Is it Okay to Condemn Sinners?

[Hannah1]

can you describe to me, written here, exactly how you would go about talking to someone you see commit a sin.
write it out here. I`d like to see it.
Me, I would say how are you lately over a coffee, say I have noticed..xx and do you know how that will affect you down the line? have you thought about it? is there anything you need help with? and then get down into the problem. they might confess struggles to me and we will talk about it and I will offer to be there as support. same time, I would make sure they understand the severity.

 

[bdavidc]

what is the need to shout and scream and be harsh can`t people point out sin without that.
Jesus never did those things either
you can tell the truth calmly and lovingly

I honestly don't know why you keep bringing up shouting and screaming. I never said we should do that.

You introduced that into the discussion, not me. I have already told you plainly, “I did not say we should stand screaming at people, ‘You're going to hell,’” and I specifically said we should “speak truth without cruelty or self-righteousness.”

Then I told you again that I have never advocated shouting and screaming, and that Christians should be loving, patient, compassionate, willing to listen, and willing to help people.

So please don't keep arguing against something I never said. We actually agree that Christians should not scream at people or treat them cruelly.

The disagreement is whether plainly and directly warning someone about sin, repentance and judgment is automatically “harsh” or unloving. Scripture shows that it is not. Sometimes God's truth is very direct. That is the point I have been making.

 

[Hannah1]

So where is the arguement I have said all the time to say it with love, and empathy

 

[Christ4Ever]

Doesn`t it matter HOW one is doing it?
Are you gonna throw a hard ball or are you gonna try to actually reach that person?
To stand screaming you`re a sinner, you`re going to hell! Will never change anything. That person will not have a change of heart because of that. Just imagine, if it was the opposite, if you were the one that was shouted that. You would not listen or change, would you. No.
The point is not to scream or shout, or come with a statement about their sin. The point is really to REACH that person. To find out the deeper goings and to assist, only then can we facilitate change. They might chose not to correct. But we have much bigger chance.
And this is what the bible says. Go to your brother. if he listens, you have won your brother. If he doesn`t listen, take one or two with you. Probably a pastor of sorts. Or close family member or something like that. And if he does not listen then, tell it to the congregation and if then not listen don`t have anything to do with him, but show love still so his soul can be saved.
That is the bible. Nothing about shouting you`re a sinner, you`re going to hell and blast it.
Does`nt change anything. (and no, twistie this was not to you I believe you have acted correctly, I just prefer not to argue especially as I don`t have all information background)
Sure there will always be those that are not ready to come back or take long time or years. We don`t know that. This is why we have to still show love. Just think about if it was you.
I would be more interested in the story and background so I could work with them there. One doesn`t arrive to ungodly conclusion out of the blue. Something usually happens. If its teaching or worse. So I would say it is more about what we can do for that person to help them.
Think about Jesus. He said to the woman about to be stoned, go, and sin no more, neither I condemn you. And He alway say sin no more. Then we have the reality of demons and their influence on our thoughts and actions we can`t forget that either. There is so many dimensions to this. There are ways to discuss sin that reach beneath the surface other than a straight this is sin you are a sinner. I would say we have to reach deeper to reach that person because ultimately what else is gonna do it.

Dear Sister,
No one said anything shouting or being unloving in offering correction. In fact you are the one assuming that is the method one will use. Which I agree in some and maybe even in many cases that is exactly what is done, but those who do love the sinner, like our Lord did, must be able to identify the sin and communicate it clearly in a loving fashion so that there is no misunderstanding to the why and what for. Speaking in love, in caring for their eternal well-being, is the very reason you are communicating the sin in the first place, that you "know" (this can't be secondhand knowledge/gossip) is being committed by the individual you are seeking to help. Letting them know that as Romans 3:23-24 says, that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. This doesn't excuse the sin but hopefully lets the person know if they don't already know, that it's not condemnation that you are speaking to them, but God's life saving grace through Jesus Christ!

The problem is that most people will identify the sin, then walk away as if they've done all that they are supposed to do. That is a negative!!! If you are willing to speak it, then you must be willing to walk with them to help them as well! Help them with that burden they may not even have known that anyone else actually knew of it! Maybe, not even themselves! The shame can be great, so understanding that, and being there with a helping hand is a must if you truly are so bold to confront a sinner, in their sin.

