Hypothetical

Post by **_Paidion** » Sun Oct 22, 2006 2:18 pm

A man once farmed for about a month. He never did any farming since.
Is he still a "farmer"? All or nearly all adults have lied at some point in their lives. Does this imply that they are liars? If so, they will go to hell. For it is written that "All liars will have their part in the Lake of Fire."

As I see it, in order to be a farmer, one must continually farm. In order to be a liar, one must continually lie. In order to be a murderer, one must continually murder. In each case, it must be habitual, a way of life.

No, Allyn, I don't see sins as "all the same". Who would you prefer to live next door? A habitual liar? Or a habitual murderer?

Jesus recognized some sins as greater than others. He said, "He who has delivered me to you has committed the greater sin."

Nothwithstanding, I do believe we should go to those against whom we have sinned, ask forgiveness, and try to make up our wrong in some way (we may be able to do this only in part) ------ even for "minor" sins, as well as major.

Post by **_Allyn** » Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:06 pm

Paidion wrote:A man once farmed for about a month. He never did any farming since.
Is he still a "farmer"? All or nearly all adults have lied at some point in their lives. Does this imply that they are liars? If so, they will go to hell. For it is written that "All liars will have their part in the Lake of Fire."

As I see it, in order to be a farmer, one must continually farm. In order to be a liar, one must continually lie. In order to be a murderer, one must continually murder. In each case, it must be habitual, a way of life.

No, Allyn, I don't see sins as "all the same". Who would you prefer to live next door? A habitual liar? Or a habitual murderer?

Jesus recognized some sins as greater than others. He said, "He who has delivered me to you has committed the greater sin."

Nothwithstanding, I do believe we should go to those against whom we have sinned, ask forgiveness, and try to make up our wrong in some way (we may be able to do this only in part) ------ even for "minor" sins, as well as major.

I can't help but agree with you.

I find this to be the problem. In this illustration I have given and after seeing a couple of the responses, this seems to be the problem we don't come to terms with very well. We say, "yes God has forgiven but wait where is the justice", we go on to say. We seem to demand justice even though forgiveness has been applied. But God doesn't teach this at all. Yes of course He demanded justice and Christ paid that penalty in His death, but now forgiveness is accomplished as well. In my illustration this person committed a terrible crime of passion and since has come to Christ. But we then go a step further and demand that secular laws now judge this person. I am certainly not against laws of the land but in this illustration I wonder what benefit it would bring to society over the possible harm it would do.

Again, I am just putting forth an opportunity to think deeper then we might otherwise. I have no hidden agenda.

Post by **_Anonymous** » Sun Oct 22, 2006 8:57 pm

Hi Allyn,

I am certainly not against laws of the land but in this illustration I wonder what benefit it would bring to society over the possible harm it would do.

What "harm" are you considering? Are you thinking of the death penalty here? This is a hard question, that's for sure!

I think I agree with those who said that they would convince their friend to turn himself in.

Governing authorities are ordained by God to provide justice, right? Should we ammend our legal code to provide an exception for anyone who had become a "new creature" since the crime was committed? What if your friend had confessed that 25 years ago he had defrauded a business asscociate out of thousands of dollars? Would you counsel him to make restitution?

I realize that in your hypothetical scenerio the murder victim had no living relatives. What if the story changed just slightly to include the fact that unbeknowst to the new brother, the victim had a fiance who was pregnant. For 25 years she believed that this man had deserted her because she never knew what happened to him. A son, now an adult, grew up without a father. Does that change you thinking at all?

I'm just thinking as I type and have no hidden agenda either. I'm not sure if I'm even sure about what I said above.

Post by **_Homer** » Sun Oct 22, 2006 9:31 pm

Let's take this question to a real life, "where the rubber meets the road" situation. How many think the Catholic Church was correct, when priests confessed to their superiors that they had molested children, and they essentially forgave the priests, kept it quiet, and did little about it?

Post by **_Allyn** » Sun Oct 22, 2006 9:33 pm

Michelle wrote:Hi Allyn,
I am certainly not against laws of the land but in this illustration I wonder what benefit it would bring to society over the possible harm it would do.
What "harm" are you considering? Are you thinking of the death penalty here? This is a hard question, that's for sure!

I think I agree with those who said that they would convince their friend to turn himself in.

Governing authorities are ordained by God to provide justice, right? Should we ammend our legal code to provide an exception for anyone who had become a "new creature" since the crime was committed? What if your friend had confessed that 25 years ago he had defrauded a business asscociate out of thousands of dollars? Would you counsel him to make restitution?

I realize that in your hypothetical scenerio the murder victim had no living relatives. What if the story changed just slightly to include the fact that unbeknowst to the new brother, the victim had a fiance who was pregnant. For 25 years she believed that this man had deserted her because she never knew what happened to him. A son, now an adult, grew up without a father. Does that change you thinking at all?

I'm just thinking as I type and have no hidden agenda either. I'm not sure if I'm even sure about what I said above.

No specific harm but I could come up with a couple. I'll just leave it at that.

I certainly don't have great answers to this senerio. My reason for bringing it up was to hear some from you guys. I personally don't have any one person in mind but I do have compassion for the one who may have come to Christ even after having committed such a terrible crime. I would want that from someone if I were the one in question. It all boils down to what would Jesus do. Now, that may in fact be an oxymoron to ask what would Jesus do if he had come to believe on Himself after having committed a crime but it is still a valid question, I believe. So if Jesus had done this, I do believe He would turn Himself in to be prosecuted and face the penalty even unto death.

Post by **_chriscarani** » Sun Oct 22, 2006 9:43 pm

I think your scenario may not be so hypothetical. I remember a news story a few years ago when the Passion of the Christ movie came out. A man had committed a murder in his past and after seeing the movie he felt so guilty, he turned himself in. I don't remember the specifics of the case, but a similar scenario to the one you have put forth has happened.

Post by **_Rae** » Sun Oct 22, 2006 11:28 pm

Another thing we can add...

What if this guy who committed murder 25 years ago and became a believer, has a wife and five children still living at home.

Would this change the opinions at all?

Post by **_Jim** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 4:09 am

If I remember right PAUL was a murderer and didn't turn himself in to be tried as one.

Post by **_Anonymous** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 7:53 am

Homer wrote:Let's take this question to a real life, "where the rubber meets the road" situation. How many think the Catholic Church was correct, when priests confessed to their superiors that they had molested children, and they essentially forgave the priests, kept it quiet, and did little about it?

Hey Homer,
I don't know. The whole matter turns my stomach, so I didn't listen very much to the reports about it. What if someone in your fellowship confessed to you that he molested children? What would you do? Would it make a difference if he was tearfully repentant? I'm a mandated reporter so if anyone ever confessed to me, I'm required to turn them in. Would I possibly be violating Christian principles?

Post by **_mattrose** » Mon Oct 23, 2006 11:49 am

Personally, I think it's better to deal with the past in somewhat of an open manner

I wouldn't want to risk unbelievers (or new believers) finding out about a 'hidden' sin from my past. I think, practically, it would severely damage my testimony for them. I wouldn't want any 'skeleton's in the closet' so to speak.