Up the Creek…

 

What is our definition of sin? Where did it come from? Why are we unable to avoid it? Can we even overcome it?

When we think of sin it is usually in the context of action [profanity/lying/adultery] but what if it is more than just that? Maybe the phrase “more” is not completely accurate…but what if sin is something that actually precedes the action?

Growing up I found the concept of sin that was taught to me to be oppressive! A constant fear looming over my shoulder – something that waited crouched at my door! But I was also taught that it was manageable…I am not sure how I came to the conclusions that I did but I started to believe that sin was conquerable – but until then it had me in its grasp…but with a few slick techniques I could be free! I read books on overcoming sin, avoiding sin –> defeating bad behavior and actions ~ I read them over and over but with no success.

It dawned on me, “What if the ‘action’ wasn’t the sin rather it was a result of the sin?” – a symptom of sin but not the disease itself. We’ve spent so much time focusing on the actions - “Dead Bodies” and have completely ignored the process that leads up to it!

Let me explain the “Dead Bodies” statement: Many of us have heard the analogy of Upstream Thinking – It goes something like this [warning: bad paraphrase coming]:

Two people come to the edge of a stream and are immediately confronted with dead bodies floating by. They begin to remove the bodies from the stream – but the bodies keep coming – the rate doesn’t change and the work doesn’t end…finally one of the two people says, “You stay here and continue pulling the bodies from the river, I’m going upstream to find out how the dead bodies are getting here!”

This story is usually used when discussing the value of prevention versus treatment…but could we use this analogy for sin? We are identifying that there are “dead bodies” [read::our actions] in the stream(s) of our life and we call that ‘sin’ that must be removed – but what if sin goes further upstream…sin is the cause of the “dead bodies” in the stream.

What caused the “dead bodies” to be in the stream in the first place – can we call this sin? What would we find is “up the creek”?

Missed it by that much...

Sin a History - Review pt. 1
Sin a History - Review pt. 2

I was going to review this book today on here but noticed Ben Witherington III just posted his thoughts on the book! Awesome...check it out - this book has helped shape many of my thoughts and questions that I am working on!

Matthew 25: “No Goat Left Behind!”…

…He says sheepishly!

In Matthew 25 there are a couple of parables (Ten Virgins & Parable of the Talents) – but following those two sections is a section that is taught often but not discussed beyond the surface implications of feeding the poor (of which I am a huge advocate). I want to ask – what does this tell us about the Final Judgment? (Matt. 25.31-46)

Evangelicals insist we are not saved by works – James says you can’t have faith without works (James 2.18) – we could argue those nuances…Abraham saved by faith – then entered covenant; Israel rescued (Saved) from Egypt – then entered covenant! Though the prevalent mindset throughout the church has often been an avoidance of good works in order to demonstrate in some twisted way that we are not saved by those works! BUT I digress…

I believe the Text proposes the concept that our interaction with others is based in whether or not we sin…consider; those who did not clothe the naked had sinned –> Why? What was their sin?

I want to assert that sin is the taking of the role of judge from the one True Judge – we, when we ate from the Tree of Knowledge, gained (maybe even stole) the role of Judge of Creation from G_d (Hence the Text declaring that we’d become more like Him)…He has spent the rest of history preparing to return as The Judge. We can see that return in this section of the Text.

The sin therefore in this section is that of poor judging – we didn’t perceive that we even needed to help – our judgment was off. It is the same as our ‘first’ sin – we judged that being naked was bad! We had always been naked – G_d even judged it to be very good.

Therefore – I would like to set before you the notion that the role of sin in humanity is that of an unjust judge (us) ruling over the creation of a Just Judge and G_d desperately wants us to return that role to Him!

Da’Bears…

err…The Bares!?!


We were created by G_d without the ability to discern between good and evil –> and G_d found this to be VERY good!

We can assume from this that both good and evil existed in the world – the serpent for one – Wrong doing existed in the world – the serpent deceived Adam and Eve.

So…we were created without the ability to discern between good and evil…G_d was okay with this – in fact He created it this way! So if good and evil existed – wrong-doing existed, if we weren’t created perfect…How did eating from the tree bring sin into the world? Wasn’t it already here- at least according to the way we typically define it???

After all Adam lied about what G_d told him (Genesis 2.15-16), apparently, when telling Eve the restrictions (Genesis 3.1-3). G_d said don’t eat the fruit…Adam must have told Eve that G_d said not to touch or eat the fruit!

What does this have to do with the realization of nakedness - and that it was wrong to be naked - when to G_d it must not have been wrong since that was how He created us and found it to be very good!

Beginning Thoughts: A Little Ditty…

… about Adam and Eve?

In the garden we were created – nowhere, by the way, does Scripture say or indicate that we were perfect…in fact Creation was declared to be “good” not even “great” – when G_d created man ~ He declared man to be “very good” but not perfect!

I am curious as to where we get the notion that we were perfect – flawless – now I do believe that we were indeed sinless but not flawless! How can that be? Well let us consider this…if we were perfect before the tree – how did us losing our “perfection” by eating the fruit make us more like G_d? (Genesis 3.5) Becoming more like G_d is indeed G_d’s concern – not that we are less like Him but more!

What is it that G_d is truly concerned about? Now that we’ve eaten from the tree –> His fear is that we may now turn and eat from the tree of life and live forever in that state we are in since eating the forbidden fruit. (Genesis 3.22)

I’d like to assert that our removal from the garden of the L_RD , therefore, is truly an act of mercy on His behalf.

My Question:

What is it that happened to us when we consumed the fruit? What changed in us? It has to be an attribute that we gained in order to make us more like G_d. Yet, I’ve only heard it taught as what we’ve lost – perfection or, occasionally, innocence.

What do you think about this perspective?

The Poll to the Left

I find it rather interesting that of the handful of people that have 'voted' on the poll...not a single person has selected Debt...the reason that I find this so odd is that that is the dominant language used in our church culture.

• Jesus paid for our sins.
• Our debt  has been settled.
• Wages of sin.
• Parable of the Unforgiving Servant (not forgiving another debt after his debt was forgiven)
• Lord's Prayer - "Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors."

I wish there were a way to allow people to 'list' what their other is on the poll...but since I'm incapable of figuring that out...if you are willing I'd like you to explain your other in the comment section of this post! Please...I'd love to know!

A Thought on Sin

This is a page where I am looking to begin an ongoing dialogue (or very possibly - monologue) about the topic of Falling Short (Romans 3.23) about fair wages (Romans 6.23) in regards to our life and relationship to G_d.

We've reduced sin to a single analogy in our current church settings; that of debt...I want to suggest that first we must consider a biblical understanding of debt (Leviticus 25) and its forgiveness (Matthew 18.21-35) - and how that affects the way that we treat those indebted to us (Matthew 6.9-15). In addition to a biblical lens for debt - I also want to look at other analogies used within the Text to imagine sin (ie. a burden to be carried - 1 Peter 2.24; Isaiah 43.24b-25).

We would not consider allowing our understanding of G_d to be wrapped up in one analogy - we need multiple (shepherd, father, creator, strong-tower, mother hen, etc...) images in order to begin to piece together who He is! Therefore I assert that when we discuss a topic such as sin that we do not allow ourselves to be duped into thinking we have a full understanding because of a single analogy (most usually that of debt)...

I am looking to use biblical Texts to challenge and expand our current Theology of Sin; I am hoping for healthy/civil/intelligent debate and discussion on this topic...please join me in this discussion - the future hope is that of a book or essay on the topic.