I appreciate what you have said, and it is truly a fine line, that one must walk if one is to do this. Prayer, and I believe Holy Spirit guidance is a must because it's not about like you have said shouting at them and driving them out of town on a rail. Though if in a church environment, and they don't accept the admonishing, then they just might have to be told to leave. With the knowledge that the door is always open for them to return. Paul speaks to this very thing to the church in Corinth.

That's is our hope in talking with others about sin. That the change really doesn't happen in a vacuum, but in the brotherhood of faith, in a Body of Believers called a Church with Jesus as the Head.

You have a good heart, Sister.

With the Love in Christ Jesus.
YBIC/Moderator
Nick
\o/

 

[Twistie]

Is it okay that you allow this?

 

[Hannah1]

Dear Sister,
No one said anything shouting or being unloving in offering correction. In fact you are the one assuming that is the method one will use. Which I agree in some and maybe even in many cases that is exactly what is done, but those who do love the sinner, like our Lord did, must be able to identify the sin and communicate it clearly in a loving fashion so that there is no misunderstanding to the why and what for. Speaking in love, in caring for their eternal well-being, is the very reason you are communicating the sin in the first place, that you "know" (this can't be secondhand knowledge/gossip) is being committed by the individual you are seeking to help. Letting them know that as Romans 3:23-24 says, that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. This doesn't excuse the sin but hopefully lets the person know if they don't already know, that it's not condemnation that you are speaking to them, but God's life saving grace through Jesus Christ!

The problem is that most people will identify the sin, then walk away as if they've done all that they are supposed to do. That is a negative!!! If you are willing to speak it, then you must be willing to walk with them to help them as well! Help them with that burden they may not even have known that anyone else actually knew of it! Maybe, not even themselves! The shame can be great, so understanding that, and being there with a helping hand is a must if you truly are so bold to confront a sinner, in their sin.

I appreciate what you have said, and it is truly a fine line, that one must walk if one is to do this. Prayer, and I believe Holy Spirit guidance is a must because it's not about like you have said shouting at them and driving them out of town on a rail. Though if in a church environment, and they don't accept the admonishing, then they just might have to be told to leave. With the knowledge that the door is always open for them to return. Paul speaks to this very thing to the church in Corinth.

That's is our hope in talking with others about sin. That the change really doesn't happen in a vacuum, but in the brotherhood of faith, in a Body of Believers called a Church with Jesus as the Head.

You have a good heart, Sister.

With the Love in Christ Jesus.
YBIC/Moderator
Nick
\o/

I'm doing e learning for my new job in mental health, and it comes in on these things, how important being empathetic and respectful and really listen and an open approach, and focus on how something affects them and making positive, not negative suggestions short and directive but positive. As you say, just pointing out sin is not going to help at all if we don't show care, empathy and a willingness to discuss. Why are you otherwise doing it if it's just to point out the sin. We forget it's always a background, and it's very likely they are struggling. Otherwise they would not have the problem. So it's a lack of empathy and willing to help that's really the problem and it's guaranteed they will reject anything you say because of it.
Thank you for your kind words, brother
But yes in obvious bad cases causing harmful behaviour we have to create boundaries, but even that have levels,we have to do more to help. But it doesn't mean we should accept behaviour thats destructive, and there's a difference between mortal sins and venial sins. If we really want to help,we have to help them get free it's our duty. While most already are too painfully aware of their sins as well our approach makes the difference, but of course, some cases we might deal with deliberate evil, that's another story

 

[Hannah1]

So,a soft ball,a are you aware, What's happening, talk to me and a questioning to help give positive directions, suggestions and show care if they don't want to get rid of the problem dig, communicate help if it's just something that goes out over the person, continue trying to help if it goes out over others stronger boundaries and of course,in severe cases. As Paul said
But venial sins that's those sins everyone are coming across,in one form or another, mortal sins are serious sins of risk of fire so those things take intervention, but there's still levels
So do you see the approach and care we really need to show

 

[Rad]

There is an important distinction here. Christians are not given authority to pronounce someone's final eternal sentence. God is the Judge. But that does not mean we are forbidden to judge whether conduct is sinful when God has already spoken plainly about it.

