The church is a hospital for sinners

theological

One of the most radical things I love about Jesus is that He came for sinners and not for the righteous. Just after we Jesus responds to the scribes who were tutting at Him for saying He had authority to forgive sins in Matthew's gospel we see their response to bringing sinners onboard.

Matthew 9:9-13 wrote:

As Jesus passed on from there, he saw a man called Matthew sitting at the tax booth, and he said to him, “Follow me.” And he rose and followed him.

And as Jesus reclined at table in the house, behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and were reclining with Jesus and his disciples. And when the Pharisees saw this, they said to his disciples, “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?” But when he heard it, he said, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. Go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice.’ For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.”

If Jesus calls out sinners from the world we are called to have compassion on those who are with us in the church. We have a pastoral calling to them.

Christianity calls us to be with people and sit alongside them. Meeting together is important in that as we bear with the sufferings of others (Romans 12:15) and it is important to meet to encourage one another in the gospel until the last day (Hebrews 10:25).

Questions for non-Christians:
How do Christians give you the impression that they think they are all sorted?
How have we failed to show you that the church is a hospital for sinners?

Questions for Christians:
How do you fall short in showing that you are a sinner who had been shown grace?
How can we be better pastors to eachother in church?

Salary Negotiator

theological wrote: »

How have we failed to show you that the church is a hospital for sinners?

First you would have to show that that what you call a sin actually needs "fixing".

Cabaal

I'll bite

Questions for non-Christians:
How do Christians give you the impression that they think they are all sorted?

Honestly I'm not sure what you even mean with this question,
All sorted with what exactly? Your life? Your sins?

If you want to believe in this stuff thats your life to spend doing it, if it makes you happy then thats fine.
Do I think its a good use of your time, not really.

How have we failed to show you that the church is a hospital for sinners?

You can't, in order to subscribe to your viewpoint on sin you have to at least believe in the viewpoint on sin that christian's believe in.
As I'm not a christian your viewpoint on sin looks just silly and accordingly standing in church seems utterly pointless and a complete waste of time, I'd rather spend my time at the weekend going for runs up mountains enjoying my life

theological

I guess my point on these two questions is that I'd welcome some introspection from those looking in as to how we fall short in this area. I want to encourage good dialogue as opposed to just getting comments like your sky fairy isn't real. The introspection in these two areas could be helpful to me and others if we raise it above that level.

Also it is possible to enjoy creation by going to the mountains and running as a Christian also

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

First you would have to show that that what you call a sin actually needs "fixing".

Greed and a love of money would be a great place to start. The Bible calls this the root of all evil (1 Timothy 6:9-10). We can all tell the world is fallen and that terrible things happen in it. The root of that is our sin from a Christian perspective.

Salary Negotiator

theological wrote: »

Greed and a love of money would be a great place to start. The Bible calls this the root of all evil (1 Timothy 6:9-10). We can all tell the world is fallen and that terrible things happen in it. The root of that is our sin from a Christian perspective.

If greed and a love of money is a sin then the church would need to take a long hard look at itself before trying to cure non-believers of that "sin".

antiskeptic

theological wrote: »

I guess my point on these two questions is that I'd welcome some introspection from those looking in as to how we fall short in this area. I want to encourage good dialogue as opposed to just getting comments like your sky fairy isn't real. The introspection in these two areas could be helpful to me and others if we raise it above that level.

Also it is possible to enjoy creation by going to the mountains and running as a Christian also



Greed and a love of money would be a great place to start. The Bible calls this the root of all evil (1 Timothy 6:9-10). We can all tell the world is fallen and that terrible things happen in it. The root of that is our sin from a Christian perspective.

I think Cabaal's point isn't that there isn't greed or even that a love of money isn't the root of much misery in the world.

I'd imagine though he'd see it in evolutionary terms. Survival of the fittest at work. Even if accepting that what makes one fit today (like dinosaurs and their size) might ultimately bring about one's downfall.

Sin would be a superfluous addition to that view.

The interesting bit would be how Cabaal deals with his sense of wrong being done as the fit trample all over the less fit. How does he square that rage (assuming he is enraged) with the fact that its just evolution doing it's thing? His worldview demands that he see his own rage as just another evolution-generated response. Which may or may not be a fit response.

I often wonder where the atheist parks his sense of being wronged. They feel the absoluteness of it, just like us. But ought to be merely shrugging their shoulders. The burglar who thrashed his house and stole his prized possessions might well be on the right evolutionary track!

