What is sin? Why is the Christian

What is sin? Why is the Christian view of sin important for understanding people? What are the consequences of sin for people individually? Institutionally? Socially? An Exploration of Christian Theology Chapter 14 Most people are familiar with the story of Adam and Eve, and of the serpent who tempted them to disobey God by eating the forbidden fruit (Gen. 2:5-3:24). According to the book of Genesis, God had created Adam and Eve to live in the garden of Eden. There they could partake of everything but the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. A serpent, however, tempted Eve to eat the forbidden fruit, which she did. She then gave some to Adam to eat. God, of course, discovered this transgression, cursed all who were involved, and banished Adam and Eve from the garden of Eden. This story of the fall of humanity into sinfulness is a classic story of love, betrayal, and tragic consequences. God creates and loves Adam and Eve. They experience an apparently idyllic life in the garden of Eden. God places virtually no restrictions on their lives, other than to avoid the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Then a serpent appears on the scene and begins to cast doubt on God’s motives. It is not clear who the serpent is or from where it came; Scripture describes it as “more crafty than any other wild animal” (Gen. 3:1). The serpent has often been thought of as a wise, albeit deceptive, creature. There is also a hint of evil, supernatural power at work in God’s creation. Nevertheless, the serpent beguiles Eve, who in turn gives the forbidden fruit to Adam, who joins in the transgression against God’s prohibition. The consequences of their action—their sin—were calamitous. God curses the serpent, condemning it to crawl and to be in enmity with people (Gen. 3:14-15). God curses Eve—and all women—to suffer pain in childbirth and to become subordinate to men (Gen. 3:16). Likewise, God curses Adam (Gen. 3:17-18; Rom. 5:12-21). And God curses not only Adam and Eve but the whole of humanity, and the very earth itself. Thereafter, people will have to toil on earth to provide for their 156 needs, but most significantly, they will eventually die. As a final act of punishment, God banishes Adam and Eve from the garden of Eden (Gen. 3:23-24). The story of Adam and Eve and their fall from God’s favor is a tragic story that has mesmerized and influenced people for centuries. Although Christians do not agree about the identity of Adam and Eve or of the serpent, the story’s influence persists in shaping personal and theological views of sin. Certainly, Christians have interpreted Scripture’s account of the fall of humanity in various ways. However, each one—in its own way—returns to the story of Adam and Eve in order to develop a doctrine of sin. Understanding Sin Sin signifies an offense against God. In Scripture, sin is understood in a variety of ways. Sin is disobedience to God (Gen. 3:6), transgression against a law of God (1 John 3:4), or any unrighteousness (1 John 5:17). Our words can be considered sinful (Prov. 10:19). So can our thoughts. Jesus said that sinful thoughts or intentions make us just as guilty of sin as the outward manifestation of our words and actions (Matt. 5:22, 28). Even unbelief can be considered sin (Rom. 14:23). In the Old Testament, sin involves transgression against God’s laws and instructions for holy living. For example, in the Ten Commandments, God instructs people regarding how they should act in relationship to God and to others (Exod. 20:1-17). The first commandment dictates having no other gods before God, the one true God (Exod. 20:3), which is followed by the second commandment against idolatry (Exod. 20:4-6). In the ancient world, people worshiped statues (animal or human) that personified natural powers. Of course, people worship other natural powers—wealth, sex, politics. For example, in the New Testament, Jesus said, “You cannot serve God and wealth” (Matt. 6:24). Sin idolatrously worships something or someone other than God. Sometimes sin is conceived not in terms of what is done but in terms of what is left undone. Neglecting to do what is good is considered sin (James 4:17). Presumably the omission of good thoughts and words is equally worthy of guilt. At other times, sins were thought to be committed out of ignorance. People may have committed a sin according to the letter of the law, so to speak, but—it is argued—they did not do so with evil intent. In these instances, Scripture still refers to such behavior as sinful, though some allowances or consideration of extenuating circumstance may be made (Num. 35:9-34; Josh. 20). 157 In sum, sin signifies any thought, word, or action that thwarts the righteousness of God or God’s intentions for our lives. The extent of sin in our lives even includes our attitudes and dispositions. No part of our lives is exempt from the influence of sin. The primary New Testament word for sin (Gk., hamartia) has the original meaning of “missing a target” or “failing to reach it.” Sin is a deviation from God’s will as well as character, implying that people in one way or another fail to achieve God’s intentions for them. The historic development of the doctrine of sin has sometimes been referred to as hamartiology, though the term is seldom used today. Universality of Sin Scripture affirms the universality of sin. All people are sinful and fall short of the righteousness and glory of God (Gen. 6:5; Isa. 53:6; Rom. 3:23; 5:12-14, 18-19). No one may say that they are without sin (1 Kings 8:46; Prov. 20:9; 1 John 1:8-10). Often