I agree with you, Eternal Judgement is Gods prerogative alone, his is the final word on who is condemned and who is saved, and while i also agree that we are called on to judge whether someones conduct is sinful according to Gods word the problem arises about just what is sinful. I have had this discussion before on these boards but feel it is so important an issue that it needs reiterating whenever the subject of sin arises. There seems to be a marked reluctance in some Christian circles to calling someone a sinner owing to their wealth or their lack of compassion for the poor. Yet these are two subjects on which Christ spoke extensively about and condemned both the rich and those that ignored those in need to eternal condemnation. Perhaps its a question of how easy it is to point the finger at others, even if thats done in a caring and considerate manner, and a marked reluctance to recognise the inherent sinfulness of our own lives of comparative wealth and comfort in a world of poverty and suffering.

Matthew 7:1 is often quoted as though Jesus forbade all judgment, but Jesus continued, “Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye” (Matthew 7:5). He was condemning hypocritical judgment, not righteous judgment.

But which of us has indeed "cast the beam out of our own eye", for are we not ALL wretched sinners in the sight of God, dependent of his Grace, mercy and forgiveness for our salvation, and if that is indeed the case, how can we see clearly to "remove the mote out of our brothers eye", these are questions i ask myself when i condemn the sins of others, for i all too clearly see that same sin in my own life which somewhat tempers what could be my self righteous condemnation of others failings.

Jesus also said, “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24). Paul said concerning those inside the church, “do not ye judge them that are within?” (1 Corinthians 5:12).

The same is true when dealing with the lost. We do not have to invent a condemnation against them because Scripture already tells us their condition: “he that believeth not is condemned already” (John 3:18).

And Scripture also tells us that in Matthew 7:21-24, many that profess to be followers of Christ will be told by him "I never knew you". It seems to me that none of us can be assured of our Salvation, that we may ourselves be the "Lost", for as ive said before we are ALL wretched sinners, and while it is an important part of our calling to point out the sins of others in the hope they will repent and follow the path of true Faith and Salvation, we must never lose sight of the fact that ALL of us tread the line between Salvation and condemnation and ALL of us must try to follow Christs words and teachings to the best of our ability.

Our responsibility is to tell people what God has said about sin, repentance, faith in Christ, and judgment. Calling something sin when God calls it sin is not personally condemning someone. It is simply agreeing with God's Word.

Totally agree, and i see there has been extensive discussion about how we do that telling, which again i agree with. Our attitude must always be one of Love and compassion and a realisation that we are ALL unworthy sinners in the eyes of God. And that when Christ said", Let him without sin cast the first stone", then NONE of us are able to cast it.

 

[Gothedral]

(...What in the casting pearls before possessed bacon is going on here..?)

Saint Luke 24:

44 And Jesus said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

45 Then opened He their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
48 And ye are witnesses of these things.

We all talk to each other like proper brothers' (and sisters lol) keepers for life.
What's the issue?

 

[Rad]

(...What in the casting pearls before possessed bacon is going on here..?)

Saint Luke 24:
44 And Jesus said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

45 Then opened He their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
48 And ye are witnesses of these things.

We all talk to each other like proper brothers' (and sisters lol) keepers for life.
What's the issue?

I suppose that for me the issue is, the selectivity of the way we interpret what is a "sin", and also exactly that, the way we talk to others about those sins. We all have our own understanding of the "truth", and i guess its only through discussion that we can test the validity of those "truths" and hope that others will do the same.

 

[KingJ]

I suppose that for me the issue is, the selectivity of the way we interpret what is a "sin", and also exactly that, the way we talk to others about those sins. We all have our own understanding of the "truth", and i guess its only through discussion that we can test the validity of those "truths" and hope that others will do the same.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't agree. Scripture is crystal clear about what sin is. God dictated to the prophets the things that upset Him and had them recorded in Scripture so that we would know what He considers sinful. Since God is righteous, everything He calls sin is evil.

1 John 3:4 says, “sin is the transgression of the law.”
1 John 5:17 says, “All unrighteousness is sin.”
James 4:17 says, “to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.”

