Le Sabot Post-Moderne

Hmmmmm....is it anti-liberal backlash, maybe? We become so incensed by wolves within the churches denying the lordship of Christ in denying the sinfulness of homosexual behavior that we want to be "really faithful" and therefore be vocally anti-homosexual as though that were an end in itself.

Not that that excuses anything -- we as Christians (corporately -- there may be many fine folks reading this blog to whom the criticisms do not individually apply) need to remember that Christ is crucified FOR our sins, and that we shouldn't skip over the last two verses of Romans 5 in our haste to get to Romans 6. ;-) To do less is indeed to make the gospel less than what it is.

My question is...are there gradations of sin? Are some sins worse than others? Yes? No? All sins send you to Hell if you do not repent of them, but beyond that, are all sins equal?

Pieter-

I think there is absolutely a gradation of sin. Fornication is clearly one of the Big Ones, so to speak, because Paul writes that those who sin sexually sin against their own body and singles out sexual sin for special mention. Any sex outside of the covenant of marriage is grossly sinful.

What I object to is the tendency I observe to lump everyone else into one group which I would call "acceptable sinners", while at the same time putting gays into a special class called "pariahs." Even if they were a special class of sinners, it would only mean we were that much more obligated to preach grace to them in love.

Pentamom-

I think you've hit the nail on the head. Part of it is just red-stater squeamishness. But a large measure, IMO, is a sort of slipper slope mentality. Some seem to think that if we reach out to them, and show them love, then "tolerance" will inevitably follow, and then the evangelicals will suddenly be electing RuPaul as Bishop or something...

Excellent post. It is indeed sad that homosexuality is the one sin that Christians just can't seem to deal with in a very practical way. You are correct when you say that all our sins are grotesque, and I believe that Christians in this country have become way too comfortable with some. Just by way of illustration, my wife graduated from a conservative Christian college. The professor asked, "How many of you would be upset if you found out your roommate was sleeping with their boyfriend or girlfriend." Several hands went up, but it was only a small fraction of the class. Next, the professor asked, "How many of you would be upset if you found out your roommate was a practicing homosexual." Now, the vast majority of the class raised their hands. The professor seemed perplexed as he announced, "Hey folks, IT'S THE SAME SIN!"

I would agree that in some sense it is the same sin but I also think that it is a broader sin in that it is a sin against God's created order. I think of David and Bathsheba whose initial relationship was in sin but ultimately was not because it was a 'natural' relationship as opposed to one that goes against 'nature'. Nonetheless, I agree that we seem to have the mentality of the Pharisee instead of the tax collector praying at the temple and we need to repent.

I think part of it is a backlash against the gay/lesbian lobby as Pentamom suggests. This is definitely a group of sinners with political power. Conservative Christians get caught up in the politics of the issue due to the full court press on many fronts from the homosexual groups. I think this is only one of many reasons why gays have a tendency to be lumped into a separate class of sinners. If we had numerous organized alcoholic political groups trying to influence policy on all levels of church and state, there might be a similar backlash.

All that being said, Discoshaman is correct -- the church has failed to minister effectively to homosexuals, and needs a better understanding of grace.

And as long as we try to fight homosexuality as a part of our on-going kulturkampf, we shall lose. We will lose because we are using the opposition's weapons.

It should be no part of a Christian's business to demonize. It should be all the church's business to proclaim grace (never cheap grace, but neither a grace that is not utterly free). And to do so not only with our lips but also with our lives.

Brad and David-

It's been really encouraging to read the responses to this post. Thanks for weighing in. It is a different sin, and it is a further twisting of God's natural order. I think we all agree though, that it isn't more severe to the point of being a special 'category' unto itself that borders on unpardonability. But it seems to be in such a category in the working paradigms of many Christians...

"Nonetheless, I agree that we seem to have the mentality of the Pharisee instead of the tax collector praying at the temple and we need to repent."

I liked this section a lot. That summarizes the whole of what I was trying to say. :) Good to see you here, btw. You're one of my first RT friends to come by the blog.

Inkling and Timothy-

Hi y'all... :)

"If we had numerous organized alcoholic political groups trying to influence policy on all levels of church and state, there might be a similar backlash."

I think you do see a similar backlash against groups such as feminists...

I don't see this reaction against homosexuality as a discrete issue, but rather part of a broader problem within Evangelicalism. Gays are only the most pronounced group of ostracizees.

You volunteered at an AIDS hospice, huh? "Volunteering"-is that what you kids call it these days?

Ah, let's go back to the good ol' days and torture and imprison them (except for those who commit the act in an Abbey, of course...).

Just kidding. ;-D

I don't think there is a gradiation of sin. When one breaks the Law, they break the whole Law, not a "part" of the Law. If the Law (and include God in this as the Law would be a manifestation of his order) was a pure, white sheet of paper, and was stained by a blot of ink in sin, then the color of that ink wouldn't matter, as the Law has still been stained. Now I'm not saying we stain God, as Jesus says that we cannot "break" the Law, only break ourselves upon the Law. However, we do introduce sin into our lives and must suffer the effects.

Gradiation might come from consequence, but it is a purely human convention and would not apply to the greater principle of holiness vs. sin.

Dr.Tuba-

Hi there!

Please forgive me for not responding sooner... I've been mad lately with real-life stuff, and let the blogging slip a bit. Thanks for posting your thoughts. :)

I agree with you on one level, in the sense that one sin is sufficient to condemn us to Hell (and that includes the sin of Adam.) Yet I think in another sense it isn't accurate. In the life of the believer I think there are some sins that are greater than others, though of course all are foul and appalling. For instance, it is clear that the Unpardonable Sin is greatest of all. And Paul singles out sexual sin as especially heinous because in it we sin against our own bodies, which are temples of the Holy Spirit. Also, I think certain sins more greatly disrupt the fellowship that we have with God than others -- murrder versus getting angry with my dog for wetting on the floor, for instance.

How do you view these passages affecting this question?

Please do come again, btw. Always nice to have new visitors... :)