Becoming vs. Sin Management

[Todd Erickson]

It appears that a great deal of the focus in Christianity has become sin, and how not to sin, and how not to have one's sin held against them.

Churches talk a lot about what Jesus did on the cross to pay for their sin, and what they owe Jesus, and how they're not worthy, and how we're all sinners, etc.

But what we actually see in the bible is a steady progression back toward humanity as God intended it. God's model of Israel is a people given more and more ideas and modeling of what God is like, and therefore what humanity is intended to be, until God finally came and embodied it for them.

Jesus talks far more about what it's like to follow Him and be like Him than He does about how they shouldn't sin. In fact, most of his declarations about sin are about how people are following themselves, or the ways of the world, rather than Him.

Does anybody else see this? If, in fact, the purpose of Christianity is not to get people out of sin (rather, this is a side effect, a symptom rather than a cause) but rather to make them like Jesus, then how should that change how Christians approach life?

[Jim Chabot]

It appears that a great deal of the focus in Christianity has become sin, and how not to sin, and how not to have one's sin held against them.

Churches talk a lot about what Jesus did on the cross to pay for their sin, and what they owe Jesus, and how they're not worthy, and how we're all sinners, etc.

But what we actually see in the bible is a steady progression back toward humanity as God intended it. God's model of Israel is a people given more and more ideas and modeling of what God is like, and therefore what humanity is intended to be, until God finally came and embodied it for them.

Jesus talks far more about what it's like to follow Him and be like Him than He does about how they shouldn't sin. In fact, most of his declarations about sin are about how people are following themselves, or the ways of the world, rather than Him.

Does anybody else see this? If, in fact, the purpose of Christianity is not to get people out of sin (rather, this is a side effect, a symptom rather than a cause) but rather to make them like Jesus, then how should that change how Christians approach life?


HI Todd! Yes I have seen this for many years. I used to watch a crazy - nutjob - educated and incredibly intelligent TV Evangelist by the name of Gene Scott. When he wasn't off on a tear about something, he would preach against fundamentalism. He preached the importance of faith, he would often say the the avoidance of sin was doo-doo christianity, "doo doo this and dont doo that." What a difference living a life of faith, a life of solidarity with the one who created us, and the side effect of that is that we find ourselves less involved with sin.

I can remember attending a local baptist church bible study about 15 years ago. One of the men was sharing how he was having a hard time avoiding sin that week. I shared that maybe the focus was wrong, maybe we should focus on our God and pleasing him, rather than avoiding his displeasure. I broached the subject that perhaps living a life in fear of sin was a lack of faith and thus sinful itself. It was like someone had turned a light on, they had never heard this position, we discussed it for the rest of the night.

So Yea and Amen Todd! Good stuff!

[Tami Martin]

Gene Scott! I remember staying up late to watch him as a teenager. Well, maybe I should say I was staying up late and watched him...watching him wasn't the reason I was staying up late! I don't remember much but I remember the crazy nut-job aspects much better than the intelligent part.

[Karen Troxler]

In my preaching, I generally focus on becoming more like Jesus and strengthing our relationship with Him, versus preaching against a particular sin. When one is doing that, the Holy Spirit will be the one to point out to them when there is something that needs to change in their life. The Holy Spirit does a much better job at it than I can anyway!

[Andy Mistak]

I wonder if our definition of "sin" isn't part of the problem. Lately I have been thinking (just thinking mind you) about a different definition of sin than my previous "willful transgression" understanding. What if we understood sin as a word, thought, or deed that breaks down relationships -- either between us and other men and women, or us and God. I have found that if I think about things in this way, I'm less likely to think in a "sin management" way, since what God wants from me is right relationship (between me and Him and me and my neighbors) anyway.

