sin and the sinner

[Brutus]

This question will surely see a wide range of answers,so here goes.You have all heard the saying"God hates sin but loves the sinner",is this a true statement?

[Squire Robertsson]

Good question, however it is not germane to this forum. So, I am closeing it here and moving the topic to the Baptist Theology and Bible Study forum.
In His service,
Keith

[ February 12, 2002: Message edited by: The Squire ]

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[Brutus]

James;good answer,care to expound on that?

[Daniel David]

Psalm 5:5 is a good verse to begin with. Also, does not Scripture speak of how God hates the workers of iniquity and violence? Is someone going to say that when Jesus called the Pharisees vipers and sepulchres that He really just hated what they did? How do you separate a person and his actions?

[Brutus]

How can we maitain that God loves all when Paul says that "He bears the objects of His wrath,being fitted for destruction,with great patience Rom.9:22.No one ought to conclude that because God's love is universally extended to all that God therefore loves everyone equally.The fact that God loves every man and woman does not mean that He loves all alike,Rom.9:13.

[Glory Bound]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Brutus:
No one ought to conclude that because God's love is universally extended to all that God therefore loves everyone equally.The fact that God loves every man and woman does not mean that He loves all alike,Rom.9:13.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was doing pretty well with this thread until this statement. This seems to contradict the earlier position that God does NOT love the sinner. I don't remember seeing anyone write anything about "loving all alike" yet.

Either He loves the sinner, or He doesn't. What is the verdict?

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[Glory Bound]

"You cannot seperate the sin from the sinner."

Why not? perhaps a better word would be "identify" rather than "separate". You can certainly identify sinful behavior - and hate that same behavior, without hating the person. Mrs. Glory Bound will do things I hate sometimes, but I don't hate her!


"God HATES people that do evil, and of course the scriptures are full of examples, which I am not going to take the time and effort to look up."

Well, then that means that God hates everyone, doesn't it? I mean - we all sin.

I have understood for years that sin is sin, and one transgression is just as much sin as another.

Why did God ever send Jesus to die on the cross for a bunch of sinners who He hated?

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[Brutus]

Sorry,I was interupted on my last post and sent it anyway. There are those who deny that God truly hates anyone and they will say that God hates the sin but loves the sinner.That my friends is a false dichotomy,remember what James said in a previous post,it is the sinner himself who is judged and condemned and punished.If God hated only sin and not the sinner,He would strip away the sin and redeem the sinner,rather than casting the whole person into hell,Mt.5:29;10:28.

[Glory Bound]

There is a difference between the penalty for sinning and the love of God. I don't see that sin must exclude love.

As I said in my last post, my wife may do things I don't like - even sin. But I still love her. I don't approve of the behavior, though. Isn't that the principle of "hating the sin, loving the sinner?"

"Believe me, God does not love the people who are in hell."

But did He love them before they went to Hell? :confused:

[Glory Bound]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Brutus:
If God hated only sin and not the sinner,He would strip away the sin and redeem the sinner,rather than casting the whole person into hell,Mt.5:29;10:28.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think God loved us - while we were still sinners . . . and I'm glad he did! smile.gif

Romans 5:8
But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[tyndale1946]

Glory bound first of all I would like to know where you got your doctrine? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"Believe me, God does not love the people who are in hell."
But did He love them before they went to Hell? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Apparently you are in error of the word of God. I have loved thee with an everlasting love and with loving kindness have I drawn thee. If they went to Hell he never loved them and the scriptures proves it. They never loved him and he never loved them. They hate him with an everlasting hatred and there is no iota of a spark of love between God or them. Point of fact God hates them as much as he does Satan because Satan is their Father... This is impossible but here is a point to consider... If a child of Satan ever found himself in glory it would be worse than being in hell because then he would have to see constantly the one he intensely hates... Just my thoughts... Brother Glen :eek:

[ February 12, 2002: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[Glory Bound]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tyndale1946:
Glory bound first of all I would like to know where you got your doctrine?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, as for my comments, I included a verse from Romans:

Romans 5:8
But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

It seems to me, that if it's true that God hates all sinners - then this verse is in error. It clearly states that God loved us WHILE we were sinners.

Now, if the verse is to be taken as it is worded, then God does love sinners. Unless you want to qualify that by saying He only loves certain sinners - and even that disproves the concept that God hates all sinners.