Scripture also shows that God gave different punishments for different sins. Some carried the death penalty, while others carried whipping or other forms of discipline. Yet all sin brings punishment. Romans 6:23 says, “the wages of sin is death.” Hebrews 10:26-27 also warns of judgment for those who deliberately continue in sin.

The dispensation of grace does not mean that God changed His mind about what is sinful. God does not change. Malachi 3:6 says, “I am the LORD, I change not.” James 1:17 says there is “no variableness, neither shadow of turning.”

Grace does not mean that God now approves of the things He previously called sin. Romans 6:1-2 says, “Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid.”

Where I think the real problem comes in is when people convolute Scripture to accommodate their own sin or the sins of others they approve of. Isaiah 5:20 says, “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil.” 2 Timothy 4:3-4 warns that people will turn away from the truth and seek teaching that agrees with what they want to hear.

So yes, discussion is useful. We should test our understanding against Scripture, just as the Bereans did in Acts 17:11. But ultimately our job is not to make Scripture agree with us. Our job is to make sure we agree with Scripture.

 

[KingJ]

So foget what you believe i'm saying and concentrate on what Christ said, in Matthew and Lukes Gospel Christ spoke of "The Rich", in Marks Gospel Christ spoke of "The Rich" and "those that trust in Riches", so Christ condemned "The Rich" and "those that trust in Riches", whats the problem?.

No youre right, its not, i agree, but then Christ goes on in verse 25 to condemn "the Rich" and in verse 23 to talk of a "rich man", are you so desperate that you are basing your whole defence of your position on the interpretation of 1 line spoken by Christ taken out of context, what of the same story in both Matthew and Lukes Gospel, where Christ just talks of "The Rich", it really does seem to me you are clutching at straws, or in this case a single straw, to stop yourself being swept away together with your house built on sand.


Did you not read my reply, or in fact my many replies on this matter where i quoted in full Christs words on the incompatibility of wealth and riches and Faith and Salvation, if you want me to repeat them i will, but the evidence of a change is there in Black and white, in Christs own words. I do not contend that wealth and riches were sinful under the OT Covenant, that was never my position, just that Christ changed, or rather Fulfilled , Gods purpose for his creation through Christs teachings in the NT. The Scripture is there, just read the Texts i have quoted and if you want me to repeat them again i will, no problem.

You do understand the concept of a Christian discussion forum dont you, we discuss, you say something, i agree or disagree, and if i disagree i tell you why, based on Scripture, the reasons i disagree, you then can either accept my reasons or tell me why, based on Scripture, you disagree with them,....... you have asked this question so many times before, and i have answered so many times before, so heres my answer again, and please, if you disagree, tell me why , based on Scripture, you so do, thanks. heres my reply " You know very well that Abraham, David and Job lived under the OT Covenant where being rich wasnt something that would condemn you in itself, Christ changed that, under the NT Covenant being rich is condemned for all the reasons ive listed in my numerous previous postings. As for Joseph of Arimathea, there is no further mention of what happened to him, but even if he was Rich and God saved him, where is the problem with that, or do you restrict God to follow the same teachings and commandments he gives to us to follow?. God is God, he can do with His creation as he wills, and any attempt to constrain him by our own futile notions of Justice are fruitless as Christ illustrated in the Parable of "The Workers in the Vineyard" where in verse 15 the "goodman of the house", God, says "Is it not lawful for me to do what i will with mine own?. Is thine eye evil because i am good". Christ gives us the basis on which we must try to live our lives, and thats it, how WE should live our lives, not God, WE, and if God chooses to do something different then who are we to question that. Otherwise how can there ever be a "Day of Judgement" where God will consign the majority of his creation to everlasting torment, when Christ tells us to "Turn the other cheek, do not resist evil, Love our enemies, Pray for those that persecute us and do good to those that spitefully use us". God is not restricted by our notions of whats right or wrong but we are here to obey his teachings on Love, Compassion ,Justice and the incompatibility of Riches with our professed faith."