[Jim Abrams]

This provides an interesting platform for a question our church continues to struggle with. I agree with Karen and most of my congregation will too up to a point. The point is of drifting away from trust in the transforming work of the Holy Spirit involves a persons participation in public ministry. Simply put, does the person in a position of leading others toward spiritual maturity have to have 'sin under management' before they are qualified to lead? What say you?

[James Diggs]

Does anybody else see this? If, in fact, the purpose of Christianity is not to get people out of sin (rather, this is a side effect, a symptom rather than a cause) but rather to make them like Jesus, then how should that change how Christians approach life?

Yea, I see it.


But what we actually see in the bible is a steady progression back toward humanity as God intended it.
I agree !!!


I wonder if our definition of "sin" isn't part of the problem.

I do think the problem is how we look at sin. I bet you some would look at Todd's post as somehow saying we need to talk less about sin and then they would claim that he doesn't want to preach the gospel.

I think our theology on sin is revealed by answering this question- does sin make us more human or less human?

Some look at sin as nothing less then the inevitable; inescapable depravity- it is what makes us human. For these the best we can hope for is sin management.

I think this group struggles to see sin as anything more than just breaking the rules God set for us, they have trouble connecting and understanding sin on an organic level. They know it is a sin to hurt their neighbor- but think it is so just because God said so. (when I say "think" it may be subconscious as they work from the assumption sin is what makes us human) For them the issue of salvation does not go much further than "forgiveness", because after all just because they are "saved" they are still left as human beings. (I think God can and does still bear fruit in these Christians beyond just "forgiveness" despite their mental model as they keep seeking God in their walk.)

Others look at sin as anything that dehumanizes us and makes us less than what God intends for us- sin makes us less human. For these, it is not about "managing sin" it is about always moving closer to redeemed humanity found in and through Jesus Christ.

I think this group has an easier time seeing sin as both individual and communal. I think while they understand that sin and it's selfishness has corrupted humanity they strive to live in it's redemption found in Jesus Christ and want to participate as part of the "first fruits" in that redemptive work as much as they can as they keep growing into the new humanity found in Christ.

These Christians talk about "sin" far more than the the first group of Christians I mentioned claims they do. These Christians talk about how to restore the humanity of those hurting around them, they seem to be drawn to having a heart to help those who have been marginalized, understanding that the marginalization of others is sinful.

This is where I think this group also has an easier time seeing sin as that which breaks relationships with both God and others. Relationships are not just about "not offending" or "not doing something wrong" to others it is about being connected with in solidarity. We are made in God's image and designed to be in solidarity with God and others who are also made in God's image. I think this group has an easier time understanding that sin is anything that breaks the solidarity we should have in the humanity God both created and redeemed according to his own image.

[Dennis Bratcher]

It appears that a great deal of the focus in Christianity has become sin, and how not to sin, and how not to have one's sin held against them.

Churches talk a lot about what Jesus did on the cross to pay for their sin, and what they owe Jesus, and how they're not worthy, and how we're all sinners, etc.

But what we actually see in the bible is a steady progression back toward humanity as God intended it. God's model of Israel is a people given more and more ideas and modeling of what God is like, and therefore what humanity is intended to be, until God finally came and embodied it for them.

Jesus talks far more about what it's like to follow Him and be like Him than He does about how they shouldn't sin. In fact, most of his declarations about sin are about how people are following themselves, or the ways of the world, rather than Him.

Does anybody else see this? If, in fact, the purpose of Christianity is not to get people out of sin (rather, this is a side effect, a symptom rather than a cause) but rather to make them like Jesus, then how should that change how Christians approach life?

Yes, I have said the same thing for a long time. Most of the ways we think about God and salvation are in terms of sin (forgiveness), which is why legal/forensic approaches to talking about Jesus dominate.

In terms of "the purpose of Christianity," I would not pit "get people out of sin" against "make then like Jesus." They are two sides of the same coin. We just have trouble seeing both sides. We have tended to see "salvation" (or even sanctification) as a goal rather than as the beginning of what the Faith is really about. As all of Scripture attests, becoming the people of God (in the sense of "entering covenant" or "getting saved") is not nearly as significant as living as the people of God (Isa 1:3, Jere 4:22, Matt 7:21, Lk 6:46, etc.).

