Reaping What We Sow

[Wilson L. Deaton]

Galations 6:7-8, Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.

I'm not sure how to word this question so let me give two examples:

1. My dad says, "Don't ride your bike with 'no hands' or you'll get hurt." I do it anyway, fall, get hurt.

2. My dad says, "Don't ride your bike with 'no hands.'" I do it, he sees me, I get grounded.

In both cases I reaped what I sowed. In the first case, what I reaped was a natural consequence (God created the natural law, of course). In the second case, what I reaped was a direct intervention for the sake of discipline (or punishment).

Which kind of reaping do you think Galations 6 is talking about?

Wilson

[Randy Wise]

Galations 6:7-8, Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.

I'm not sure how to word this question so let me give two examples:

1. My dad says, "Don't ride your bike with 'no hands' or you'll get hurt." I do it anyway, fall, get hurt.

2. My dad says, "Don't ride your bike with 'no hands.'" I do it, he sees me, I get grounded.

In both cases I reaped what I sowed. In the first case, what I reaped was a natural consequence (God created the natural law, of course). In the second case, what I reaped was a direct intervention for the sake of discipline (or punishment).

Which kind of reaping do you think Galations 6 is talking about?

Wilson

If your Father was stating the bike ride in regard to teaching the scriptures then one possible read would be "do not put the Lord your Gods mercy to the test."

The scripture above to me clearly shows two paths taken. To the one who choses to follow Gods Spirit the reward is eternal life. To the one who choses to follow the sinful desires of the flesh eternal death or the soul that sins will die. Maybe people were using Jesus as a scapegoat to continue to sin so what was written was "God cannot be mocked"

Randy

[John S Knight]

Galations 6:7-8, Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.

I'm not sure how to word this question so let me give two examples:

1. My dad says, "Don't ride your bike with 'no hands' or you'll get hurt." I do it anyway, fall, get hurt.

2. My dad says, "Don't ride your bike with 'no hands.'" I do it, he sees me, I get grounded.

In both cases I reaped what I sowed. In the first case, what I reaped was a natural consequence (God created the natural law, of course). In the second case, what I reaped was a direct intervention for the sake of discipline (or punishment).



Wilson

Wilson,

For me this has to be put in the context of the letter Paul was writing. The letter, of course, would have no chapter/verse breaks at the time it was written. And the key, I think, is in chapter 5 where Paul is contrasting sowing to the "flesh" with sowing to the "Spirit," and he gives the "fruit" of both "plantings." And he wraps it up in chapter 6 with the natural conclusion; "Don't mock God by thinking you can change the principle He established that whatever seed is planted will produce 'in kind!'"

At least that is how I take it. Thanks.

[Marsha Lynn]

No answer here, although I lean toward the natural consequence side, even to the point of wondering if we really need a hell beyond that which results in this life simply as a natural consequence of sinful choices. However, I have a similar question which I hope is closely enough related to tag along in this thread.

I've often wondered about Jesus' instruction to not judge that we be not judged. If we do judge, what type of judgment will we encounter? Is Jesus referring to the judgment of God or is he talking about the natural consequence of critical people being an easy target for criticism?

Earlier this morning someone shared with me her aversion to the materials produced by a fallen televangelist. She said, "He was going on about what terrible things [another fallen televangelist] had done while doing the same things himself!" Her judgment of his actions was more severe in light of the words of judgment he had spoken before his own deeds came to light. Is that the sort of thing Jesus meant? And is that an example of reaping what we sow as a natural consequence?

Marsha

[Randy Wise]

No answer here, although I lean toward the natural consequence side, even to the point of wondering if we really need a hell beyond that which results in this life simply as a natural consequence of sinful choices. However, I have a similar question which I hope is closely enough related to tag along in this thread.

I've often wondered about Jesus' instruction to not judge that we be not judged. If we do judge, what type of judgment will we encounter? Is Jesus referring to the judgment of God or is he talking about the natural consequence of critical people being an easy target for criticism?

Earlier this morning someone shared with me her aversion to the materials produced by a fallen televangelist. She said, "He was going on about what terrible things [another fallen televangelist] had done while doing the same things himself!" Her judgment of his actions was more severe in light of the words of judgment he had spoken before his own deeds came to light. Is that the sort of thing Jesus meant? And is that an example of reaping what we sow as a natural consequence?