No what this is moving Beyond is a determination by yourself not to accept what is clearly taught by Christ, the incompatibility of Riches and Faith, because in so doing, you would not only have to accept that you are wrong, which i feel is very hard for you to do, but would also mean a radical change in your Personal, Political and theological reasoning and position. But that is what Christ does, he takes our perceived notions of whats right and proper and turns them on their heads, and we either accept his teachings and commandments as our professed Lord and Saviour or we can wallow in the condemnation of our own prejudices and perceived righteousness.

I don't think you understand how discussion on a Christian forum works. There is this book called the Bible, and it is the Scriptures therein that dictate the debate. If you say something is supported by Scripture, you provide the Scripture. Scripture corrects Scripture. It is not opinion verse opinion. You need to deal with all of scripture. If you hold onto one or two cherry picked words or verses you are not much better than the devil in Matt 4.

The bible has plenty terrifying warnings for false teachers, only an absolute idiot would ignore this fact.

The Terror of Standing Before God as a False Teacher

-------------------

1. “The rich” vs “those that trust in riches”

Mark 10:24 specifically says, “them that trust in riches.” Possessing riches and trusting in riches are not synonymous. Jesus did not say that being rich itself makes salvation impossible. Mark 10:27 says, “with God all things are possible.”

2. “Christ condemned the rich”

You keep asserting this but have not established it. If simply being rich condemned someone, why does Paul specifically address “them that are rich in this world” in 1 Timothy 6:17 and tell them not to trust in uncertain riches? He does not tell them that being rich itself makes them condemned.

3. “Christ changed the rule under the New Covenant”

You still have not produced a Scripture saying that God changed wealth from something permissible under the OT to something sinful under the NT. In fact, 1 Timothy 6:17 directly addresses rich believers. The problem is trusting in riches, loving money and serving mammon.

4. Abraham, Job, David and Joseph

You say the OT examples are irrelevant because Christ changed the rule. But Joseph of Arimathea was a rich man and a disciple of Jesus (Matthew 27:57). Zacchaeus was also wealthy, yet Jesus said, “This day is salvation come to this house” (Luke 19:9). Again, wealth itself is not presented as the sin.

5. “God can do whatever He wants”

Of course God is sovereign. But that does not allow us to dismiss Scripture. Matthew 20:15 is about God's right to be generous, not permission for us to redefine what sin is. Your comparison with turning the other cheek also fails because Scripture says “Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord” (Romans 12:19). God judging sinners is not the same as us taking personal vengeance.

6. New Covenant changes things

You know very well that Abraham, David and Job lived under the OT Covenant where being rich wasnt something that would condemn you in itself, Christ changed that, under the NT Covenant

Where does Christ actually say that merely possessing wealth is now sinful or incompatible with salvation?

The NT warns against loving money, trusting in riches and serving mammon. That is not the same as saying that possessing wealth itself is a sin.

In fact, the NT specifically addresses “them that are rich in this world” in 1 Timothy 6:17 and tells them not to trust in their riches, but to trust in God. It does not tell them that their wealth makes them condemned.

7. The question you keep avoiding

I have asked you the same question because you have never actually answered it: Where does Scripture say that merely possessing riches is itself sinful or incompatible with faith and salvation? You keep giving me warnings about what riches can do to a person's heart. I agree with those warnings. But that is not the claim you are making.

You say this is the same question I have asked before. Exactly. I keep asking it because you keep avoiding the actual question.

 

[Rad]

I understand what you are saying, but I don't agree. Scripture is crystal clear about what sin is. God dictated to the prophets the things that upset Him and had them recorded in Scripture so that we would know what He considers sinful. Since God is righteous, everything He calls sin is evil.

Scripture may be "Crystal Clear about what sin is", but our understanding of Scripture leaves much to be desired. Hence the lengthy discussion we are having about the compatibility of riches and faith and Christs teaching on the subject. We both read the same Bible yet both believe our widely differing beliefs on the subject are right.

1 John 3:4 says, “sin is the transgression of the law.”
1 John 5:17 says, “All unrighteousness is sin.”
James 4:17 says, “to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.”

Scripture also shows that God gave different punishments for different sins. Some carried the death penalty, while others carried whipping or other forms of discipline. Yet all sin brings punishment. Romans 6:23 says, “the wages of sin is death.” Hebrews 10:26-27 also warns of judgment for those who deliberately continue in sin.

