02-06-2006, 07:13 PM
This really annoys me. And its biblically unsound.

Especially those radical preachers who go around telling all homosexuals they will go to Hell. Although I don't believe homosexuality is right, and I don't condone it, if you are a Christian you are NOT going to Hell for it.

Jesus died for EVERYONE. If homosexuals are going to Hell for being gay, then isn't everyone whos ever told a lie, or been jealous going straight to Hell too? If being gay can send you straight to Hell as some would have you believe, and its not even one of the Ten Commandments, then imagine what breaking one of the Ten Commandments would do.

It just SICKENS me how some "preachers" and "men of God" will protest & picket at the funerals of gay soldiers, because being gay is a "horrible, horrible sin." I can't imagine how the loved ones of those soldiers must feel to see their son or daughter's funeral protested at. I could go on for pages about how much this irritates me, but I won't.

What do y'all think about this?

02-07-2006, 12:37 AM
To me all sin is equal except for Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

I think placing 'values' on sin is actually the sin of Pride and Arrogance. By thinking murdering and raping is worse than minor theft and white lies, you can feel better about yourself, you don't look 'as bad' as other people.

You think you're Ok, that you're good enough and you'll make Heaven all right.
In the case of Christians it's an arrogance for how good a Christian they are and how well they're walking with God. Since they don't struggle with this really bad sins they must be doing good.

02-07-2006, 07:32 AM
Consequences are different. So, people naturally assume levels of value or depth of evil.

This really annoys me. And its biblically unsound.
Since when have humans naturally been biblically sound?

02-09-2006, 05:56 PM
Since when have humans naturally been biblically sound?

Yea. Youre right about that part. But still...well I could write a six page long essay on this topic but I wont. I dont know what more can be said here.

02-09-2006, 07:43 PM
All sins are the same, correct.

I see some sins as more HARMFUL, though. There are some sins which hurt only one person, and there are those which influence many. In my opinion, that's ONE reason people assign value to sin.

I'm not assigning value, don't get me wrong, I'm trying to explain.

02-09-2006, 07:48 PM
Right, but the main point is, there is NO sin that will condemn you to Hell if you TRULY believe.

02-13-2006, 04:12 PM
Right, but the main point is, there is NO sin that will condemn you to Hell if you TRULY believe.
yes but if you TRULY believe, you will try to stop doing what you are doing wrong. it goes the same way for every sin. of course we are imperfect...but that still doesn't give us an excuse to sin. Jesus saved us because we couldn't do it on our now that we are saved, we are to "...go and sin no more."

02-13-2006, 06:43 PM
yes but if you TRULY believe, you will try to stop doing what you are doing wrong. it goes the same way for every sin. of course we are imperfect...but that still doesn't give us an excuse to sin. Jesus saved us because we couldn't do it on our now that we are saved, we are to "...go and sin no more."

Amen, if a homosexual comes to Christ they would leave that kind of lifestyle behind. Although, it'd be the same as a pathological liar coming to Christ, or a serial killer, a Britany Spears fan, etc (ok, I was joking about that last should be a sin though :P lol jk...)

02-14-2006, 01:03 AM
Keep in mind that God deals with things in His own time.

He may not confront a person's pathological lying until He has other issues out of the way, like maybe a foul temper, bad language, drunkenness etc.

So until God deals with it, they will still continue in it till God decides to convict him/her.

So it's not always a clear-cut view.

02-14-2006, 07:59 AM
Well, that was a vague glimpse of the No True Scotsman Fallacy (

02-14-2006, 08:36 AM

Different values, different earthly consequences, different barriers.
But all cannot be undone by the sinner, and all not undone sins have the same final price -- separation from the Sinless.

40Jesus answered him, "Simon, I have something to tell you."
"Tell me, teacher," he said.

41"Two men owed money to a certain moneylender. One owed him five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. 42Neither of them had the money to pay him back, so he canceled the debts of both. Now which of them will love him more?" 43Simon replied, "I suppose the one who had the bigger debt canceled."
"You have judged correctly," Jesus said.