So I guess you could say that's where I got my doctrine - Romans 5:8. smile.gif

[Brutus]

Hell is the final expression of God's hatred.God does hate the reprobate sinner in a very real and terrifying sense.This is clearly taught in scripture,Psa.5:5-6,11:5.We need to understand that this is not a milicious hatred,it is a holy abhorance for that which is vile,loathsome and evil.But it is a true hatred nonetheless.So while there is a genuine sense in which God's love is universal in its extent,there is another sense in which it is limited in degree.The love of God for all humanity is not the sort of love that guarantees everyone's salvation.For it is not a love that nullifies God's holy abhorance of sin.

[tyndale1946]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Romans 5:8
But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you understand that being a sinner is a condition instead of an act that is easy to understand. We are all sinners and you can believe that or not and being a sinner is our nature. Its what you are. Not what you do. The wages of sin is death and we all die.

When Christ died on the cross his sacrifice embraced those of the past, present and future and only his elect. Those who the Father gave him in eternity and only those and none else. Remember his elect are a large number that no man can number.
Christ says I came down from heaven not to do mine own will but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Fathers will that has sent me of all the Father has given me I should lose nothing but raise it up again at the last day... Brother Glen smile.gif

[ February 12, 2002: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

[Aaron]

Glory Bound hit the nail on the head. The Scriptures say what they say.

Now, just because in our finite, fleshly, vain imaginations we cannot reconcile God's love with His justice doesn't invalidate His love in some cases.

God is love.

[Brutus]

Brother Glen;you're hitting the nail right on!!!I don't understand why people can't grasp that,it's quite simple :confused: God's love is indeed universal but it is limited in degree and His hatred is such that abhores the sin and the sinner.

[aiki]

"For God so loved THE WORLD that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life" John 3:16

We were all once alienated from God and were His enemies in our minds by wicked works. (Col. 1:21) It was while we were in this state that He sent His Son to die for us. I'd say God does love sinners.

[tyndale1946]

If you want to discuss the doctrine of Total Depravity... Which is the T in the TULIP doctrine drop into the Calvinism/Arminian Section as I started a thread on it... If you are curious... I won't discuss it here... Any takers?... Brother Glen smile.gif

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[Glory Bound]

I seems to me that some of you are going to extremes here. For example . . .

Brutus:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Brother Glen; you're hitting the nail right on!!!I don't understand why people can't grasp that,it's quite simple God's love is indeed universal but it is limited in degree and His hatred is such that abhores the sin and the sinner.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, if it's "quite simple", then why the contradiction between "God's love is indeed universal" and "His hatred is such that abhores the sin and the sinner"? Are you saying that God loves and hates the sinner at the same time? Or by saying "universal" you don't really mean "universal"?

tyndale1946:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>If you want to discuss the doctrine of Total Depravity... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't see where this has anything to do with our discussion as to whether God loves the sinner or not. By definition, we are admitting that the sinner is depraved - every last one of them. This is just a distraction from the central point.

JAMES2:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Other posts including mine have explained the Romans and John 3:16 verses quoted in the other posts. Why is it that people just absolutely refuse to listen to what those verses say and merrily go alone with what they WANT them to say? It is really sad to see that.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What "they WANT them to say?" How much clearer can a verse be? What part of the word "love" in this verse don't you understand? Either this verse means that God loved sinners, or it's one of the worst translations in the history of the Bible. Furthermore, I don't recall any adequate explaination of this verse.

Romans 5:8
But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

I fail to see any motivation for a God who hates humanity in it's sin to be interested in saving them.

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[Glory Bound]

Wow, James! You sure got into some detail in your response! I appreciate the time it took for you to do that. smile.gif

You used the word "absurd" a lot . . . I don't recall making any claims that fell into the areas you deemed "absurd".

In my opinion, you are making this a far more complicated question than it needs to be. In a nutshell, the original topic was simply does God love the sinner? (I think we all agree that God hates sin . . . right?)

A number of statements were made to indicate that God does indeed hate sinners, with a few scripture verses to support that view.

Now I introduce Romans 5:8 and suddenly the subject expands to: the doctrine of total depravity; whether God loves every person without exception; who SAINTS are; who Christ died for; refuting that God died for those in Hell and whether Christ died for every last person versus the elect.

It seems that while we both write in English, we are not communicating at all! smile.gif

Now, maybe I can clarify my point:

Romans 5:8 says "But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us."

This clearly states that God loves sinners. Whether it's the elect, who were sinner prior to salvation, or all mankind, it doesn't matter to my point: God loved sinners.

