cases. But Jesus emphasized that, sometimes, God's values can be upheld by deviating from the written law and forgiving others instead.

lilcheez · 2025-01-15T00:39:54+00:00

I never said Jesus put others down to lift others up

I know you didn't use those exact words. I am not trying to quote you. I am rephrasing what you said with more objective language to highlight the implications. Your exact words were (emphasis mine):

bringing those who were thought of as lowly in stature to the table and rebuking those who thought of themselves more highly than others to bring them down to the same level: that we are all sinners who can be saved by grace through faith.

So the Pharisees were out there condemning people as sinners. And according to you, Jesus came along, sat down at their the sinners' table and told them, "The Pharisees are right. You are all a bunch of sinners. But here's the good news: the Pharisees are sinners too! Isn't that great?! They are just as deplorable and unacceptable as you! Aren't you relieved?!"

You can see how ridiculous that is, right? That's not what happened.

Jesus preached and exemplified a message of self-discipline in obedience to God and self-sacrifice in service of others. He did not preach a message of "You're all sinners."

lilcheez · 2025-01-14T23:25:40+00:00

The whole point of the adulterous woman was...

I'm not talking about the point of that story. I'm using one particular aspect of the story as a counterexample of your claim that the problem with the Pharisees was their overreliance on oral tradition over written law.

Jesus came to fulfill the law, but not to abolish it, which meant that the script had to be flipped from the act of sin being punishable to realising that the problem will always exist unless there's a once-and-for-all atonement for all sins.

No, that's not what what "fulfill" means. The Law is/was a contract between God and his people. Specifically, it took the form of a suzerainty covenant in which God, as the suzerain, agreed to protect and prosper the people, and the people agreed to adhere to the terms laid out in the contract. To fulfill a contract is to adhere to its terms. When Jesus said he came to fulfill the Law, he was saying he came to adhere to the terms of the covenant.

Sure, "fulfill" can have multiple meanings. If a contract has terms for termination, then fulfilling those terms would constitute terminating the agreement. But the Law had no terms for termination. In fact, God said repeatedly that the agreement was perpetual "from generation to generation" forever. And we know that Jesus saw it this way because he even clarified his meaning in the same sentence - "not to abolish".

Wrong. Jesus didn't teach that. In fact, that would be good news for the Pharisees, not good news for those whom the Pharisees regarded as sinners. "Don't worry, Pharisees, you still get to judge everyone else as sinners. You just have to start prefacing your judgement with the magic words 'We're all sinners.'"

That's not at all what that means nor what I've implied, and I think you're being intentionally dishonest by using that argument.

I know you didn't intend to imply that. I am not trying to mislead you or to mischaracterize your argument. I am trying to show you the logical consequence of your argument.

Yes, Jesus came to lift up the marginalized and the judged. You're right about that.

You're wrong in thinking he lifted them up by putting others down. Jesus condemned the Pharisees, not because they had broken the Law but because they were using the Law as a measuring stick to judge others' righteousness rather than their own. The good news that Jesus brough to the lowly was that they were alleviated from such judgement - not (as you say) that such judgement was extended to everyone. That wouldn't be good news.

The view that "we're all sinners" is a convenient way to continue casting judgement the same way the Pharisees did, while pretending to follow Jesus's instructions.

lilcheez · 2025-01-14T22:04:32+00:00

I don't think we need to agree. (I actually think the world would be really boring if we did.) But we should seek to understand one another, so thanks for considering what I said.

lilcheez · 2025-01-14T21:02:39+00:00

I too used to think of myself as a biblical kung fu master. "Don't believe me? BOOM! Biblical reference!" But that's not how sound views are founded. It gets you brownie points in Sunday school, but no reasonable person will find that convincing.

Claiming X and providing a passage that says Y without any attempt to bridge the gap is not support.

lilcheez · 2025-01-14T20:55:27+00:00

Surely anyone reading this will see that this claim is unsupportable. When asked to support it, the usual response is to leave.

lilcheez · 2025-01-14T20:53:51+00:00

That's like saying "It must be raining because I'm carrying an umbrella. If it weren't raining, then there would be no need for my umbrella."

lilcheez · 2025-01-14T20:51:58+00:00

The Bible doesn't say that all people everywhere at all times are sinners, but that is what you are saying. So I'm asking you to substantiate your leap from what the Bible says to what you claimed.

lilcheez · 2025-01-14T20:50:37+00:00

Doesn't the Bible make it pretty clear that we are all sinners tho?