The dispensation of grace does not mean that God changed His mind about what is sinful. God does not change. Malachi 3:6 says, “I am the LORD, I change not.” James 1:17 says there is “no variableness, neither shadow of turning.”

God does not change his mind, that is true, but his purposes are fulfilled, as when Christ in the Sermon on the mount in Matthew 5: 17-48 said on a number of issues, " It has been said,.... but i say unto you", this is not God changing his mind, but Christ fulfilling Gods purpose, Matthew 5:17 "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.".

Grace does not mean that God now approves of the things He previously called sin. Romans 6:1-2 says, “Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid.”

Where I think the real problem comes in is when people convolute Scripture to accommodate their own sin or the sins of others they approve of. Isaiah 5:20 says, “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil.” 2 Timothy 4:3-4 warns that people will turn away from the truth and seek teaching that agrees with what they want to hear.

Agree completely, the problem is that our prejudices and beliefs are often so tightly held that they transform into "knowledge", we know that we are right and anyone questioning those established prejudices and beliefs are sometimes ridiculed or viewed as either heretical or even possessed.

So yes, discussion is useful. We should test our understanding against Scripture, just as the Bereans did in Acts 17:11. But ultimately our job is not to make Scripture agree with us. Our job is to make sure we agree with Scripture.

So true, and thats why most of us are here i would guess, to test our beliefs ,in the light of Scripture, and to come to a better understanding of what it means to "walk with Christ".

 

[Rad]

I don't think you understand how discussion on a Christian forum works. There is this book called the Bible, and it is the Scriptures therein that dictate the debate. If you say something is supported by Scripture, you provide the Scripture. Scripture corrects Scripture. It is not opinion verse opinion. You need to deal with all of scripture. If you hold onto one or two cherry picked words or verses you are not much better than the devil in Matt 4.

The bible has plenty terrifying warnings for false teachers, only an absolute idiot would ignore this fact.

The Terror of Standing Before God as a False Teacher

OK, point taken, so for me to get a better understanding of just where you stand, perhaps it would be easier to take the verses i am using to support my belief one at a time, and ask just what they mean to you.

So the first one is Matthew 6: 19-24, you know it well but i'll print it here for ease of discussion "
"19 Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:
20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:
21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.
23 But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!
24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon."
what is your understanding of Christs words here in relation to the possession of Earthly riches?.

I'll get round to the points you made below when discussing the other verses i'm going to quote to support my belief of the incompatibility of Wealth and Salvation according to Christs teaching.
Let me reiterate that what i'm saying is my BELIEF, i may be wrong, in fact in many ways i hope i am, because like most other people on these boards, in world terms i am Rich, and so will suffer Christs condemnation, The best i can say in my defence is that i am trying to give my earthly treasures away to the poor and thus store up Treasure in heaven, to put into practice Christs commandment to "Love your Neighbour as yourself" and "treat others as you'd want to be treated", but being the wretched sinner that i am, my riches, as Christ well knew, have a special hold on, and place, in my heart.

-------------------

1. “The rich” vs “those that trust in riches”

Mark 10:24 specifically says, “them that trust in riches.” Possessing riches and trusting in riches are not synonymous. Jesus did not say that being rich itself makes salvation impossible. Mark 10:27 says, “with God all things are possible.”

2. “Christ condemned the rich”

You keep asserting this but have not established it. If simply being rich condemned someone, why does Paul specifically address “them that are rich in this world” in 1 Timothy 6:17 and tell them not to trust in uncertain riches? He does not tell them that being rich itself makes them condemned.

3. “Christ changed the rule under the New Covenant”

You still have not produced a Scripture saying that God changed wealth from something permissible under the OT to something sinful under the NT. In fact, 1 Timothy 6:17 directly addresses rich believers. The problem is trusting in riches, loving money and serving mammon.

4. Abraham, Job, David and Joseph

You say the OT examples are irrelevant because Christ changed the rule. But Joseph of Arimathea was a rich man and a disciple of Jesus (Matthew 27:57). Zacchaeus was also wealthy, yet Jesus said, “This day is salvation come to this house” (Luke 19:9). Again, wealth itself is not presented as the sin.

