Yes, of course it is an individual decision. I don't think anyone here has been arguing for wholesale book burning or censorship. And yes, the repulsiveness of the sin does affect what people do, as it should. I am more repulsed by some sins than others. If I found an author was divorced and remarried it might factor in my decision; but for example CS Lewis was, and I've read and appreciated his books. If I found that an author turned into being a gay nightclub-hopper, I would be far less likely. If I found that the author had a beer with his hamburger every other Thursday night, it would matter somewhat less to me. Of course the degree of repulsiveness of the sin affects us. And that is as it should be.Sudsy wrote:I understand but just saying some would stop reading the books of these men I referred to if they knew they did these things they considered sin. I was raised that any alcohol drinking, all smoking, owning a TV, etc were all sins.
Where does one 'draw the line' on what sins of an author reach a level where their books should all be ignored ? Is this not an individual's decision on what sin crosses that line ? What if you found out an author whose writings encouraged you in your faith walk and then you found out he was divorced and remarried or he had a gambling habit or beat his wife ? Doesn't how the repulsiveness of the sin to us affect what we would do ?
Would you say that no sin that a person might fall into could be so evil or wicked that it would give you any pause in appreciating a book he may have written prior to his "fall"? Not trying to pin you to the wall here, just curious.