Don't get on people's back because of any sin, though. Because you are in debt just as he is. Don't judge, for you are not a qualified, just authority. One sin may make things worse than another, but at the same time they are all sins.

I hope I made some sense.

02-15-2006, 01:35 AM
You made perfect sense and it's an excellently appropriate scripture for the topic.

02-19-2006, 05:18 AM
Well, I think all sins do have different worldly values. For instance, looking at a woman lustfully is not going to cause the same amount of damage as, say, beheading a 7 year old girl. They have different values in this place. In the eyes of God they are both going to earn the same penelty.........does that mean that one is not worse then another?

The same eternal punishments, the same consequences, do not neccesarily mean that the sin is equal. Even in the eyes of God the sin may be more dangerous or more grave, he just chooses to punish both, eternally, in the same way. Even so, He may very well choose to punish one more in this world then the other.

Just be glad that God redeems in the same way He punishes. Just as our seperation from Him regardless of committed sin occurs, so our redemption regardless of sin is given.

And isn't that what the good news is really all about?

02-24-2006, 08:24 AM
Different sins most definately have different values on earth. They have to in order to separate sin from crime. If you had to choose your next door neighbor between someone who has a habit of swearing quite loudly and a child molester who would you rather live by? (obviously you would rather pick nice people if you could but you get the point). There must be a value so that we on earth could come up with equitable punishments. We can't treat all crimes alike. We are humans we aren't Christ we cannot be expected to be able to forgive the way Christ does in extreme situations. But that is because we have a sin nature. Because of that nature it is much easier to forgive someone who leaves thier trash can at thier front door (yes we have a nieghbor who's can is overflowing 3 feet in front of the front door for at least 5 days a week)than it would be to forgive someone who bashed your daughters head in 25 times with the claw end of a hammer then dragged her in the woods, raped her, and left her for dead. Why do I use this example? Because it is not a hypothetical. There is a guy awaiting execution in CA for this very crime.

02-25-2006, 11:33 AM
Consequences are different. So, people naturally assume levels of value or depth of evil.

That's the simplest explanation I have ever heard for this topic. Well said, Jonathan.

Scott, I know what you are saying, from Matthew 12:31 (paraphrase - any sin shall be forgiven, except blasphemy of the Spirit), but I'm trying to understand fully 1 John 5:16, 17. If anyone has some insight into these two verses, please share.

I do believe, as somasoul suggested, God gives stricter consequences here on Earth for certain sins.

02-25-2006, 04:47 PM
Lisa, I ran across this quite a while may explain the verses

A. John gives some very specific instructions about praying for a brother who is in sin. Verse 16.

1. "If someone sees a brother commit a sin which does not led to death. He should pray and God will give him life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is sin that leads to death. I am not saying he should pray about that."

Here John makes a distinction between the believer's occasional failures that cause sin and habitual sin. Verse 17 states, "All wrong doing is sin, there is sin that leads not to death." This is a chilling statement.

2. Please note that in Greek the words "a" in verses 16-17 are found. The word "a" would indicate a single particular sin, however that is not what is being said.

a. There is "sin" (singular) that leads to death. It is not a particular sin.

b. It is not the "unpardonable sin" of the Old Testament mentioned in the Gospels in Matthew 12:31-32, Luke 12:10, and Mark 3:28-29.

c. The unpardonable sin is in context a part of the dispensation of the Law. It is a specific sin of blasphemy, in which a person would credit the devil for the work of the Holy Spirit. The special circumstances involved in blasphemy can not be duplicated today. The Scribes and Pharisees committed this sin in attributing the work of Jesus to the Devil. (see Matthew 12:24, Mark 3:22, Luke 11:15)

3. What is in view here in 1 John can be understood by looking at 1 Corinthians 11:27, 30.

a. Some in the Corinthian church were sick and some had died having committed the sin's of not discerning the body and blood of the Lord. b. What it means is this, they were in fact believers who lived lives in sinful disregard for the sacrifice that Christ made for their sins.

c. By the sinful pattern of their lives they showed a callous disregard for Christ's sufferings for them. It would be like ridiculing or belittling a person who had given their life to save yours.

d. Hebrews 12:6 "For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth." Read verse 7 and 8

e. A person who "professes" to be a Christian and who lives continually in sin and there is no chastening in his life shows he is not saved. God does not chasten the unsaved who are not His children. However, if a genuine Christian continually sins, God will chasten him and that is evidence he is saved.