Marsha

One path lead to "eternal life", which strongly suggests that destruction means eternal death. The scripture however was not a judgment in the sense that no change of mind would help, but a warning of the eternal consequences of following the desires of sinful flesh. At the point of Gods judgment no change of mind helps.

Yes, I also think there are consequences in this life for sin as well as the eternal consequences.

Randy

[Wilson L. Deaton]

No answer here, although I lean toward the natural consequence side, even to the point of wondering if we really need a hell beyond that which results in this life simply as a natural consequence of sinful choices.

I was on the natural consequence side when I first started pondering this a day or two ago. Now I'm beginning to shift.

If we take, "you reap what you sew," as proverb or general truth (that allows for exceptions) then natural consequences seems to work. If we take it to be an absolute truism (no exceptions) then it would require eternity to make it work out. There are too many who have sewn good and reaped heartache in this lifetime...

Still pondering.

Wilson

[Wilson L. Deaton]

I've often wondered about Jesus' instruction to not judge that we be not judged. If we do judge, what type of judgment will we encounter? Is Jesus referring to the judgment of God or is he talking about the natural consequence of critical people being an easy target for criticism?

Good question. I've never wondered this before! I've always assumed it was a statement about ultimate divine judgment.... Now I have another issue to ponder, but I still lean strongly toward the divine judgment side. This probably reflects years of being indoctrinated with the notion that being "saved" meant being saved from hell rather than saved from sin and all the implications that go along with that (including the tension between present vs. future kingdom).

Wilson

[Dale Cozby]

If we think about what a Judge does, he not only decides guilt or innocence, but also sets punishment for said guilt.

So to "judge" could mean to declare guilt AND to set punishment for it as well.

Jesus also said you will know a tree by its fruit. So are we passing judgement on a tree when we see it is a thistle tree adn call it such?

OR are we passing judgement when see it is thistle tree and we thus set punishment by cutting it down and burning it?

Jesus likewise said le t he who is without sin cast the first stone. He didn't rebuked them for pointing out her sin, but rather for attempting to cast stones(set punishment)

It is one thing to be able to identify a bad seed, it is clearly another to cut it off and burn it. The former is discernment the latter is judging.

[Marsha Lynn]

I was on the natural consequence side when I first started pondering this a day or two ago. Now I'm beginning to shift.

If we take, "you reap what you sew," as proverb or general truth (that allows for exceptions) then natural consequences seems to work. If we take it to be an absolute truism (no exceptions) then it would require eternity to make it work out. There are too many who have sewn good and reaped heartache in this lifetime...

Good point. How about this?

The "you get what you give" principles in the Bible describe the overall order of the universe. In our current world, we see it "through a glass darkly". The disorder that sin has introduced into this world, obscures it to a certain extent but it's still evident enough that it's easy for us to become "Job's comforters" when we see bad things happen to good people. We develop a deep conviction that there's an underlying principle in the universe that people reap what they sow. We want to apply it here and now, and often can because it is generally true. However, sin, disease, weather, and other disasters -- human-based or natural -- sometimes change the formula to where we may see that principle "mocked" as far as this life is concerned. It's only in light of eternity that it is perfectly true.

[Ryan Scott]

For me, anyway, it becomes a lot clearer when you read the chapter from the beginning. Here the author is talking about pride and forgiveness and living in community. Read in that context it seems to me that in our relationships with other people, we're more inclined to get what we give.

I'm not sure there is any larger philosophical statement being made here.

[Wilson L. Deaton]

Which kind of reaping ....?


I've concluded it is both/and rather than either/or.

We will reap what we sow (generally) as we live here in terms of relationships, heartbreak or joy, etc. We will also reap we sow in an eternal sense based on God's judgment. (Of course, repentence can "unsew" with regards to the eternal side.)

Wilson

[Marsha Lynn]

It is one thing to be able to identify a bad seed, it is clearly another to cut it off and burn it. The former is discernment the latter is judging.

Maybe so ... but if you start pointing out the bad seed in other people's gardens, it's probably safe to assume that you will eventually discover some seed inspectors examining your own plot.

:fun19

[Mark Metcalfe]

I've often wondered about Jesus' instruction to not judge that we be not judged. If we do judge, what type of judgment will we encounter? Is Jesus referring to the judgment of God or is he talking about the natural consequence of critical people being an easy target for criticism? Marsha

"Forgive us in the same way that we forgive others" holds the same principle.

