Potential Sin vs. Actual Sin, aka Homosexuality vs. Gossip

Great Debates
1

I’ve been reading the recent Pit and GD threads about homosexuality, and I decided to ask outright a question which I touched on elsewhere. In Mr. Visible’s Pit thread about his nephew he talks about what his nephew will face during his remaining years of high school. Now, I’m a Christian, one who puts her greatest focus on the teachings of Christ. I also know what it’s like to be an outcast in a high school in a small town in America. Therefore, I believe that Mr. Visible’s statement that his nephew will “endure three years of solitude, torment, isolation and rage” if he stays in his current school is reasonable. It certainly mirrors my own, and I was straight.

Here’s my question. In Mark 7, Christ teaches about what’s clean and unclean. Among other things, it contains the justification for Christians not keeping kosher. In Mark 7:20-23, Jesus says the following:

“Sexual immorality” is mentioned here, but so are greed, malice, deceit, slander, arrogance and folly. The high school kids who will torment Mr. Visible’s nephew, or, from my experience, anyone who doesn’t fit in, are surely guilty of actually committing these sins, yet they will do so because Mr. Visible’s nephew has the potential to commit what they regard as the sin of sexual immorality. When their feet are held to the fire, as it were, I’ve read many Christians who claim homosexuality is sinful say that, technically, it’s only homosexual acts that are sinful. Why is it all right to condemn someone for a sin they are tempted to commit, yet nothing is said about sins which are clearly and unambiguously designated so by Christ and which are actually being committed.

To me, being tempted to commit a sin alone is not reason enough for condemnation. According to Christianity, Christ was tempted and, if He had not been tempted, I would not be a Christian. By taunting, showing cruelty, rejecting and isolating a person, by my moral standards, people are actively and willfully sinning. By confessing that he or she is attracted to the same sex, even if I considered homosexuality a sin, I would only consider a person to be confessing that he or she is tempted to commit a sin. If having sex with a person one could not have a commitment with is a sin (in my book that is), it’s one I’ve been tempted to commit a few times myself and I do not, I cannot consider the temptation in and of itself sinful.

So, why do some people justify actual sins against people who admit only to potential sins? Does a homosexual orientation outweigh actual gossip? If so, how does one justify this?

By the way, please don’t limit this thread to homosexuality and gossip within a Christian context – I’m genuinely curious about actual vs. potential sin. That was just the most glaringly obvious example I could come up with. I’m also curious about non-Christians’ take on the whole issue.

Respectfully,
CJ

2

christian checking in.
Its wrong of course, to say anything rude to anyone ,especially one who is"tempted to commit a sin of immorality".

Most of the other students (esepcailly males) are also tempted, just with girls.

The glitch here is homosexuals cannot marry and even Before that, its considered wrong when it is not considered wrong(by society) for hetero couples to be doin the nasty in high school.

I think its a society thing, its not acceptable to even be tempted to do “it” with a same sex person.

Heck, I was ostracized in school for being ugly!

So much for homosexuality. About gossip:

did you hear what NoClueBoy did?..

:wink:

3

I think it’s kind of silly to assume that the kid will be harassed. Nothing has even happened yet and already there’s a lament? It’s almost as if people WANT the kid to be harassed in school so it’ll “prove” how evil conservatives are.

Anyhow, to answer your question, temptation isn’t a sin. The book says that Jesus was tempted in EVERY way we are tempted, so I assume He went through sexual temptations. The point, I think, is that He overcame those temptations, and so we can too because He gives us the power to do so.

4

I knew I was gonna get mentioned in this thread! And I didn’t even vanity search. I just wanted to see two of my favorite lady Dopers were talking about.

John, James, and Paul (or whoever wrote those books) clarify this question a little bit, I think.

True, these are not the words of Jesus. But, it seems to show a consensus among 3 early Church leaders of the danger and actual sin of misuse of words to hurt.

John even delves into the attitude behind hurtful speech, imho. Remember how Jesus went into attitude in the Sermon on the Mount? Committing adultery in the heart and whotnot? If this writer truly is the disciple that Jesus was ‘especially fond of,’ then it would make sense that he had a good understanding of Jesus’s words and intent.

I have to add a little disclaimer that there is still some debate on who actually wrote certain canonical books and when. That’s why I make those “if” staements.

5

So, while my words don’t carry the weight of canonical Scripture, it seems to me that hate speech, and even unintentionally hurtful gossip has a geater culpability than mearly being drawn to a certain course of action.

Is being gay a sin? Subject of a lot of debate. I’ve changed my view over the years, mostly because of my Dad.

Is hurtful gossip or mean spirited words a sin? Yes. I think so.