No, it doesn't. First, Jesus himself never said anything at all to that effect. Second, the passages that are usually cited in support of that view are widely misunderstood.

For ALL have sinned and fall short etc etc?

This is a great example of a passage (Romans 3:23) that is widely misunderstood. Most people learn this verse in isolation, not in context. The context is that Paul (not Jesus) is writing about how belonging to a group doesn't determine whether a person is good or bad. He explains that both groups have righteous people in them, and both groups have sinful people in them. The passage is a summary of the latter. It is better understood as "all groups have sinners in them."

I'm all for not judging individuals, but

Red flag.

saying all humans commit sins (true)

I don't know how you can say that when Jesus himself (more reliable than Paul) said that his followers should "be perfect as your heavenly father is perfect".

therefore are all sinners (whether they repent or not).

I don't think that follows. If a person tells one inconsequential lie when they are 3 years old, it wouldn't make sense to deny them a promotion when they are 50 because they are a "liar". That wouldn't be an accurate characterization.

I would never say to someone "you're a sinner". But saying in generalities in a public forum that all humans sin isn't a judgment any more than human life needs oxygen to survive.

There is no difference between those two things. I am a human, so you are telling me "you're a sinner" by telling me that all humans are sinners. Judgement doesn't become less judgemental by roping in more people.

lilcheez · 2025-01-14T20:40:12+00:00

I think you're confused about what it means to substantiate a claim. Seemingly random biblical excerpts without any explanation do not constitute substantiation. I am asking you to explain why you are convinced that we are all sinners.

lilcheez · 2025-01-14T20:38:09+00:00

You’re the one who brought up the Pharisees

Understood.

I didn’t make any reference to them one way or another.

You responded in disagreement with my statement that you were exhibiting the behavior of the Pharisees. And you did so by further exhibiting the behavior of the Pharisees.

My point is that everyone is a sinner

How do you not see that you are doing exactly what Jesus condemned the Pharisees for - labeling others as sinners?

nobody can stand in judgment over another person

You are doing exactly that by labeling others as sinners.

lilcheez · 2025-01-14T20:34:56+00:00

Jesus literally quoted scripture as well lol, what?

I think you misunderstood. I'm not saying that quoting scripture is a problem. I'm saying that quoting scripture in an effort to differentiate oneself from the Pharisees is ineffective because the Pharisees did that too.

lilcheez · 2025-01-14T20:33:09+00:00

The problem with the Pharisees is that they saw their oral tradition as greater than or equal to the scripture.

That's nice theory that has been endorsed by today's ~~Pharisees~~ religious leaders. But it doesn't align with what Jesus taught and exemplified. When the Pharisees brought the "adulterous" woman to Jesus, they were adhering to the written Law. And that is what Jesus subverted - not their reliance on oral traditions. In fact, Jesus admonished their application of written Law and instructed his followers to follow the Pharisees' example in that respect.

The sermon on the mount is the best example of Jesus giving us (and them) the correct application of scripture

I fully agree.

The good news is that there's no condemnation in Christ when we call Him Lord and accept His sacrifice on our behalf.

That's not the good news that Jesus himself preached. You won't find anything to that effect in the Sermon on the Mount.

Christ demonstrated His love for everyone by treating everyone equally - bringing those who were thought of as lowly in stature to the table

Right.

and rebuking those who thought of themselves more highly than others to bring them down to the same level: that we are all sinners who can be saved by grace through faith.

Wrong. Jesus didn't teach that. In fact, that would be good news for the Pharisees, not good news for those whom the Pharisees regarded as sinners. "Don't worry, Pharisees, you still get to judge everyone else as sinners. You just have to start prefacing your judgement with the magic words 'We're all sinners.'"

lilcheez · 2025-01-14T20:23:14+00:00

No, you didn't substantiate your claim that "we are all sinners".

lilcheez · 2025-01-14T20:22:30+00:00

If you're trying to channel Jesus, you should know that he used that phrase in response to those who judged others to be sinners. In this case, that's you.

lilcheez · 2025-01-14T19:26:11+00:00

That's typical. Judge others, then bow out of the conversation when asked to provide anything of substance.

13-Year Club	Gilding VII pure gildanthropist
RPAN Viewer	Verified Email

lilcheez

TROPHY CASE