I have no problem with “hate the sin; love the sinner”. But the doctrine a lot of so-called Christians are currently following is “ignore the sin; elect the sinner”.
A Christian can give people the benefit of the doubt, and look for the most charitable possible interpretation of their words and actions. That may have been what Flyer was attempting to do here—but if so, he needs to afford the same grace to Clinton.
Hating the sin and loving the sinner is a good thing.
BUT:
-
White evangelical Christianity has a long history of ‘hating the sin’ in ways that are indistinguishable from hating the sinners. For instance, your belief in the immorality of gay sex didn’t have to be accompanied by a decades-long drive to make life as difficult and miserable as possible for gays. But it was. (And don’t tell me about ‘tough love.’ Funny how that always seems to apply to the sinners who y’all are less fond of.)
-
There’s a big difference between forgiving a sinner, on the one hand, and OTOH actively working to elevate an unrepentant shitheel to a position of great power. You get forgiven as part of the flock. You don’t get to commit whatever sins you want, and be shepherd.
-
Don’t you love his variation of the Golden Rule from that video?
[QUOTE=Donald Trump]
Get even with people. If they screw you, screw them back ten times as hard. I really believe that.
[/QUOTE]
As a Christian, do you approve this message? Because I sure don’t. And it seems to not only be one of Trump’s lifelong guiding principles, but also one that he certainly hasn’t abandoned in this election season.
“Hate the sin, love the sinner” is such a cop-out.
It might be plausible if they then tried to get the sinner some help and stopped him from doing these things again and again and again and again and again.
But in this case, they are ignoring his behavior. Worse, they are encouraging and enabling it.
You can love the sinner all you want, but you are still morally obligated to discourage or even stop additional sins from accruing, especially from a repeat offender who shows absolutely no signs of remorse or any intention of stopping.
Trump is a massive asshole and continuing to ignore and enable his current and virtually guaranteed future sins is a moral failing on the part of everybody who supports him.
I mean, isn’t that the excuse evangelicals have for supporting draconian laws against abortion and homosexuality? That they still love the sinners but want their sins to end? Why the fucking double standard for Trump? Why not stop HIS sins from ending?
Actually, ‘screw them back ten times as hard’ is exactly what Jesus preached. No wait, it’s the complete opposite. Something tells me Trump, among his other sins, isn’t much on forgiveness either.
Although Trump doesn’t seem competent enough to be the AntiChrist, in most other ways he seems to measure up. I don’t know why more people haven’t gotten on this.
Love the sinner hate the sin- unless it’s Hillary cause she the devil!
Damn right it’s not that bad. Of all the vile things he’s said and done, of all the stupid policies he’s pretended to recommend, this doesn’t even ping the meter. For those that haven’t watched the video:
Donald ribs his celebrity colleague for initially refusing to introduce him at an event.
He says he was going to call her dumb, even though he says that wouldn’t be true, but ultimately doesn’t call her dumb.
He says he’s traveled the world talking about how wonderful she is, she’s the best, etc, but she wouldn’t introduce him. To spell it out for you…he’s complimenting her.
He feigns insult and says “She came…over here.” The audience laughs loudly and he accuses them of having dirty minds.
He kisses her on the cheek, she sits down.
In sum, he teases a colleague while complimenting her heavily. Yaaaaaaaaawwwwwn.
Because it’s a completely forgettable, tepid occurrence? This shite is lighter fare than every White House correspondence dinner ever.
Terry Pratchett’s character Granny Weatherwax had a pretty good definition of sin: that sin is when you treat people like things.
And it’s a pity more Christians don’t accept the authority of Granny Weatherwax’ wisdom on this subject, because by her definition, Trump really IS the Antichrist: he treats everybody like things, all the time.
Well, if stuff like this was enough to make a person decide to not vote for Trump, then that person is an idiot. A reasonable person would have rejected Trump long ago for far better reasons.
Maybe you’ve gone over this elsewhere, but I’d love to hear your reasoning here.
Hillary has never been convicted of anything, and worst thing you can say about her is that she’s a fairly typical politician with privacy and sincerity issues. Her foreign policy, while bellicose, is not nearly the “bomb them all” that Trump’s is.
Donald Trump, by the same evidentiary standards that are applied to Hillary’s misdeeds, has committed fraud (Trump U.), tax evasion (Trump Foundation), sexual assault (his own words and witnesses), spousal rape, adultery, very likely statutory rape (if the stories about the 1980’s sex and cocaine parties are to be believed), and has notoriously cheated contractors who were due payment. Those are all pretty sincere character flaws, but as a Presidential candidate, probably the most glaring flaw of all is that he doesn’t do his homework. He came to the debates woefully unprepared, spat out word salad, and lost badly each time. For most of his other character flaws, you could probably point to some other president with similar failings, so you could overlook the hideous character IF he were fit for the job. But he’s not.
Someone who was “far worse” than Trump would have to perform human sacrifices in the Oval Office. So I’m interested in hearing your justifications here.
He should have deleted the video, then everything would be okay.
Because sexual assault takes place on stage at every White House correspondents’ dinner? Our press corps is more depraved than I realized.
Seriously, this may be a very mild sexual assault, but that’s still what it is: he grabbed her, pulled her to him, and without giving a good goddamn whether she wanted to kiss him or not, tried to kiss her on the lips. She managed to get an arm up in time, and turn her head, so he only kissed her on the cheek.
The real point here is, though, that he was willing to do a milder version, in public, up on stage, of what a dozen women have accused him of doing in private.
The point is that if one had doubts about their truthfulness, here he is doing something that’s very much of a piece with what he’s accused of. If he’s willing to do that much in front of an audience, with his face up on a few Jumbotrons, it should be no surprise that he was a bit more forceful and persistent in private.
Especially b/c he’s doing it out of a feeling that he is right to avenge his bruised ego by doing this in public deliberately.
There’s no real reason for me to believe that Jennifer Hawkins and Donald were friends, and there’s no evidence tht she was happy / OK with what was going on here.
Since Christianity has been brought up here, Donald Trump is going to go down in history as the topic of innumerable sermons. He’s tailor made for a sermon: the man who got so, so, so close to being the most powerful man in the world (for many reasons, some of them even good) but was undone by his own personal vices, his ‘women problem’ first and foremost.
Jennifer Hawkins is a very canny businesswoman. She has nothing to gain by publicly trashing Trump right now.
Perhaps a tell-all book in a couple of decades will be a different story.
Something somethimg immoral something.
I thought it was something about how she didn’t use her Satan-powers to stop the Benghazi attacks.
It is hard to imagine something you could say to make Christianity look uglier and more hypocritical than your posts here. What a shit religion you have, totally divorced from any serious ethical stance.
Fortunately the folks I know who are Christian are far better people than you, otherwise I’d have a hard time believing it could ever be a good thing.
It doesn’t work that way.