What if the speaker doesn’t mean to hurt? Well, imho, it’s still wrong. Remember the precedent set in the Mosaic Law of the Unintentional Manslayer? Even though a death may have been caused by accident, there was still a penalty to pay. And if the Avengor of Blood caught him, then the payment was death, even to the Unintentional Manslayer.

Who knows how hurtful our words can be? What if our harsh dismissal of someone’s core essence caused them misery? What if a severe depression were added to by our words? People have been known to commit suicide.

Worse Case Scenario, yeah. But still. It shows the power of negative words.

6

NCB, I agree, mostly. However, “hate speech,” as defined by many people today, is simply saying something to the effect of “I think ____________ is wrong.”

I don’t think anyone needs to get up in anyone else’s face and start berating them for stuff they’ve done. However, it is unreasonable to expect people to keep their mouths shut about what they believe. And from what I see, especially on these boards, that’s exactly what some people want. Shut them up, first and foremost, and then badger them till they give in and express the opposite opinion.

And I don’t think you can hold anyone responsible for someone else choosing to commit suicide. Yes, people dole out a LOT of BS to people but ultimately if someone decides they can’t take it, that’s their decision. Many, many people have gone through hell (sheesh, just look at high school) and managed not to kill themselves.

And what’s this Avenger of Blood thing you’re talking about? I’ve never read anything like that in the OT, can you tell me where it is?

7

Well I wouldn’t want to be the one who pushed them over the edge!

8

The suicide statement can be taken as hyperbole. I was just trying to highlight the power of words.

For that matter, we can choose to allow things to hurt us or not, depending on our level of emotional strength. Though I may not agree with someone on something near and dear to their heart, I feel it would be wrong to “attack” their viewpoint simply because it’s different than mine. Someone in good emotional health would see the ignorance and/or intolerance for what it is. Someone having some troubles or turmoil emotionally may take it very personally.

Debating and making a point is one thing. “You’re wrong and that’s a horrid view to have,” is another.

We have seen this happen in these forums over and over again. Whether it’s about Religion vs Evolution, Gay vs NoGay, Republican vs Democrat. People get nasty with each other. Neither side of any of these issues is exempt from spewing hateful speech. I think it has gotten a little better lately, though.

But, I think we are probably just discussing different sides of the same coin.

As for the Avenger of Blood and the Unintentional Manslayer, it’s in Numbers chapter 35. The provision for Cities of Refuge. Here is an online version.

My point in using that old provision of the Mosaic Law is to show professed Christians that, in some things, we might possibly be held accountable even though what we did was unintentional. Over the top? Maybe. But Jesus did say that he that who is faithful in much is faithful in little. I think the opposite holds true, too.

9

I’m about as far from being a Christian as it’s possible to be, plus I’m gay, so I could write a book about your basic assumptions that I disagree with. But I won’t.

I’d be interested to know whether you’re implying that gay people can’t have a committed relationship, or if you mentioned this simply as an analogy. My partner and I have been in a monogamous relationship for many years, and we are as committed as any nongay couple we know, if not more so. Level of commitment has to do with one’s core values, plus maturity, and this has nothing to do with sexual orientation.

Someone please hold me back, or this’ll wind up in the Pit.

As most people know, the teenage suicide rate among gay kids is way beyond that of nongay kids, some say six times as high. Obviously, this isn’t anything intrinsic to homosexuality, but a reaction to negative external pressures, from the kid’s family, church, school, government, popular sports and music role models, and above all, peer pressure.

I remember all too well what it’s like to be a gay teenager, and back when I was going through it, there was **absolutely no support, anywhere. **Back then, it was something that you didn’t tell anyone, even your closest friends. You didn’t even talk about it, except of course in ridiculing someone who was perceived as being gay.

I remember the isolation, the secrecy, the lies, and above all the loneliness and confusion of being a gay teenager and having nobody to turn to for support. The people who should have provided that support were the **last **people I would have opened up to. It took a tremendous amount of strength to survive those years, and tragically, many do not.

So when a young gay person takes his/her own life, is he the only one who bears responsibility? After all the taunting and teasing and condemnation, can everyone else just sort of shrug and go on with their lives, and comment about how that little queer should have been stronger, and how he should have been able to take all that abuse? Is that what you’re saying, SnoopyFan?

**Anyone who believes that it’s wrong to be gay, or that it’s wrong to act on those feelings, is morally responsible for the high rate of suicide among gay teenagers. **I don’t care if you’ve got dozens of gay friends, and treat them the same as anyone else. I don’t care if your beliefs are rooted in the sacred teachings of your religion, you still **chose **that religion, and **chose **to agree with all of its beliefs.

But that gay kid didn’t choose to be gay. And no amount of preaching or ridicule or violence will change that. It will either make him stronger - or it will push him over the edge. And yes, as an autonomous human being, he’s responsible for his own actions - but when people have driven him to that kind of despair, it’s beyond me how they can wash their hands of any responsibility.

