Debi Peck, you are just too smart. The quote that I gave in my last post was indeed a (poorly, as it turns out) disguised restatement of 1 John 3:6 - "No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him."
We are studying 1 John in Sunday School and this verse really stuck out to me. In fact, a lot of 1 John deals with the rejection of sin and is hard for most of us to get our heads around.
I had hoped to let my last post go on for a few more days. I was pretty sure that almost everybody would disagree with the statement. At face value, it is in fact very disagreeable. Even as someone who adheres to the Wesleyan tradition, it is hard for me to conceive of a world in which the followers of Jesus fully depart from sinful behaviors. We teach it. But rarely do we live it.
And that is the problem.
What has happened in the church that we are so far removed from the words of John that actual holiness seems to be such an impossibility? Is it? Has the church always accepted that those within our walls would continually sin?
For the sake of discussion, I would like to offer a few questions. Answer as many or as few as you like, I am hoping that the conversation that follows will explore the nature of holiness and what responsibilities the followers of Jesus have to live a holy life. So here are my questions:
1) What is your best definition of sin? Of holiness?
2) If you disagree with 1 John 3:6, why will followers of Jesus continue to sin?
3) How much sin is acceptable in the life of a follower of Jesus? How much is too much?
4) How long can a follower of Jesus go without sinning? (Give your best guess here... a day? a week? a month? forever?)
5) What would you say to a follower of Jesus who claims to have been set free from a compulsion to sin? Or, on the other side of the issue, what would you say to a follower of Jesus who claims to be enslaved by a compulsion to sin?
6) If there will be no sin in heaven, when will followers of Jesus stop sinning and why?
Have at it, and keep it nice!
Looking forward to the discussion.
Monday, April 6, 2009
Is Holiness a Myth?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Heath,
On the other thread I mentioned how Romans 7 seems to conflict with 1 John, thus we need to reexamine how we look at these texts. You pointed out that perhaps it is our understanding of Romans 7 we need to rethink.
That's just the point, though, when two or more pieces of Scripture seem to collide we have to pause and rethink. We can't take any one of them in isolation. That's what systematic theology is all about.
Personally I don't think 1 John is saying that true Christians will never sin again. But I don't think we can write the verse off either. It should make us pause and think about just how seriously God takes sin.
We shouldn't take falling into temptation lightly. Jesus said that if our right hand causes us to sin we should cut it off. I believe he was using a figure of speech, but nevertheless he was illustrating the ferocity with which we should go after the sin in our lives.
We need to cut it out by whatever means necessary.
Do we do that, though? Probably not nearly often enough.
Steve,
I am curious... how do you define sin? And would you care to tackle any of my other questions?
I like Cornelius Plantinga's definition: not the way it's supposed to be.
We often think of sin as something like breaking the rules, but I believe it goes beyond that. It is every way that creation has been negatively affected by the fall.
3) Honestly I don't believe that any sin is acceptable. We should have zero sin in our lives. But that's why we have to rely on grace.
4) I have no idea. I don't think there's a specific time-line here. But if our thoughts and attitudes can even be sinful, then I find it hard to believe that anyone could go a day without sinning.
5) If someone said they were set free from the "compulsion" to sin I would be skeptical. They're saying they don't even have the desire to sin anymore? They aren't even tempted? I would question that. However, I have always found that the closer I am with God, the more I despise sin.
As for someone who feels enslaved by sin, that's also problematic. We all sin, but we shouldn't be slaves to sin. We shouldn't feel that we have no other choice. I would recommend this person find a mature Christian to help mentor them. And like I said in my other post, I would recommend that they try to remove the enslaving sin by any means necessary.
6) That's a good question. I guess I've always assumed that when we die or Christ returns, that's when sin will end for us. Maybe that is little more than an assumption - but I don't really see another answer to that question.
Hmmm, I am going to think about it, but I don't think that is a very good definition of sin.
The problem I see is two-fold.
1) How do you assertain how something is "supposed to be," as in, what standard do you use.
2) If something is supposed to be and yet is not, then why is the ultimate cause not a bearer of partial responsibility for it's lack of being. i.e., Why is God not partially responsible for sin? I believe free will plays a defining role in sin. That definition seems to embrace a destined view of creation and marginalizes the role of free will in sin.
Moving on...
I agree that we should have zero sin in our lives. And I also agree that we rely on grace for forgiveness. But what about relying on grace for prevention of sin?
Are we not saying, in essence, that God's grace is able to erradicate past sins, but it is ineffectual against our future sin?
If we admit that we cannot overcome sin, even if we rely on God's grace, what does that say about the power of grace?
And what do we do with 1 Cor. 10:13 - "No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it."
If God provides the way to resist temptation, why would we assume that we have to sin?