It has been said that God doesn't love sinners at all - that the entire concept is erroneous. Yet, this verse plainly states that God DID love sinners - at the very least a certain number of them, depending on your view regarding election.

Either God loves sinners - or He doesn't. I think it's a contradiction to indicate that God loves AND hates sinners.

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[Brutus]

James;you summed it all up quite well!I think that we have just about run the gambit on this subject and thanks to everyone who had something to contribute! :D

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[Glory Bound]

Thank you too, Brutus, for posting such a question.

James: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> So God loves the Elect who were sinners before they were regenerated, and does not love those he did not elect.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This answers my question. In your view, the sinners referred to in Romans 5:8 are only those elect who are sinners.

So to correct the phrase: "God hates the sin, but loves the sinner" it would be better stated: "God hate the sin, but loves the sinner IF the sinner is also one of the elect".

I'm not disagreeing with you (or agreeing) - I'm just trying to resolve what appears to be an obvious conflict in scripture. Perhaps Paul should have worded his statement differently, since the fact that we were sinners makes no real difference since we are also the elect. The other sinners, those not of the election, are condemned regardless.

Thanks for sharing your views! smile.gif

[aiki]

The heated and sharp exchanges on this thread made me think of Paul's remarks to Timothy: "And the servant of the Lord must not strive but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves..." (2 Ti. 2:24&25)

Just some food for thought. smile.gif

[Brutus]

Aiki;thanks for your input!I sorry,I don't think that there was any sharp or heated exchange on this thread,if you want to see heated exchanges go to Baptistfire.com things get really hot over there.Anyway,iron sharpeneth iron,we are to be ready to tell all why we believe as we do.I thought that things were pretty mild.How about you James? :D

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[aiki]

Well, since you guys are on the same side of this argument it seems odd to me to ask each other if the exchange was heated. You weren't on the receiving end of each others posts (not in a disagreeable way, that is). I wonder what Glorybound thinks? Anyway, I love a thoughtful and passionate debate just as the two of you seem to. I know, however, that I can sometimes put being right before being loving. I saw shades of that here. Speak the truth in love! God bless guys! smile.gif

[ February 13, 2002: Message edited by: aiki ]

[Brutus]

Aiki;Why wonder,let's ask em! :confused: Glorybound; did you feel that any of our exchanges were heated and or sharp? Please be honest.If you were offended by anything that was directed at you we want to know.I want no hard feelings over anything that was said.One thing that we must do is agree to disagree and that can be done without hurting anyone! :D

[Brutus]

Hey y'all; why don'y you jump on over to Brother Glen's thread on Calvinism and Arminianism? Certainly there will be some stimulating conversation over there!!! :cool:

[tyndale1946]

Y'all come on over the waters fine!... Brother Old Line Baptist Glen :D

[Glory Bound]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Brutus:
Aiki;Why wonder,let's ask em! :confused: Glorybound; did you feel that any of our exchanges were heated and or sharp? Please be honest.If you were offended by anything that was directed at you we want to know.I want no hard feelings over anything that was said.One thing that we must do is agree to disagree and that can be done without hurting anyone! :D<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hehe . . . this is good. It's always a good thing to make sure we're not being offensive. That's the problem with online forums - it's hard sometimes to discern the others intentions based on simply the written word. There's no sense of "tone of voice". So many times others will read our words and . . . I know this is hard to believe . . . misunderstand our intended meaning.

As far as "agreeing to disagree", I guess that may be what it's come down to. But I really wasn't trying to debate (maybe that's how it came across) as much as I was trying to figure out the stated opinions regarding the original question in light of certain scriptures.

At any rate, I suppose the discussion has wound down at this point. I think I understand the view James (and I guess Brutus) has regarding the subject.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot... :rolleyes: ... No, I'm not offended. But I appreciate the concern! :cool:

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[preacher]

Just a question...why would Christ teach us to love our enemies, if the Father doesn't love His?

[Daniel David]

First, we aren't God. God didn't reveal His Word for His sake but for ours.

Second, we don't know who will believe; God does.

Third, we are to be characterized as those who love which God is.

Fourth, God has many enemies, do you really believe that He was saying to love everyone indiscriminately? What about satan and demons? :eek:

[Glory Bound]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by preacher:
Just a question...why would Christ teach us to love our enemies, if the Father doesn't love His?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hmmm...this is a good question smile.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Fourth, God has many enemies, do you really believe that He was saying to love everyone indiscriminately? What about satan and demons? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't see where points 1-3 address the question, and the fourth seems to basically discount the concept entirely. I'd like to hear the opinions of others on this one.

