If judging is bad then religion makes it worse
List
Judging the sinner not the sin is a mask for judging the sinner
If humans are biased to do wrong then nobody can expect us to believe they judge sins not sinners
The idea of sin as something that disrespects God is judgemental for the idea of wrong will do
Bringing God into it contradicts innocent until proven guilty
Christians say our sins murdered Jesus
Christians say the worst sin ever was when Adam and Eve broke a rule though it did no harm and that if we sin we affiliate with them and participate in their rebellion
Christians say that sin is a rejection of God and thus will lead to an eternity away from him so it is very bad indeed and an insult to your loved ones who could be in Heaven without you
Christians condemn harmless actions as severe sins such as having sex with condoms with somebody you are not in a relationship with
If we are all prone to judge and judging is bad then religion goes too far.
Religion advocates rabid hate in all but name.
Analysis
The Christian teaching that we must judge sins and not sinners needs translation. The translation is, "Sins are perfectly bad and sinners are perfectly good."
Hypocrisy often describes a person with double standards. A better way to understand it is referring to how people pretend to follow a standard they don't follow. We all pretend to follow a standard we do not follow. For example, to love a good person is to hate a bad one because to love x means to hate what is not x or that would destroy or corrupt it. Love and hate go together for to hate one is to love that one's opposite. To say you hate judging people is to lie for you are admitting to hating people who judge righteously.
Honest Christians reject the hypocrisy and lies about
loving sinners and hating sins. They teach, "Sometimes it is said that God hates
sin (impersonal) but loves the sinner (personal), but this attempt to mitigate
the wrath of God is not really faithful to the biblical witness. Wrongdoing in
the Bible is never dissociated from the wrongdoers, who are fully responsible
for their actions. Retribution cannot be shifted to an impersonal level without
it ceasing to be what it is. We cannot imagine a judge excusing a murderer who
says he is sorry and offers to clean up the mess, as if the crime were all that
mattered. However sincere his repentance might be, the murderer would still be
held responsible for his sin, just as we are held responsible for our sins
before God. But curiously, there are many people who for some reason fail to
make this equation. Although they might agree in the case of the murderer, they
do not accept that this principle can be applied directly to sins against God.
By a process of reasoning sometimes disparagingly referred to as 'cheap grace',
they believe that verbal repentance is enough to take away sin, and that if they
confess to wrongdoing God will not exact any penalty from them. This procedure
appears to be automatic and painless, causing the minimum of upset and
inconvenience to the normal flow of everyday life. The truth, though, is that
people who think like that have never really encountered the depths of the love
of God in Christ. If they had they would have recognized that there is a heavy
penalty to be paid for their sin - a penalty which Christ bore for us on the
cross. Unless we understand that we are fully deserving of God's wrath, which he
will certainly inflict on those who do evil - Romans 1:18-32, we shall never
even begin to understand the depth of the love which has rescued us from our
misery and from our just deserts" (page 222, The Doctrine of God, Gerald Bray,
IVP, Illinois, 1993).
Jesus is said to have proven that judging sinners is a sin when he saved the
adulteress from stoning. But he said to her, "Go and avoid this sin in future."
He said it was a sin and her fault so he was judging her as guilty. He was
condemning the sin as bad for he told her to avoid it. He did save her from
being stoned but he didn't say this meant that God didn't have a punishment in
store for her. He did not mention forgiveness by the way.
Sin is a religious concept - it is defined as an offence against the law of God.
The person is judged as immoral. That is enough and all that is needed in a
secular world. But the believer goes further. The person is also judged as a
sinner - an offender against God. This is a grave evil because it is going
beyond what is necessary.
You cannot say that if you say somebody has sinned in doing x that you are
stating it as fact and not judging. When you accuse them of sin, you are indeed
judging.
When you judge a person as good, that means you have tried to judge them for the
bad and found nothing. To judge as good goes with judging as bad. The believer
has to judge God as deserving worship implying that if God behaved differently
he would be judged as not deserving worship and he would not be given it. It is
like, "I judge you as good God, but if I didn't you can go and rot. When I judge
you as good, I potentially judge you as bad and am open to it." God is not man
that he would be impressed with worship that contains a sting or nasty
implication. We should not be judging beings that may not be there at all. We
know criminals are around us so judging them is different. Belief in worshipping
God then contradicts the fact that it is evil to judge beyond need. Having a
judgemental worship for a judgemental God is hardly inspiring to anybody who
wants to take the notion that you can judge the sin and not the sinner
seriously.
The Bible God says that most of what saved people do is sinful and unsaved
people do nothing else and their good is sinful (Romans 3). With this cynicism,
how can you not judge and not hate the sinner with the sin? To love the sinner
would be really rewarding the sin.
Even if the believers cannot accuse me of anything specifically bad they believe
that I am a sinner and they hate me. They hate me in the sense that they hate
sinners for I am a sinner. I know I am a sinner so I have to hate me. If I hate
me I will soon hate them and make them hate me. If I accept love from them I am
deceiving them and stealing from them.