One answer: Spend more time studying and preaching the Gospels rather than Paul. It is not that Paul is unimportant. It is only that since the early church cast the Faith in certain structures addressing certain questions, Paul has tended to dominate theological discourse. Maybe Jesus and his teachings (as mediated through the Gospel writers) ought to occupy that place.

Grace and Peace,

Dennis B.

[Ryan Scott]

I was reading a book yesterday and it made a simple, yet profound statement that some time early in its history Christianity went from being a religion concerned with suffering to a religion concerned with sin. I spent a lot of time thinking about that statement.

If we define sin as those actions which lead to suffering (not necessarily or only of the one committing the act, but suffering anywhere) it keeps the relief of suffering primary. When we begin to focus on the actions themselves we get into legalism and develop a narrow focus.

Something to think about anyway.

[Jim Abrams]

I wonder if we don't get the cart before the horse, so to speak, if we talk about sin as "anything that breaks down relationships." I am more prone to think of the breakdown of relationship as the result of sin not its source. I think we would do well to define it at its source and then describe it by its results. I think this helps us avoid the legalistic trap preaching against particular sins and leaves more room/freedom for the Holy Spirit to do his convicting work in people. The Spirits work sets the stage for the sin remedy!

[Shea Zellweger]

I speak very little on the concept of sin. It's not that I don't think it's something that's real, or that we need to try to not sin, but that I don't see how naming this sin or that sin somehow makes someone more prone to not doing it. Scripturally, I would use the example of Jesus' words about driving demons out, and how if they are not replaced by something good, they return with 6 friends. It's like the person who tries to give up smoking (because it's a sin, doncha know?), but in the process becomes gluttonous due to the oral fixation, irritable due to the withdrawal, and wasteful with money as he or she repeatedly buys a pack of cigarettes, smokes one, gets frustrated, throws out the cigarettes, then repeats the process the next day/week. When you are trying to avoid every sin, eventually you fall into one, just like when you try not to miss a freethrow, chances are you miss it. On the other hand, if we have a positive focus- becoming more like Christ, growing in our relationship with God and with others, etc.- then are lives are eventually taken over by that focus, and as time goes on, God shows us what needs to be removed, and fills that space with more love.

[Sarah Smith]

What a wonderful thread!

We've been slogging through some of those tough times: a family member going through a much needed but very unwanted divorce. I'm struggling with a health issue that comes up from time to time. My husband is struggling with poor health in two areas, and has surgery scheduled for next week (and I pray we get in over with, not rescheduled!). During this time we've realized the church we most fit with theologically (COTN) is not the one in this town we most fit with in Sunday morning practice.

DH is, I believe, approaching the time for a crisis of faith concerning ES. So of course, lots of struggles and Satan rears his ugly head.

And yet, during my quiet time, during prayer, almost audibly I felt the Lord remind me "holiness is not something you do. It is who you are."

Now, before you throw brickbats re behavior I am well aware good works should follow...must follow...will follow.

DH's growth and struggle are just reminding me we cannot work our way to saved, or work our way to holiness.

We receive them as gifts, then go do the work.

[Randy Wise]

Does anybody else see this? If, in fact, the purpose of Christianity is not to get people out of sin (rather, this is a side effect, a symptom rather than a cause) but rather to make them like Jesus, then how should that change how Christians approach life?

What if the purpose is two fold? One to give life and the other to conform us to the likeness of Christ? Since you use the word Christian should we then assume the starting point of your question is for those who already belong to Jesus?