02-25-2006, 09:43 PM
That's the simplest explanation I have ever heard for this topic. Well said, Jonathan.
:: smirks ::

02-28-2006, 05:21 AM
Was that a good smirk?

Well, Scott (hmm...Laura, did we ever decide to call him Scott #2, or New Scott?:)) it didn't help me much on the verse (unless there is something I am missing, although, I do agree the sin is probably plural), but, it did help me understand what blaspheming the Holy Spirit meant. I was always confused about that before, although, I don't know if I agree that it cannot be done today.

Old Scott (hee, hee...I just love that!), this is one of the things on the Chistian Questionaire/Quiz thingy that was in the bulletin you sent that I was going to get back to you on, then I lost it. It asked about the values of sin, and you stated what is said in Matthew. But, I wanted to ask you what you thought about this verse in 1 John.

I did a word study, and that didn't help, either.

1 John 5:16,17

If anyone sees his brother committing a sin (amartia) not leading to death (qanatoB), he shall ask and God will for him give life to those who commit sin (amartano) not leading to death (qanatoB).

There is a sin (amartia) not leading to death (qanatoB); I do not say that he should make request for this.

All unrighteousness is sin (amartia), and there is a sin (amartia) not leading to death (qanatoB).

I was hoping to find specifically which sin(s) lead to death and which do not. I was excited to discover in verse 16 that two different words were used for sin. I thought that would give me the answer. But, they mean the same thing, and both words are used to describe the sin(s) that do not lead to death.

I wondered if death meant physical death, or spiritual death. (For example, a sin leading to only physical death would be David and Bathsheba's first baby having to die due to David's sin.)

The word used (qanatoB) can mean both physical death and spiritual death resulting in hell. So, that didn't help, either.

Any thoughts?

02-28-2006, 05:49 AM
Online Bible isn't working right now. So I'll look at it later.

02-28-2006, 11:22 AM
We could just call him Great Scott, instead of Old Scott.

-- Doc Brown

02-28-2006, 02:45 PM
I like it!

03-01-2006, 12:56 AM
heehee...yeah i think we need new names for them....cus them both being called Scott and having the same birthdays and both being into computers....well that was funny to find out...but i think we need new names for them...

tho i do like the 'old Scott' like you said Lisa....get him back for all the times he teases me about being older ;) lol....Jonthan that one is guuuuud...very funny ;D

im gona have read through this thread again...its getting very interesting...great to hear what everyones views on this are :)

03-01-2006, 01:38 AM
I am Great Scott! Worship me as your new god!!

(please don't smite me Jesus, I was joking...)


I read through a lot of 1 John and it surprised me that I'd overlooked so much in there! I MUST study that book now! Cause it's contents are juicy and ripe.

First two chapters boiled down to this:

Christians do not sin.

Yeah it actually says that sons of God do not sin.
John 3:6 "Whoever abides in Him does not sin."
John 3:9 "Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God."

(Now why didn't I find this when the suicide thread was still open?)

so for chapter 5 to turn and say 'If anyone sees a brother that sins'
Might it be referring to a biological brother?

Might the sin leading to death be the unforgivable sin?

Maybe the sin leading to death is a physical death for judgement. You know a Capital punishment?

If your brother sins a sin that execution isn't the punishment for, pray for him that God will give him life. If execution is the punishment, I'm not saying to pray for.

But then immediately after it says "We know that whoever is born of God does not sin; but he who has been born of God keeps himself, and the wicked one does not touch him. "

So I really don't know... there's so much in this book which says that Christians do not and cannot sin that to say in the middle of it "if you see a brother sinning"

bah, wish my Pastor would get back from America already! I have so much to pickle his head with! LOL!