For your sake, I hope your God is more forgiving than I am.

10

NoClueBoy:

Ironic you would mention those verses.

Matthew 5: 27-28
Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
Looks to me like Jesus was of the opinion that looking but not acting (one could call that temptation) was sin too. Surprised you guys missed that one. Well, not really.:wink:

11

So, by my mentioning it (first!) in context with attitude and intent, I missed it?

Indeed! Incredibly ironic.

Score a point for you! :slight_smile:
My main point was how destructive and hurtful misuse of words can be, as highlighted by early Church fathers.

What jesus was saying (imho, of course) was that the intent can be as bad as the action. My own life experiences can lend support to this view. Was he really saying that temptation itself was a sin? Or that one’s reaction, even inwardly, to a temptation can be sin? I think it’s the latter. ymmv

12

I’m not ignoring you, panache. You made some heavy points.

I mean, wow, I had completely overlooked the gay teen suicide issue. My apologies if glossed over anything by labling the suicide issue as hyperbole.

13

badchad, I guess that shouldn’t leave anyone much room to criticize anyone else for her or his “sins.” Maybe that’s the point.

14

Panache, there is a faction of Christians (among whom are Polycarp and, I believe, Siege, who do consider sex outside of marriage a sin. Because gays aren’t allowed to be married, these Christians do hold an “extreme circumstances” exception for them (if in a committed relationship), and believe and work for the passage of same-sex marriage because of that particular belief.

Siege is on our side. :slight_smile:

15

I am a christian who also considers outsideofmarriage sex to be wrong and not wholly for religious reasons.
I am for marriage.
Hey, if gays want to marry, marriage must be sene as something good(which it can be dependign on whom you marry!)

My opinion is NOT popular in any churches I’ve gone to for more than once.

16

Zoe

Regarding the OP that sounds like half the point, the other half is that potential sin is sin too.

However, the next layer of questioning should regard is it ok to criticize people for criticizing?

17

Heh! Sorry, vanilla…I knew you were sympathetic, but wasn’t sure exactly what your stance was. :slight_smile:

18

Look, all I know is that Bibleman has fought the evil Gossip Queen, but so far hasn’t found the need to battle Gayman. I think that speaks volumes.

19

Anyone who believes that it’s wrong to be gay, or that it’s wrong to act on those feelings, is morally responsible for the high rate of suicide among gay teenagers.

That’s bullshit.

I’m not even going to bother to comment on the rest, there’s no point.

20

OK, lets’s leave homosexuality out of the reasons one can be gossiped about for a moment, shall we? In the infamous case in Paducah, Kentucky, where a young man shot up a school prayer group, one of the things I remember reading is that, after that same group of kids tormented the boy who ultimately shot them. My childhood best friend was tormented because she had handicaps. I was tormented for several reasons, among them remaining her best friend and refusal to end that friendship and being the English kid in an American school during America’s Bicentennial.

I have experienced the effects of gossip first hand. I don’t want to hijack this too badly, but I could not walk down a hallway in high school without being insulted, often by people I didn’t even know. If I wasn’t careful, I would eat lunch or ride the bus home standing up because no one would let me sit next to them. My books would routinely be hit out of my hand; in winter, I was a frequent target of snow and iceballs, and, at one point, my family was tormented because of my unpopularity by obscene phone calls. That best friend I mentioned had a nervous breakdown the summer between our sophomore and junior years because of the constant torment she endured, as well as her physical issues. If anyone showed friendship to me or her, that person also became a target for insults.

One of the reasons I take some Christians for their stance on homosexuality is because of one of the few people who did stand by me during those years, who gave me a seat at the lunch table and who showed me kindness, even at the risk of drawing insults himself. Years later, after high school was far behind us, he told me he was gay. He wasn’t out at the time. Geeks like us were asexual. I refuse to believe that this person who took the risk of showing me kindness, courtesy, and decency is somehow inherently more sinful than the kids who made my life constant torment. My cite for doing so is above.

Panache, I deliberately used the word “commitment” not “marriage” for a reason. I think it is possible for two people to have a deep commitment to each other without being legally married, and this applies to homosexuals in particular precisely because it is not currently legally possible for two homosexuals to marry. That friend I mentioned and his partner recently celebrated their 10th anniversary and I’m thrilled, especially since his partner is also a kind, decent, honorable, neat human being who manages to be worthy of him. As for the rest of your post, no need. I’ll start the Pit thread.

Apos, this month’s issue of The Door Magazine has an interview with Willie Ames, the creator of Bible Man which I think you might like. The interview’s not on-line, but if you can, track down a copy and buy it. Among other things, their parent organization, a charity called The Trninty Foundation and they could use the money.

SnoopyFan, and anyone else interested in what the effects of constant gossip do to a person’s soul, I’ll see you in the Pit.

CJ