[Daniel David]

Glory bound, we are commanded to do many things that God isn't. He is the only One who has the right to not love someone. We have been forgiven so much, we must love others. tongue.gif :eek:

[Glory Bound]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PreachtheWord:
Glory bound, we are commanded to do many things that God isn't. He is the only One who has the right to not love someone. We have been forgiven so much, we must love others. tongue.gif :eek:<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did Jesus command us to love people that He Himself did not love? This is a new concept for me . . . doesn't that seem somewhat hypocritical? :confused:

[aiki]

Well, if Glorybound is okay with your responses, then, hey, I'll just shutup about hot dialogue.
:D
I wonder about that verse that says, "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is long-suffering to us-ward, not willing that ANY should perish, but that ALL should come to repentance". (2 Pe. 3:9) This verse seems to say that God's desire to save is all-inclusive, not confined to the elect. I have trouble, then, reconciling this verse to the notion that God hates all but the elect. While He may not love the unregenerate as much as He does His own children, this verse suggests that He has at least some concern for them. Hmmm.....

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[aiki]

Uh huh. I wasn't hoping to blind side you with this verse. Just curious about your thinking, that's all. Thanks for the link.

In addition to the verse in my last post there is a similar one in 1 Ti.2:4 "(God) will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." Seems even more clear than the one in 1 Peter that God has some concern for non-elect sinners. Anyway, I'll go and check out your link now.

God bless!
smile.gif

[ February 14, 2002: Message edited by: aiki ]

[Glory Bound]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Now, who do you think Peter is talking to? Was he referring to EVERY SINGLE individual in existence, that will come into existence, has ever been in existence? Or was he talking to the saved, ELECT of God. I think the scripture speaks for itself.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm starting to get just a little tired of having this method of scripture interpretation tossed about all the time. I think it should be considered, but not to the extent that it has been used here.

After all, he was talking to PEOPLE. Does that mean his words didn't apply to anyone outside of that little group? Did he state that his words were "only for the ELECT?" If you only use this criteria, what's there to say that these words could even apply to Christians who were not in attendance?

Have you ever addressed a group with a subject that would also apply to others outside of the group? Does this mean that ALL of the epistles apply ONLY to the ELECT? There's nothing there for anyone else?

Finally, I find that stating a viewpoint, and following it up with a line such as "I think the scripture speaks for itself" comes across as arrogant. There are those who do not share our views, and I don't think it adds anything to the discussion to tack these statements on the end of our arguments.

While I appreciate the response, and the detail provided, the tone seems to imply "How silly to ask such a question - if you would take the time to read like the rest of us then you'd know better than to ask".

Some of us are intriqued by the differing viewpoints expressed here. We will be discouraged from asking further questions if they are responded to with an air of arrogance.

That is just my impression - I'm sure it was not intended. I'm certainly not saying that it was. But in this forum, the written word is all we have (plus a few emoticons ;) ).

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[aiki]

I'm not in disagreement with the doctrine of election. And I know that it is "God who gives us repentance to the acknowledging of the truth" (2 Ti. 2:25) and that "no man can come to (Christ as Saviour) except the Father who has sent (Christ) draw him...". (Jn. 6:44) I am just not as persuaded as you are about God's hatred of sinners.

Are you a teacher of some sort professionally? You adopt a rather didactic, almost patronizing tone when you answer questions, which is why I ask. smile.gif

Wow! John Gill is master of avoiding the use of a period. I got breathless just reading his stuff! He makes some excellent points, though. Thanks again for the link.

[ February 14, 2002: Message edited by: aiki ]

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[Glory Bound]

See what I mean by this form of comunication being misunderstood? ;)

James:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I really don't understand where you get that I am being arrogant. I really don't.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was trying to indicate that in certain cases your responses could be taken as being arrogant. Not that you ARE arrogant. I never intended in any way, shape, or form to say that you were arrogant. I never had relations with that woman . . . Oops! redface.gif I got carried away! :D

I am not kidding when I said that I appreciate your detailed posts - some people would just give a quick reply and let it go at that. It's obvious that you do care about what you believe, and want to share that. That's to be commended. There are too few Christians who seek to share their knowledge and experience with others.