I believe the judgment (perhaps the scholars can weigh in) is not the pie-tasting kind (this is better than that), but of the condemnation kind.
Jesus said, "where are your accusers?" The woman caught in adultery replied that there were none. Jesus said, "neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more." Obviously, the final statement draws on a [type of] judgment in order to sin "no more," but the preceding one clearly shows that he has not judged her sin (held it against her).

The parable of the man who owed much and the other who owed little figures into this principle, too.

Condemn not, lest ye be condemned (Mark's paraphrase), because I have seen all too often that people are most critical of their own weakness that they see in others. If a person sows condemntation, it will also be their harvest.

Mark

Lord, help me to forgive others as you have forgiven me; and help me to go and sin no more!

[Hans Deventer]

Condemn not, lest ye be condemned (Mark's paraphrase), because I have seen all too often that people are most critical of their own weakness that they see in others. If a person sows condemnation, it will also be their harvest.

Yes. And it may be the thing for which they reject themselves as well. Sometimes, the word is also directed to oneself.

[Mark Metcalfe]

Yes. And it may be the thing for which they reject themselves as well. Sometimes, the word is also directed to oneself.

Not sure I understand what you've tried to say Hans. Can you restate? Thanks.

[Hans Deventer]

Not sure I understand what you've tried to say Hans. Can you restate? Thanks.

Sure! Sometimes, we condemn ourselves the strongest, even more than others. And deem ourselves unworthy of God's love. Which is of course crazy because we are never worthy in the first place, that is what grace is for. So the thing is to stop looking at ourselves as needing to be worthy of God's love, as needing to meet some predetermined level of perfection, and start accepting that He actually does love us. Now once one starts understanding that God really loves you, despite your obvious shortcomings etc, one can start to love others and stop condemning them.

Hannie and I sometimes joke about this, when either of us failed in something. We say, "oh dear, now that you burned the potatoes, you're out!" with a big smile. Because we both know that our love does not depend on the flawless performance of the other. And that is a great feeling.

[Mark Metcalfe]

Sure!

Thank you. I agree that when we see ourselves from God's perspective, it helps us to have God's perspective with others.

[Dale Cozby]

I am just writing to keep my fingers busy right now, but this little thought came to me a minute ago and I want to share it.

Shouldn't we be less concerned with reaping what we sowed and more concerned with sowing what we reaped.

If we as Christians would devote ourselves to planting seeds of the love God has given to us, we could be less worried about the weeds the enemy is sowing.

I think it is safe to say Christians have been given a great gift from God and we are a blessed people. IF we spent more time giving that love to others, we would have a much more fruitful life than worrying about the harvest the enemy is sowing and reaping.

Sort of like spending time laying sod rather than pulling weeds.:fav18

1 John 4:18

[Marsha Lynn]

My Bible-reading schedule brought me to Jeremiah 17 this morning.

Verse 9 reads:
The heart is deceitful above all things
and beyond cure.
Who can understand it?

Verse 10 adds:
"I the LORD search the heart
and examine the mind,
to reward a man according to his conduct,
according to what his deeds deserve."

So the heart is deceitful beyond cure and the LORD who searches such hearts rewards people accoding to their conduct? This seems rather contrary to what we teach and preach -- that the LORD can cleanse our hearts and we are saved by faith, not by works; that our conduct will always fall short but our hearts/motives can be pure.

As I considered this, I was reminded of this thread. I wonder if there is a connection here.

1. The heart is deceitful. We know that. We come to God in our brokenness trusting Him to love us anyway. And He accepts us because we trust in Him. If we were judged completely on merit, we would have no place in the kingdom. We rely completely on mercy.

2. Even though our faith brings us into relationship with God, we cannot escape the reflective nature of our actions. When we sow criticism and judgment, we reap criticism and judgment. When we sow generosity, we are blessed in return. When we offer forgiveness, we discover that we also are forgiven.

