# Does talk about sin really turn visitors off?



## Jack K (Aug 24, 2010)

In the thread on retaining visitors, several responses wryly suggest visitors would stick around if we decided not to talk about sin. I see the point. “Seeker-friendly” churches have indeed seemed to fill seats in part by filling services with sin-free blabber.

But is it really true that talking about sin will turn people away? I’ll start the discussion by suggesting the following:

Talking about sin does _not_ turn people off if you do it well. In fact, it is powerfully inviting. Many, many people are hungry for a place where they can honestly acknowledge their sin, struggle through it with like-minded brothers and sisters, and be assured of their justification and forgiveness in Christ. This is, after all, the true need of every soul.

In some churches it isn’t safe to talk about sin because it only gets brought up in a scolding or condemning sort of way. In other churches, sin is off-limits because it interferes with a feel-good message. But rare indeed is the church where sin can be openly recognized, confessed, hated, fought against—all because our status as sons of God means the shame of the sin doesn’t stick to the sinner.

Yes, this Gospel is a stench to some. But it is equally sweet to many. People will want to stay when we talk honestly and freely about sin—including our own—out of a deep confidence that our salvation makes it (1) safe to admit that sin and (2) worthwhile to battle it. In all the world of religion, this is uniquely, irresistibly attractive.

Thoughts?


----------



## Skyler (Aug 24, 2010)

I am turned on by preachers who talk about sin, if they tell it like it is. 

On the plus side, people who are really seeking won't be scared away by talk of sin. It's just the pseudoseekers will run away screaming like schoolgirls. If you want pseudoseekers, I guess you can have them, but I don't see why. =)


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Aug 24, 2010)

It comes down to what is causing the offense. If you talk about sin in a self-righteous way, then your arrogance and pride will offend people. If you talk about sin in a relativistic and niave way, then you will offend people looking for justice. If you talk about sin in a gospel way, then people will not be offended by your self-righteousness or relativism but by the gospel itself. Either way is going to offend someone. But only one way is going to save them even if they are offended initially.


----------



## jwithnell (Aug 24, 2010)

The loving thing to do is to talk about sin so that the hearer can flee the wrath to come and cling to Christ alone. Will this turn many folks away? You bet it will. But if a church does not give the warning, and the good news that allays those fears, it is not a church. There are many large institutions today that would not be considered churches by that definition.


----------



## Jack K (Aug 24, 2010)

Puritan Sailor said:


> It comes down to what is causing the offense. If you talk about sin in a self-righteous way, then your arrogance and pride will offend people. If you talk about sin in a relativistic and niave way, then you will offend people looking for justice. If you talk about sin in a gospel way, then people will not be offended by your self-righteousness or relativism but by the gospel itself. Either way is going to offend someone. But only one way is going to save them even if they are offended initially.





jwithnell said:


> The loving thing to do is to talk about sin so that the hearer can flee the wrath to come and cling to Christ alone. Will this turn many folks away? You bet it will. But if a church does not give the warning, and the good news that allays those fears, it is not a church. There are many large institutions today that would not be considered churches by that definition.



So we agree we must talk about sin for the sake of unbelievers (and I would add for believers, too). Clearly we must. But in your experience is it true that this turns away more visitors than it attracts? Or is that a just myth bought into by the seeker-friendly movement?

Should we agree with their assessment, and expect that bringing up sin will mostly cause people to leave? When they do leave, should we assume that's why? Or should we expect that if we talk about sin _and do it well_, it will not only be the right thing to do but also one that tends to attract people? What's been your experience?


----------



## raekwon (Aug 24, 2010)

The same sun that melts the ice hardens the clay.


----------



## cih1355 (Aug 24, 2010)

Does talk about sin really turn visitors off? That depends on how one talks about sin and on the type of visitor. 

If a person gives the impression that he is better than anyone else when talking about sin, then this would be a turn off. If a visitor doesn't like hearing the truth, then he is going to be turned off by it. Those who want to hear God's truth no matter how offensive it may seem to others are not going to be turned off by it.


----------



## jwithnell (Aug 24, 2010)

One of the best antidotes for pride in the believer: look again upon your sin. From that perspective, preaching about sin might drive away some believers along with unbelievers. That's one reason why it is important to read the law week after week. It's hard to hide when it is put before you so clearly. People will stay or go for a variety of reasons, but yes, I've known of people leaving.



> The same sun that melts the ice hardens the clay.


What a wonderful expression!


----------



## Willem van Oranje (Aug 24, 2010)

Jack K said:


> In the thread on retaining visitors, several responses wryly suggest visitors would stick around if we decided not to talk about sin. I see the point. “Seeker-friendly” churches have indeed seemed to fill seats in part by filling services with sin-free blabber.
> 
> But is it really true that talking about sin will turn people away? I’ll start the discussion by suggesting the following:
> 
> ...


 
This applies to the regenerate, but not to the unregenerate, who will be turned off by the idea of "battling" against sin. You'll still drive the goats away, which is not a bad thing. And I'm not about to speculate as to the number of truly regenerate there may be in our communities.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Aug 25, 2010)

Jack K said:


> Puritan Sailor said:
> 
> 
> > It comes down to what is causing the offense. If you talk about sin in a self-righteous way, then your arrogance and pride will offend people. If you talk about sin in a relativistic and niave way, then you will offend people looking for justice. If you talk about sin in a gospel way, then people will not be offended by your self-righteousness or relativism but by the gospel itself. Either way is going to offend someone. But only one way is going to save them even if they are offended initially.
> ...


 
I don't think it's a myth. The seeker-freindly movement is actually driven my marketing research. They model thier ministry based on what unbelievers tell them. And I do think it is true, most people, do not want to be called sinners. Most people have a higher opinion of themselves than they should. Most people think, despite all their faults, that "I am a good person." And anyone who comes along and blasts that self-image is going to provoke self-preservation, either fight or flight, unless their heart is being changed by the Spirit. And this problem continues on even in immmature believers. 

No matter how well you talk about sin, no matter how carefully and sensitively you say it (which you should always try to do), it's still going to hurt. It's like a doctor telling someone they have 1 month to live. You want to say it is kindly as you can, but it will still hurt. We should try to talk about sin with compassion and love for the person we speak to, and hope they will see that in us. They can see our sincerity even if they don't agree with our message, and they will sometimes respect that. But unless their heart is changed, they will go where their ears will be tickled. 

Jesus, the best preacher of the gospel, was eventually rejected by most who heard him, once they understood what he was saying. And I don't think we could charge him with preaching about sin in a careless or insensitive way.


----------



## Theoretical (Aug 25, 2010)

There are three kinds of churches that talk about sin: (1) those that primarily talk about "those bad people out there" and at most a bland moralism within the church, (2) those that talk about "those bad people out there" and also rail against certain sins within the congregation self-righteously, and (3) those that primarily talk about sin in the context of the church and both its evil and pernicious effects on the people of God humbly but directly. The first one is baldly offensive out of moral blindness, the second is at least consistent but absolutely free of love, and number three is humble and winsome

Because sin is exhaustive (just look at the larger catechism!), none of us, no matter how "good" we are, we have no room to be self-righteous towards a fellow sinner. It doesn't mean we should gloss over sin, but rather that we should be far harsher as a people on our own planks than we are on others' specks. And even more specifically than us as a people, I should be harshest of all on myself, as I know my heart better than I know anyone else's. A robust view of sin in this light is powerfully appealling.


----------