In this form of communications, the written word doesn't always come across as intended - in fact that's probably the case most of the time. But when I read someone who states that the opposing view is foolish, then that basically indicates anyone holding the opposing view is foolish. I don't think this is you intention. :cool:

So - I'm not calling you names - and I do appreciate the discussion. It's interesting. I don't share all of your stated views, but I do some of them. I know the discussions on election can get rather long, and I'm not interested in getting tangled up in that "tarbaby" issue now. Maybe one of these days. :D

[tyndale1946]

Watch it... I'm going to throw a monkey wrench into the whole works. Can some tell me why that anytime someone sees the word saved they think it applies to eternal salvation?... Does it always?... Aiki brought up this scripture... I Timothy 2:1 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;

2 For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.

3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;

4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

All men speaking of the elect of God being saved not eternally but from untruth. One of the greatest sins when Jesus Christ came into the world was the sin of unbelief.
The elect of God who by last count were as the sands of the sea and the stars of the sky that is your elect brethren were already Gods children. Though they were as God children then is no different today as all Gods children need to be delivered from error and untruth.

If these spoken of here were not Gods children then how can they lead these types of lives. Unless your righteousness exceed the righteousness of the Pharisees ye shall in no wise enter the kingdom of heaven. Brought to this realization of truth that the only one that could stand in your room and stead was Jesus Christ... Just my thoughts... Brother Glen smile.gif

[Glory Bound]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tyndale1946:
Watch it... I'm going to throw a monkey wrench into the whole works. Can some tell me why that anytime someone sees the word saved they think it applies to eternal salvation<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Monkey wrench!!! Duck!! :eek: :D

Beats me. It's like why some people see the words "all men" and "the world" and they think it applies only to a chosen few.

You guys are just too sophisticated for me. I'm just an elementary reader. I'm still stuck in the old school of simply believing what I read as I read it.

Maybe someone else can answer your question, Brother Glen . . . and return your monkey wrench! :D

[ February 14, 2002: Message edited by: Glory Bound ]

[JAMES2]

[ February 20, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[JAMES2]

[ February 15, 2002: Message edited by: JAMES2 ]

[Graceforever]

I’m sorry, but you can’t separate the sin from the sinner… Paul said that he was nothing but a sinner… Does anyone here actually think that they can go though this life, sinless? If so, the bible (not me) says that you’re a liar and know not the truth…. The only way that God separates those that believe in him, from as vile a person as you can imagine, is the Blood of Christ….

Once you’re saved, God no longer sees you in a sinful condition, which in fact you are…. Why? Because Christ was made sin for us, who knew no sin, that we could become the sons of God…

Ask yourself this question, why did God forsake Christ while he was upon the cross? It was because that God couldn’t look upon sin… Christ, for the first time in eternity, was separated from God, the Father….

Christ bore those infirmities so that God wouldn’t (actually, couldn’t) see us in our sinful condition, but he would only see the blood applied to everyone that believes….

IMO, that’s how that God separates the sin from the sinner…. Peace… Gary

[tyndale1946]

I agree with that and add I will be a sinner until I die but there is a Spirit that will return to God when I die that can't sin!... Brother Glen smile.gif

[HankD]

Psalms 11:[5] The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.

Those who "love" violence are the object of God's hate.
A kind of reverse "conversion" those who are comitted to wickedness as a way of life.

HankD

[Glory Bound]

Graceforever:
I’m sorry, but you can’t separate the sin from the sinner… Paul said that he was nothing but a sinner…Where did the concept of separation come from? The original question was whether it's true that God hates the sin but loves the sinner.

You guys are boasting of your status as "sinners" - so does God hate you? He does if He hates sinners.

Scripture says "All have sinned...", yet we all admit that God at least loves some of us, if not all men. God sent Christ to die for sinners - this is love.

[Brutus]

Remember,it's the sinner himself who is judged and condemned and punished.If God hated only the sin and not the sinner He could strip away the sin and redeem the sinner rather than casting the whole person into Hell,Mt.5:29,10:28.

[Glory Bound]

Originally posted by Brutus:
Remember,it's the sinner himself who is judged and condemned and punished.If God hated only the sin and not the sinner He could strip away the sin and redeem the sinner rather than casting the whole person into Hell,Mt.5:29,10:28.The penalty (wages)for sin is death. That penalty can only be paid by death - either the sinner's or Jesus. It was God's love of the sinner that modivated Him to send Jesus to die for our sins.