Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

Patrick H
Gormley


The relationship between "love sinner and hate sin" and violence

Love the sinner hate the sin is taken by some to mean only hate as in violence. So you can hate the sin if you are sure you will be non-violent and in the light that not everybody who hates you would be violent towards you. The rule then only condemns physically violent hate.

If love sinner hate sin only means that you must never act violently against a sinner without grave need then why do we need to be told to be non-violent towards sinners such as shoplifters, contraception users, heretics, fortune-tellers, etc? It is clear that the doctrine of sin incites to violence and steps have to be taken to address that. The doctrine is like giving somebody a virus and the alleged cure as well and then going around all sanctimonious. Love the sinner and hate the sin proclaims that violence is reasonable and should be the response to sin but restrained. What good is that?

Whoever holds back violence against non-sinners such as contraception users or witches hates. To hate the actions of those who are accused of sin but are not is hate. Hate starts with false accusations. To accuse people of offending and breaking the law of God is not necessary and thus is a sign of hate.

 

If love the sinner and hate the sin is possible then it can only be for a religion that forbids respect for violence as well as violence and means that forbidding.  Christianity is based on the Bible being the one book that should be put out there and into every Church and venerated.  It gets worse.  The faith goes as far as to say it is God's communication with us.  Christianity requires you to accept on pain of exclusion from the ministry and religion teaching and from Heaven that the Bible is what God would write if he were the authors - in other words, he is the author of the Bible as much as any Bible writer such as Paul was.

 

The fact remains that the Bible has God explicitly commanding violence.   Jesus mentioned how God demanded that bad sons be put to death.  Far from saying God was wrong to say adulteresses should be stoned, he said a woman should be stoned if her accusers have no sin worthy of stoning.  Jesus hailed Moses with the utmost respect though Moses was a religious fanatic who murdered thousands on religious grounds for God told him to do it.  Those who know the faith well explicitly make excuses for the violence and condone it.

 

Love of sinners is thin coming from a faith that is guilty of respecting violence, respecting those like Jesus who respected violence and respecting the hypocritical clergy and parents who did not care enough to walk away from that religion but who spread it.  I did not say commanding I said respecting.  How religion foments violence is another discussion.

 

Love the sinner and hate the sin is bizarre if you translate it as, "Non-violence to the sinner - the bad person, violence to the sin."  Seeing a sin to be violent too paradoxically objectifies the person who does the sin so honest hate of the bad person would be less savage than this tripe.