No matter how theology plays out it should be plain to all that God does punish sin. (Those that refuse Gods correction as many warnings are given) That doesn't go away though forgiveness/life eternal can be received through Jesus. So that should be a concern for those who don't belong to Christ and can be at least one focus for those that do belong to Christ and see others walking on the wrong path. So snatching others from the fire can be incorporated into what we see as "Love". That being said I don't know why that would be "the" major focus for a body of "believers" coming together as a group to worship service. When we leave that service and we look at the world we see "sin" and those that live in sin. Hopefully as believers we live a lifestyle that depicts enough contrast that the world can see the difference between those that belong to Jesus and those that don't. In what we see in the world it is certainly lawful to give the cure. "Jesus"


Randy

[Bob Hunter]

If I’m not mistaken the message of Holiness goes beyond sin management, or perhaps it should if we were to be true to scripture and tradition.

A couple of years ago, I did a research paper on Maximus the Confessor and his views on sanctification or deification (Theosis). Essentially he taught that salvation is a process of sharing in the life of God. St. Athanasius nicely sums up it up, “God became man, so that man might become God.” The emphasis is placed squarely on the incarnation and not just on the atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins. This view goes beyond forgiveness (or mere sin management) and allows us to think about being renewed in the image of God. I look at it as a early expression of what we sanctification or transformation unto Christ-likeness. Or being a partaker of the divine nature (reaching the full potential of humanity in Christ).

I guess my point is this, mere sin management is nothing new. Christians have been responding to this narrow point of view for a long time (centuries). Maximus is recognized in both the East and the West for his contributions to Christian theology. His views are roughly the equivalent of what we call sanctification. So if the focus of Christianity has become sin, that is a sad development. Our focus should be on Christ and his incarnation. (Sounds Eastern doesn’t it?)

[Kevin Rector]

I wonder if our definition of "sin" isn't part of the problem. Lately I have been thinking (just thinking mind you) about a different definition of sin than my previous "willful transgression" understanding. What if we understood sin as a word, thought, or deed that breaks down relationships -- either between us and other men and women, or us and God. I have found that if I think about things in this way, I'm less likely to think in a "sin management" way, since what God wants from me is right relationship (between me and Him and me and my neighbors) anyway.

I've taught for years now that sins are sins precisely because they break down right relationships. There isn't a sin in the world you can think of that doesn't have at it's root the destruction of relationships.

That doesn't mean you have to get rid of the "willful transgressions" part. They are not mutually exclusive. The problem of sin is where we willfully transgress against a known law of God which is the same thing as willfully transgressing a relationship.

[Billy Cox]

Churches talk a lot about what Jesus did on the cross to pay for their sin, and what they owe Jesus, and how they're not worthy, and how we're all sinners, etc.


If Jesus paid it all, why do we owe him *anything*?

[Hans Deventer]

If Jesus paid it all, why do we owe him *anything*?

Because He didn't. He ransomed us, and that's a different story altogether.

[John Reilly]

Jonathan Edwards offered some thoughts on sin management ... "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" ... the picture of God holding sinners over an open campfire like dangling a spider over the flames.

[Billy Cox]

I have for a long time considered that to be a most unfortunate word picture.

[David Graham]

Jonathan Edwards offered some thoughts on sin management ... "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" ... the picture of God holding sinners over an open campfire like dangling a spider over the flames.

Perhaps we could contrast that picture of the angry God with the figure of Christ gently dealing with Peter at the Men's beach breakfast after the resurrection as described in John 21: 15-19. That "wicked" Peter had only days before denied his Lord three times..... and Jesus stirred up the coals of Peter's love by asking him simply three times; "Mate, do you love me"?

I suspect that Christ deals with most of us that same way.

Blessings,
Dave

[Ryan Scott]

Jonathan Edwards offered some thoughts on sin management ... "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" ... the picture of God holding sinners over an open campfire like dangling a spider over the flames.

It might be a more appropriate picture if we talked about the world working in such a way that sinners end up unknowingly dangling above the fire by virtue of sin, with God offering a way off the fire.