Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Jordan's avatar

This was a great article, and I'm glad to see critical response to this rather than the directionless outrage I've been seeing.

One thing I've noticed in online discourse is that Tait's equating of his sexual misconduct (i.e. crimes) as "sin" not only detracts from its severity, but allows for misplaced anger at the nature of his actions. I've seen people more upset about the fact that Tait's actions were towards other men than the actions themselves, as if assault is a lesser evil than same-sex attraction, though I guess in many evangelical circles, it is.

Expand full comment
alandmuse's avatar

I think your take on things displays an underdeveloped understanding of sin. To characterize an action as simply "a sin to be forgiven" as opposed to being a (potentially) ongoing roadblock to union with God requiring *repentance*. Maybe this is a vestige of "one saved, always saved" theology or maybe it's a reflection of the all-too-often public line that is presented in the wake of the publication of iconic Christians' misdeeds. Either way, it reinforces a weak understanding of the seriousness of sin in the same breath you're complaining about it.

Expand full comment
16 more comments...

No posts