Take the current concern about end of civilization as we know it - like, there was a programme in BBC2 about it last night, it's become that mainstream a possibility. In that event, the burglar-type would strike me as fitter for the days ahead than the accountant type.

theological

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

If greed and a love of money is a sin then the church would need to take a long hard look at itself before trying to cure non-believers of that "sin".

OK great. Perhaps you could elaborate on this. I think it could be more helpful to focus on individual rather than institution.

You're proving the point that we're sinners in the church which perhaps suggests that we don't look sorted according to the first question.

It might be worth defining what I mean by church also. I mean the gathered group of Christian believers in local churches and throughout the world. I don't mean a building or an institution per se.

ChrisJ84

Cabaal wrote: »

I'll bite

Honestly I'm not sure what you even mean with this question,
All sorted with what exactly? Your life? Your sins?

If you want to believe in this stuff thats your life to spend doing it, if it makes you happy then thats fine.
Do I think its a good use of your time, not really.

I think what @theo is saying is that Christians see everyone as sinners in need of God's grace, and atheists see no one as sinners (at least in the Christian sense of the word). What no-one is saying is that Christians are all sorted and therefore superior to everyone else - but that is what Christians are often accused of. And to be fair, Christians often do give that impression. The point is that it is inconsistent with what we say we believe, and should be called out.

Cabaal wrote: »

You can't, in order to subscribe to your viewpoint on sin you have to at least believe in the viewpoint on sin that christian's believe in.
As I'm not a christian your viewpoint on sin looks just silly and accordingly standing in church seems utterly pointless and a complete waste of time, I'd rather spend my time at the weekend going for runs up mountains enjoying my life

Agree, it would be odd for you to subscribe to a Christian worldview and not be a Christian. Assuming that we all have what we see as good reasons for believing what we do, there is scope for interesting conversation on why we see the world the way we do, which is more consistent and better explains the way things are etc.

Salary Negotiator

theological wrote: »

OK great. Perhaps you could elaborate on this. I think it could be more helpful to focus on individual rather than institution.

You're proving the point that we're sinners in the church which perhaps suggests that we don't look sorted according to the first question.

It might be worth defining what I mean by church also. I mean the gathered group of Christian believers in local churches and throughout the world. I don't mean a building or an institution per se.

I don't think you can focus on the individual and not the institution, they both go hand in hand. Without one there is no other.

Ultimately though there's no need to distinguish between them, you asked "How have we failed to show you that the church is a hospital for sinners?" and for many that's an unanswerable question because we disagree fundamentally on who or what a sinner is.

Many of the things that you consider a sin I do not, ergo there's no need for a hospital for sinners in the first place.

smacl

theological wrote: »

Questions for non-Christians:
How do Christians give you the impression that they think they are all sorted?

Collectively, they don't. I think that the group the refer to themselves as Christians is that diverse that sweeping statements such as the one above make no real sense.

How have we failed to show you that the church is a hospital for sinners?

I find the implications behind the notion that your "church is a hospital for sinners" dubious when examined. A hospital is somewhere you go to get cured from a disease, illness or something else that is wrong with you. What you list among sins, as illustrated in the recent Israel Folau thread, includes perfectly normal states of being such as homosexuality and atheism. I find the notion that you would seek to 'cure' these things as morally reprehensible.

antiskeptic

smacl wrote: »

I find the notion that you would seek to 'cure' these things as morally reprehensible.

What about aspects of yourself that you yourself find morally reprehensible? Or are you are pure as the driven snow? Or "not such a bad person"

Presumably, assuming you see problems within, you have other places to go for a cure, whether pulling yourself up by your own power or engaging the assistance of others insight and wisdom (a.k.a. a hospital)

1123heavy

theological wrote: »

One of the most radical things I love about Jesus is that He came for sinners and not for the righteous. Just after we Jesus responds to the scribes who were tutting at Him for saying He had authority to forgive sins in Matthew's gospel we see their response to bringing sinners onboard.

He actually only came for the children of Israel. They were his people, they were his goal. He made this quite clear on numerous occasions. Don't let the ramblings of Paul get in the way of that very clear fact ....

antiskeptic

1123heavy wrote: »

He actually only came for the children of Israel. They were his people, they were his goal. He made this quite clear on numerous occasions. Don't let the ramblings of Paul get in the way of that very clear fact ....