Christian doctrine is that because of original sin we have a bias to sin.
Catholicism says baptism weakens the bias. Not only is there no evidence
for that but it does not want any. One wonders why God will not fix the bias in
baptism properly. It is just a scam. It is gross evil for if this
bias is so terrible and if man can be so harmful then any quack treatment for it
deserves to be spat on and is feeding the problem.
A religion that says we prefer to be sinful cannot really
mean it when it says it does not judge. The person who hates you for having
harmed them knows you might have a weakness that was not your fault that led you
to do what you did but they still hate you. They think you probably meant to do
it and did it wholly freely and religion thinks the same thing for it says we
have a bias towards sin.
The rule pollutes your love
Hatred like all bad and damaging emotions comes from fear. If you fear a person
and believe they freely could do you harm then you hate that person to some
degree. To harbour something that will lead to hate is an act of hate in itself.
It’s having feelings that make you want to see harm come upon a person. Loving
the sinner and not the sin is impossible and abnormal and if you inflict
something abnormal on yourself or try to you cannot love anybody else at all.
The love you have to have to enter the kingdom of God is a mental disorder. So
God wants our heads screwed up even though in many cases this will lead to
violence and murder. God is violent and a murderer. The God doctrine calls God’s
ministers to be our enemies.
Examples of the danger of the doctrine of judge sinner not sin
The combination of God and free will implies that on hospital waiting lists
anybody who has unsafe gay sex and who is fond of the cigarette or bottle and
becomes ill because of it should be relegated to the end for they had something
to do with their illness. The Church must stop being silent about these evil
implications just to impress people. They might say they cannot judge but they
cannot take the risk that the innocent are being pushed to the back of the queue
at times.
How does the Catholic Church answer those who oppose it for saying that AIDS is
the result of sin and that its ban on condoms is not to blame for helping to
spread the plague? It is saying that condoms are sinful even though they save
lives for the lives would not need saving this way had it not been for sin. That
is certainly judging most people who have allegedly sinful sex. If they are just
weak people but not sinners or if they mistakenly think the sex is ethical then
the Church cannot use its answer.
The doctrine of judging sin not sinners leads to great silliness. Take a
pro-life woman who has had an abortion. She will say something like, "Abortion
is a great evil. Abortion took my baby." Sorry sister abortion did not take your
baby. You did. The doctrine brings religion some benefits but as it is ludicrous
it only opens the door to hypocrisy and even moral relativism - the Church's
most formidable enemy.
People tell you to be cautious around strangers. They add that this is not the
same as having suspicions about the strangers. That foolish dose of hypocrisy is
an example of judge sins not sinners. A child will be totally confused by such
incoherent advice and tragic consequences can ensue.
Religion wants people to sin so that it can "love"
them
The Catholic holds that we must hate the sin and love the sinner and love the
sinner because we hate the sin. But it follows then that the person you judge as
the worst is the person you love the most. It would take great and miraculous
love to be really able to hate the sin while loving the sinner. This teaching
would suggest that Catholics should be grateful if they are categorised as great
sinners! But Catholics have no time for that notion as they know fine well that
love the sinner and hate the sin is really hating the sinner and are refusing to
admit it.
If I should judge the sin and not the sinner, does it follow that I am morally
worse than the sinner I judge? Yes. Hating the sinner and the sin would be
always wrong. Loving the sinner and hating and judging their sin is a basic
commandment and the one the other ones depend on. So it is worse to defy a core
principle than a sub-principle that flows from it. For example, to condemn the
commandment to love is more fundamentally evil than committing adultery.
Moreover, I would be guilty of using the person's sin as an excuse for hating
them. As far as intention goes, I am glad deep down that they actually gave me
an opportunity to hate them. In my black heart I am more evil than the black
heart that did the sin. Remember we are talking about intentions and ill-will
here and not about the fact that the sinner you judge may have wreaked more
havoc than you.
Some say I am to judge myself and nobody else. If they are right then it follows
I must love others more than myself. That is only a recipe for hating others for
the resentment will burn inside you. And you will hate yourself for it. And if
people follow your example there won't be any sinners alive for anybody to
judge.
If hate is bad for its dangerous and irrational then love
the sinner and hate the sin serves only to make it even more dangerous and
irrational. All hate and anger risks going out of control and invites loss of
control. It is partial loss of control. It is even more reckless when you tell
yourself that the hate and rage is not about the sinner but the sin. Then you
take away the boundary between administering justice or going beyond it too far.
There is no hope of finding that boundary if you ignore the needs of persons.
Hating a sin or being angry at it implies that you know to what degree an
"immoral" action committed by a free agent may be hated or be the cause of your
anger. It exposes the hypocrisy and deceit of saying ,"I believe in judging the
sin and not the sinner." You are judging the sinner when you cannot know their
degree of guilt or responsibility. Religion says only God knows exactly how bad
a person meant to be. You are acting like God.
Finally
Religion makes hate more irrational and dangerous than it might be.