5. “God can do whatever He wants”

Of course God is sovereign. But that does not allow us to dismiss Scripture. Matthew 20:15 is about God's right to be generous, not permission for us to redefine what sin is. Your comparison with turning the other cheek also fails because Scripture says “Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord” (Romans 12:19). God judging sinners is not the same as us taking personal vengeance.

6. New Covenant changes things



Where does Christ actually say that merely possessing wealth is now sinful or incompatible with salvation?

The NT warns against loving money, trusting in riches and serving mammon. That is not the same as saying that possessing wealth itself is a sin.

In fact, the NT specifically addresses “them that are rich in this world” in 1 Timothy 6:17 and tells them not to trust in their riches, but to trust in God. It does not tell them that their wealth makes them condemned.

7. The question you keep avoiding

I have asked you the same question because you have never actually answered it: Where does Scripture say that merely possessing riches is itself sinful or incompatible with faith and salvation? You keep giving me warnings about what riches can do to a person's heart. I agree with those warnings. But that is not the claim you are making.

You say this is the same question I have asked before. Exactly. I keep asking it because you keep avoiding the actual question.

 

[bdavidc]

I agree with you, Eternal Judgement is Gods prerogative alone, his is the final word on who is condemned and who is saved, and while i also agree that we are called on to judge whether someones conduct is sinful according to Gods word the problem arises about just what is sinful. I have had this discussion before on these boards but feel it is so important an issue that it needs reiterating whenever the subject of sin arises. There seems to be a marked reluctance in some Christian circles to calling someone a sinner owing to their wealth or their lack of compassion for the poor. Yet these are two subjects on which Christ spoke extensively about and condemned both the rich and those that ignored those in need to eternal condemnation. Perhaps its a question of how easy it is to point the finger at others, even if thats done in a caring and considerate manner, and a marked reluctance to recognise the inherent sinfulness of our own lives of comparative wealth and comfort in a world of poverty and suffering.

But which of us has indeed "cast the beam out of our own eye", for are we not ALL wretched sinners in the sight of God, dependent of his Grace, mercy and forgiveness for our salvation, and if that is indeed the case, how can we see clearly to "remove the mote out of our brothers eye", these are questions i ask myself when i condemn the sins of others, for i all too clearly see that same sin in my own life which somewhat tempers what could be my self righteous condemnation of others failings.

And Scripture also tells us that in Matthew 7:21-24, many that profess to be followers of Christ will be told by him "I never knew you". It seems to me that none of us can be assured of our Salvation, that we may ourselves be the "Lost", for as ive said before we are ALL wretched sinners, and while it is an important part of our calling to point out the sins of others in the hope they will repent and follow the path of true Faith and Salvation, we must never lose sight of the fact that ALL of us tread the line between Salvation and condemnation and ALL of us must try to follow Christs words and teachings to the best of our ability.

Totally agree, and i see there has been extensive discussion about how we do that telling, which again i agree with. Our attitude must always be one of Love and compassion and a realisation that we are ALL unworthy sinners in the eyes of God. And that when Christ said", Let him without sin cast the first stone", then NONE of us are able to cast it.

Rad, I agree that we need humility when dealing with the sins of others. We should examine ourselves first, and none of us has any room for self-righteousness.

But I would disagree with a couple of things. Jesus did not condemn people simply for being wealthy. Scripture says, “the love of money is the root of all evil” (1 Timothy 6:10), not money itself. The real issue is what rules the heart. Likewise, refusing compassion to those genuinely in need can certainly reveal a serious spiritual problem, but wealth itself is not what condemns a person.

I also don't believe Scripture teaches that Christians continually “tread the line between salvation and condemnation.” That would leave us with no real assurance at all. Jesus said the believer “hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life” (John 5:24). John wrote, “that ye may know that ye have eternal life” (1 John 5:13).

Matthew 7 does not require us to become sinless before helping another person with sin. Jesus said first remove the beam from your own eye, “and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye” (Matthew 7:5). The point is repentance and humility, not that only a sinless person can recognize sin.

So I agree that we should never approach someone else's sin with pride. But humility should not become uncertainty about what God has plainly called sin, nor should our own failures cause us to doubt the promises God has given to those who are truly in Christ.