Why should we believe the ramblings of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John* over Paul?

* leaving aside contention as to whether the ramblings were theirs in fact.

1123heavy

antiskeptic wrote: »

Why should we believe the ramblings of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John* over Paul?

* leaving aside contention as to whether the ramblings were theirs in fact.

It's well established from all sides of the debate that Paul's teachings are another kettle of fish altogether. The differences come down to whether or not Paul was 'right' so to speak.

Jesus was Jewish, he lived and preached Jewish law. There are significant differences to today's Christianity. Why? Paul's letters.

theological

1123heavy wrote: »

It's well established from all sides of the debate that Paul's teachings are another kettle of fish altogether. The differences come down to whether or not Paul was 'right' so to speak.

Jesus was Jewish, he lived and preached Jewish law. There are significant differences to today's Christianity. Why? Paul's letters.

It isn't true anyway.

Jesus ministered to many Gentiles in the gospels and gave them the same offer of faith. There's loads of examples throughout all four. There's loads of examples in the Old Testament even about how Gentiles would come to believe in God. Particularly in the prophets (Isaiah is a good example).

I'd really like to keep this thread on topic if possible. I'd be pretty keen to discuss whether or not Jesus came for the Gentiles in a more appropriate thread.

antiskeptic

1123heavy wrote: »

It's well established from all sides of the debate that Paul's teachings are another kettle of fish altogether. The differences come down to whether or not Paul was 'right' so to speak.

Well established? In which circles? Certainly not in circles which hold both the gospels and Paul as scripture.

Jesus was Jewish, he lived and preached Jewish law.

Jesus was God. He didn't preach Jewish Law ("the law says, 'thou shalt not commit adultery'. I say to you that if you so much as lust after a women in your heart you have committed adultery"). He lived this somewhat higher level spirit of the law

There are significant differences to today's Christianity. Why? Paul's letters.

Paul expounded on Jesus. Jesus set an impossible standard. One far beyond Jewish law (which he regularily broke btw)

Salary Negotiator

antiskeptic wrote: »

What about aspects of yourself that you yourself find morally reprehensible? Or are you are pure as the driven snow? Or "not such a bad person"

Presumably, assuming you see problems within, you have other places to go for a cure, whether pulling yourself up by your own power or engaging the assistance of others insight and wisdom (a.k.a. a hospital)

That’s a completely different issue though. If someone seeks out the church for help then more power to them.

But the original question was about seeking help for issues that the church, be that an individual, group or institution, and not the “sinner” deem to be sinful.

You are judging that person and then trying to convince them that you’re actually trying to help them. It’s just another form of gaslighting.

theological

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

That’s a completely different issue though. If someone seeks out the church for help then more power to them.

But the original question was about seeking help for issues that the church, be that an individual, group or institution, and not the “sinner” deem to be sinful.

You are judging that person and then trying to convince them that you’re actually trying to help them. It’s just another form of gaslighting.

For the record, the OP expressed very clearly the opinion that Christians are sinners who need a Saviour. The OP didn't point fingers at non-Christians, the OP is about Christians and the church. I asked for your opinion on two questions which were about your perspective of Christians from a non-Christian perspective.

When Christians speak about sin, it is precisely about our moral shortcomings. Christianity holds that our moral shortcomings are an affront to God, and that we deserve judgement, but God offers us mercy in Jesus Christ.

So when you say moral shortcomings have nothing to do with sin, that isn't true from a Christian perspective. That is exactly what that word means. The only difference between non-Christians and Christians in this regard is what we consider to be sinful, and whom we deem it to be sinful against. For non-Christians it is purely horizontal in that we wrong other people, but for Christians it is horizontal and vertical in so far as we sin against God and our neighbour.

Salary Negotiator

theological wrote: »

For the record, the OP expressed very clearly the opinion that Christians are sinners who need a Saviour. The OP didn't point fingers at non-Christians, the OP is about Christians and the church. I asked for your opinion on two questions which were about your perspective of Christians from a non-Christian perspective.

When Christians speak about sin, it is precisely about our moral shortcomings. Christianity holds that our moral shortcomings are an affront to God, and that we deserve judgement, but God offers us mercy in Jesus Christ.