Also, I would like to point out that there is a difference between an internal compulsion to sin, such as coveting, and an external source of temptation, such as someone offering you an illegal way to get rich quick. Temptation is not always self-made. And temptation does not equal sin.
I used to be tempted to take God's name in vain. I no longer ever feel that compulsion. Is that really all that weird? And why is that experience not applicable to other internal temptations?
Thanks for commenting!
I do believe there was a way creation was intended to be, as in the way it was before the fall. I don't know if that makes God at least partially responsible for sin...
You could make the argument that free will makes God partially responsible for sin too. Because God willingly created being that had the capacity to sin.
If you try hard enough there's really no way around "blaming" God for sin.
I do believe that grace can prevent future sin. I don't think we HAVE to sin, but yet we do. It's just very difficult to not sin. Difficult enough that I wouldn't really expect anyone to be able to do it. There are sins that I have far less trouble with now than I used to as well. But I still have trouble with sins.
And I agree with you about temptation. Temptation itself is not sin.
"...not the way things are supposed to be."
If that is the definition of sin then everything is sin and if everything is sin then nothing is sin.
I don't think you can do better than Wesley's defintion.
I don't think holiness is a myth...it's what holiness is that causes the problem...tough to put a objective definition to a subjective experience.
Exactly, everything is tainted by sin... so I see no problem there.
Where you come to the conclusion that that means nothing is sin is where I don't follow your logic. How did you come to that?
I cannot recommend "Half Hours with Saint Paul" by Dr. Daniel Steele highly enough for those who would desire to study 1 John. First John is perhaps the most misinterpreted book in the Bible, and Steel paints the importance if reading John in context, and with consistency.
Sin and Holiness is a subject that would take too much space here to discuss. I offer the following to anyone that is up to the challenge.
http://www.biblical-theology.net/a_theology_of_sin.htm
Hey Jeff,
The whole point of this post is to discuss sin and holiness, not to point out other websites where they also discuss sin and holiness.
I wonder what empiracal method you use to declare that 1 John is perhaps the most misinterpreted book. By whose standards? The Calvinist standard?
Jeff, what is your definition od sin and holiness and let's start there.
1) What is your best definition of sin? Of holiness?
2) If you disagree with 1 John 3:6, why will followers of Jesus continue to sin?
3) How much sin is acceptable in the life of a follower of Jesus? How much is too much?
4) How long can a follower of Jesus go without sinning? (Give your best guess here... a day? a week? a month? forever?)
5) What would you say to a follower of Jesus who claims to have been set free from a compulsion to sin? Or, on the other side of the issue, what would you say to a follower of Jesus who claims to be enslaved by a compulsion to sin?
6) If there will be no sin in heaven, when will followers of Jesus stop sinning and why?
1. Sin is best defined as something done that is separate from God, who is Holy...that's how I define it anyhow.
2. The doctrine of my church does state that the old nature still exists, but because we are now under the Holy Spirit we should be able to conquer sin. Does that mean we always do, no it does not. We are under grace though. I have always thought that when asks Jesus to forgive them He forgives all sins, past, present, and future.
3. Truth be told, we should always strive for no sin at all.
4. That is a very difficult question because there is a lot of things that can be considered sin. First of all, we need to know what is considered to be sin. For example, is it okay to tell a "little white lie" to someone so as not to hurt their feelings, etc.
5. With enough prayer and perseverance, people can be delivered from sins. And, if someone has a compulsion to sin in some way, they at some point must have let that sin take root and become an ingrained habit. It would take a lot of prayer and concentrated effort to break that pattern.
6. When we die.
By the way, thanks Jeff I will check out Half Hours with Saint Paul...
history,
A couple of follow up questions if I may...
You said, "is it okay to tell a "little white lie" to someone so as not to hurt their feelings" as a reason it is hard to answer how long a person can go without sinning. Are you suggesting that telling little white lies is a sin that is impossible to resist? I fail to see how that (if we are to call it "sin") is any harder to prevent than telling big black lies.
Also, if death is when we will stop sinning, what is it that changes? Are we diffrent people after death than before death? Is free will removed? Is sin impossible? Why does this marker stand as the end of sin for you?
Thanks again!
Steve,
If sin touches everything we do, how do we then know it's sin? A state of no sin must exist for us to know what is short of that state.
With the definition, "not the way it's supposed to be"...how do we know how it's supposed to be if everything is tainted with sin.
Sooo, if everything is sin, then nothing is sin because we have no judge on the "way things are supposed to be" cause it's never that way cause it's tainted by sin.
For the folks who say we sin everyday in word thot and deed, I usually ask them how have they sinned today. Most can't tell be specifically although they believe they have.
Thanks for the discussion!!
Post a Comment