Wilson's original question was whether this reflective action in the universe traces directly back to God (divine retribution/reward) or whether it is built into the fabric of living (natural consequences). A corollary question is whether it is true without exception or just a general principle. This verse in Jeremiah attributes it directly to God, as do such New Testament verses as Hebrews 11:6 and Revelation 22:12. However, I'm still thinking that God has set up the world to where His involvement isn't clear to us and that the "get what you give" principles show up all around us looking like natural consequences. Perhaps, in light of eternity, it will be obvious that those consequences were inevitable all along, that the "get what you give" laws are no more negotiable than the law of gravity.

This isn't coming out like I hoped. Maybe I can sum up my thoughts in a way that is more clear.

1. Coming into and staying in a relationship with God is a matter of faith. We believe in Him and submit ourselves to Him and He accepts us. This is "salvation".

2. Actions bring consequences. Loving actions bring blessing; selfish actions bring grief. This is a law of nature put there by God as surely as the law of gravity. Even when those who sow loving actions are sitting alone and destitute on an ashheap scraping their sores with broken pottery, there is still blessing. And even when those living in selfish ways appear to be on top of the world, grief still lurks at their heart's door. This has nothing to do with salvation (nor with material blessings). Christians reap what they sow, both good and bad. Sinners reap what they sow, both good and bad. Regardless of spiritual condition, those who love are loved, those who hate are hated, those who forgive are forgiven, those who condemn bring condemnation their direction, not necessarily directly from the hand of our loving, compassionate, and merciful Father, but from the natural consequences that He has built into the universe in order to reward those who choose right over wrong.

OK, that "summary" was longer than my initial statements. I give up. I think something is gelling for me, but it's not coming out in words very well.

Marsha

[Wilson L. Deaton]

However, I'm still thinking that God has set up the world to where His involvement isn't clear to us and that the "get what you give" principles show up all around us looking like natural consequences. Perhaps, in light of eternity, it will be obvious that those consequences were inevitable all along, that the "get what you give" laws are no more negotiable than the law of gravity.

.... This has nothing to do with salvation ...


Perhaps this everything to do with salvation!

Laws of gravity and buoancy dictate that when step out of a boat you sink. That is built into the fabric of the universe. You can violate a boat charter rule that says, "stay in the boat," but you can't viloate the natural law that says if you do, you will sink and get wet.

That is, unless God, intervenes and overrides that law. Then it becomes possible to walk on water. Jesus and Peter both did so.

It is just as certain and built into the fabric of our universe that you reap what you sow. This includes the issue of sin and eternity. If you sin you reap destruction. But by grace, God can let you walk on water! That is, he can intervene on your behalf making it possible for you to have eternal life instead of destruction that would the "natural" result.

Peter's sinking illustrates what happens when we try to be self-righteous. When we take our eyes of God and try to find salvation on our own it's back to the natural law of reaping what we sow--we sink! It is only by trusting God's grace and that alone that we can hope escape the law of reaping what we sow.

To use traditional "hell' language: Saying that God sends people to hell is like a man stepping off a building and saying, "God made me fall." It's the man's own sowing is what made you sink (or go to "hell").

Universal law: You reap what you sow. (Including, "The wages of sin is death...")
One exception: The grace of God through Jesus Christ can save you from this law. (Expressed as, "... but the gift of God is eternal life..")

This filters down: Natural relational law and inclination is an eye for an eye, hate your enemy. In the same way that God grants grace and saves us from reaping what we sow, we are to show the same grace and grant absolution from any "reaping" someone might receive to the extent that we have control. Namely, if they knock out our tooth, they should reap the loss of their tooth, but instead we forgive and love, etc.

Wilson

[Wilson L. Deaton]

Ten men noticed the seam of their pants was coming loose. They went to their wives and asked them to repair the pants. One man's wife wasn't home so the man made the repair himself.

The next day, all the men sat down. Nine men's pants--the nine the women had repaired--held fast but the one man's pants--the one who had made his own repair--split wide open.

This just goes to show that while a stitch in time saves nine, "a man rips what he sews."

Wilson

[Marsha Lynn]

Galations 6:7-8, Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.
... natural consequence (God created the natural law, of course). ... direct intervention for the sake of discipline (or punishment).

Which kind of reaping do you think Galations 6 is talking about?

It is just as certain and built into the fabric of our universe that you reap what you sow. This includes the issue of sin and eternity. If you sin you reap destruction. But by grace, God can let you walk on water! That is, he can intervene on your behalf making it possible for you to have eternal life instead of destruction that would the "natural" result.