So when you say moral shortcomings have nothing to do with sin, that isn't true from a Christian perspective. That is exactly what that word means. The only difference between non-Christians and Christians in this regard is what we consider to be sinful, and whom we deem it to be sinful against. For non-Christians it is purely horizontal in that we wrong other people, but for Christians it is horizontal and vertical in so far as we sin against God and our neighbour.

This made me think of another reason why you have failed to show non-christians...

You’re more interested in getting your point across than listening to what the non-christians are saying.

uck51js9zml2yt

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

This made me think of another reason why you have failed to show non-christians...

You’re more interested in getting your point across than listening to what the non-christians are saying.

I thought this was a discussion site and getting your point across was the point of it.

Salary Negotiator

Maryam Mango Worshiper wrote: »

I thought this was a discussion site and getting your point across was the point of it.

Where’s the discussion? He asked a question of people and then ignored their answers.

If he actually wanted non-christians to answer he would have asked his question in a more suitable forum.

Any way I’ve answered his question and he doesn’t seem interested is actually engaging on the issue so I’ll leave him to it.

theological

I heard you and I'm responding to you. Hearing doesn't mean agreement.

You seem to have misunderstood the point of my OP because you're claiming it was somehow posted in judgement.

Feel free to engage with my response to you if you want. That's how conversation works.

Cabaal

antiskeptic wrote: »

I think Cabaal's point isn't that there isn't greed or even that a love of money isn't the root of much misery in the world....

Errrr, what??? no it isn't
I merely said as I'm not christian I don't subscribe to a christian view that includes that there is such thing as "sin" and i don't subscribe to to the idea that going to church is a good use of one's time.

You making stuff up and suggesting stuff I never implied on any level

uck51js9zml2yt

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

W

If he actually wanted non-christians to answer he would have asked his question in a more suitable forum.

t.

Posting here has never stopped those who wanted to respond from responding.

Cabaal

Maryam Mango Worshiper wrote: »

Posting here has never stopped those who wanted to respond from responding.

The point is valid,
He's hardly going to get many responses, there are more appropriate forums to ask a question directed at non christians

theological

Cabaal wrote: »

The point is valid,
He's hardly going to get many responses, there are more appropriate forums to ask a question directed at non christians

It's worth pointing out that the OP was designed for conversation for both Christians and non-Christians there are questions for both. The topic is Christianity, so this is the right place to have this conversation.

And I don't know about not having got many responses. There's been a lot of contributions on this thread and the others I've posted. Hopefully that'll continue.

smacl

Cabaal wrote: »

The point is valid,
He's hardly going to get many responses, there are more appropriate forums to ask a question directed at non christians

The OPs posts are probably better placed here than on the likes of the A&A forum where starting a discussion that is based on the assumption that piece of scripture is reflective of reality will be dismissed as a non-argument by most atheists.

hinault

theological wrote: »

One of the most radical things I love about Jesus is that He came for sinners and not for the righteous. Just after we Jesus responds to the scribes who were tutting at Him for saying He had authority to forgive sins in Matthew's gospel we see their response to bringing sinners onboard.



If Jesus calls out sinners from the world we are called to have compassion on those who are with us in the church. We have a pastoral calling to them.

Christianity calls us to be with people and sit alongside them. Meeting together is important in that as we bear with the sufferings of others (Romans 12:15) and it is important to meet to encourage one another in the gospel until the last day (Hebrews 10:25).

Questions for non-Christians:
How do Christians give you the impression that they think they are all sorted?
How have we failed to show you that the church is a hospital for sinners?

Questions for Christians:
How do you fall short in showing that you are a sinner who had been shown grace?
How can we be better pastors to eachother in church?

Your post reiterates the importance of the sacraments which Jesus Christ gave to His church.
One of those sacraments is the sacrament of confession (repentance).

Jesus gave apostolic authority to His clergy to administer the sacrament of confession (repentance).

Jesus wants us receive His salvic grace and confession allows each penitent sinner to avail of that salvic grace. Thanks be to God.

uck51js9zml2yt

Cabaal wrote: »

The point is valid,
He's hardly going to get many responses, there are more appropriate forums to ask a question directed at non christians

I disagree, lots of non Christians cone here, you included.
Honestly don't know how you've time for photography the amount of time you spend here

Deja Boo

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

Where’s the discussion? He asked a question of people and then ignored their answers.

If he actually wanted non-christians to answer he would have asked his question in a more suitable forum.

Any way I’ve answered his question and he doesn’t seem interested is actually engaging on the issue so I’ll leave him to it.

amen