Universal law: You reap what you sow. (Including, "The wages of sin is death...")
One exception: The grace of God through Jesus Christ can save you from this law. (Expressed as, "... but the gift of God is eternal life..")

So are you saying that the "get what you give" laws only apply to the unregenerate who do evil and the regenerate who do good? (Good on the part of the unregenerate doesn't negate their eternal lostness and bad on the part of the regenerate doesn't negate their salvation.) How, then, can it be a law at all if it is consistently set aside based on other factors?

Marsha

(I was digging for some profound insights into this matter for this my 1,000th post, but ended up with only a question. :cool: )

[Wilson L. Deaton]

So are you saying that the "get what you give" laws only apply to the unregenerate who do evil and the regenerate who do good? (Good on the part of the unregenerate doesn't negate their eternal lostness and bad on the part of the regenerate doesn't negate their salvation.)

This was a new line of thinking for me when I posted it and didn't have time to work through all the implications and weaknesses...

Howver, in thinking about it in terms of the questions you have raised:

Temporal "reaping" still applies.

Sow responsibililty and reap responsibilites (faithful with a few things...)

Sow honesty reap trust. Sow dishonestly, reap distrust.

Sow infidelity reap broken marriage.

Sow judging, reap being judged.

Sow overspending reap the imprisonment of heavy indebtedness.

Sow dedication and practice in a given field (sports, music, career) reap expertise in that field.

Sow sin, reap death.

Sow "repentance" ane reap eternal life (in spite of all the sin you have already sown).

The repentance won't necessarily take away all the "temporal" reaping that has already been set in motion: It takes a while to rebuild trust. A victimized spouse might not want to repair the broke marriage. Credit card companies still want to be repaid. Even if you repent of our sins you will not be a great piano player if you have sown years of lackluster effort....

Furthermore, sowing new sins brings about some new reaping. That is, backsliding happens. (Suppose you owe me $100. I forgive the debt. You then borrow another $100. That doesn't mean you again owe me for the first $100 but you certainly owe me for the new $100.)

How, then, can it be a law at all if it is consistently set aside based on other factors?

It isn't set aside "consistently" for "other factors." There is one exception and one factor. Even though the wages of sin is death we can receive eternal life through Christ Jesus.

That's why we call it grace! (Consider all that Paul said about the "Law" and grace.)

Shortcuts don't generally exist for other areas of reaping.... (I say "don't generally" instead of "never" because I can't put God in a box...)

Wilson

[Marsha Lynn]

It isn't set aside "consistently" for "other factors." There is one exception and one factor. Even though the wages of sin is death we can receive eternal life through Christ Jesus.

So ... still thinking...

Generally speaking in reference to temporal time and always in light of eternity, our own conduct is reflected back to us. And generally we reflect other people's conduct back to them. We hate those who hate us, reinforcing their animosity toward us. And we love those who love us, making us more dear to them which makes them treat us with even greater love which ... you get the idea. It's a spiral of reinforcement in any direction. And it's built into the universe.

Then God steps in and makes a deliberate choice to love in the face of rejection. He loved us first! Even before we repented. However, He does not suspend the "get what you give" laws built into nature for us. He doesn't chastize us for deeds for which we have repented, but we will still face the natural consequences of those deeds. Even when we are living in clear relationship with God, we still bear the consequences of poor choices (such as overspending or neglecting our health) whether or not we have repented for doing those things.

Not only does God sidestep the "give them what they deserve" law as far as giving us what we deserve in our sinfulness, He also calls us to make that same lifestyle choice. We naturally reflect back to people what we see in them, responding to the greedy with tightfistedness and to the dishonest with a lack of candor, as examples. However, God calls us to be proactive, choosing a positive response to negative behavior. And He empowers us to do so.

Perhaps the exception to the "get what you give law" for Christians is less in seeing fewer negative consequences tracing back to our own poor choices and more in purposefully turning away from our natural tendency to act negatively toward negative people. God doesn't add to the natural consequences of our negative behavior, and occasionally even grants us immunity from those consequences in His grace. We, in turn, don't add to the natural consequences of the negative behavior of others and, as much as we are able without causing greater harm, even lift up those who are sinking in the mire brought about by their own poor decisions.

Maybe. I think. Anyone who sees more clearly is welcome to point out the fallacies here.

Marsha