sin is conceived primarily in terms of personal sins, but sinfulness extends far beyond that of individual responsibility. Frequently in Scripture it is conceived in terms of sins against groups of people and other societal sins (Gen. 19:13; Exod. 32-33; Lev. 4:13-21; 25:28; Matt. 11:20-24). Themes of justice and compassion for the poor and other dispossessed people in society represent continuous concerns in Scripture. There is no such thing as the privatization of sins or of a personal sin that does not have social implications. Likewise, sins were thought to be committed by collective groups of people as well as by individuals. The Hebrew nation, for example, along with the later kingdoms of Israel and Judah, were guilty of collective sins for which God held them responsible as a group (Num. 20:1-13; Deut. 32:1- 33; Jer. 44:1-6). Thus, a collective response to the presence of sin was as necessary as an individual response; public confession of sin was needed as much as individual confession of sin. Consequences of Sin Sin resulted in a number of consequences. As already mentioned, the story of Adam and Eve describes specific curses against humanity following their sin. In addition to physical death, people would suffer a separation from God. This separation led to a kind of alienation for people, not only from God but also from their true selves and from others. A spiritual blindness ensued, consisting of hardness of heart, licentiousness, social injustice, and even violence. More than becoming spiritually blind, people became rebellious, especially toward God. Ongoing rebelliousness involves more than active aggression against God or transgressions against God’s will. It also involves indifference to God and God’s will, which represents a kind of passive aggression. The result of sin is death of a spiritual as well as physical nature, which continues beyond this life into eternity. Since all people are considered guilty of sin, this guilt changed the status of people before God. It signified a legal guilt or culpability for sin. It also signified a broken relationship with God, with others, and with themselves. Thus, a general state of unhealthiness resulted that affected, in one way or another, every aspect of human existence. People are now in bondage to sin as if they were slaves to it (John 8:34; Rom. 7:25). All aspects of their lives reflect orientations, outlooks, and actions tainted by sin. Development of the Doctrine The ancient church was concerned with developing a proper understanding of sin. After all, sin signified the greatest barrier between people and God. Beyond the fact that all people were considered sinful, however, Christians conceived of sin in a number of different ways. Much of the debate had to do with the origin of sin and its continuing effects on people and their offspring. In this chapter, I focus on the issue of the origin of sin. In the next chapter, I will focus on theological understandings of the nature and extent of sin as they developed in church history. Certainly, a discussion of the origin of sin is inextricably bound up with a more complete study of the nature and extent of sin. However, we will begin with views of its origin. The Origin of Sin How did sin originate? That is, what is the source or cause of sin? Are people responsible for the origin of sin? Is some demonic power responsible for it? On the other hand, is God ultimately responsible for the origin of sin? These questions have puzzled Christians through the ages. No one view of the origin of sin has gained consensual agreement, but distinct viewpoints have arisen. Prominent Christian perspectives are discussed below. Volitional View Probably the most common Christian understanding of the origin of sin is the view that sin originated due to free choices that people made contrary to the will of God. From this perspective, people were righteous or at least morally neutral before sin occurred. However, when people exercised their volition in ways that resulted in evil choices, sin occurred. These choices may have occurred in a variety of ways. For example, sin may have occurred as anxiety or as some betrayal of God, oneself, or others; deviation from or negligence of righteousness; disobedience toward God due to idolatry, avarice, ingratitude, pride, rebelliousness, selfishness, or sensuousness (e.g., fleshly appetites); and so on. However, in each case, sinfulness occurred as a freely chosen thought, word, or action. Augustine is the most prominent proponent of the volitional understanding of the origin of sin in the ancient church. He considered sin to be especially the result of pride or self-centeredness on the part of individuals. According to Augustine, sin does not constitute something in and of itself. Instead, sin consists of wrong choices. People choose to think, speak, and act in accordance with their own will rather than the will of God. From the volitional perspective, God permits people to commit sin. It is not the direct will of God for people to commit sin, but God permits them to exercise freedom of will. Although God foreknew that sin would occur, it is not God’s primary will that sin should occur. God is prepared, however, to respond in an appropriate and saving way to the sin of humanity. In the story of the fall of Adam and Eve, the presence of the serpent does not eliminate human responsibility for sin. People are still ultimately responsible for their decisions, despite the presence of an outside influence or temptation. However, even considering the existence of an evil power in the world that is hostile to God—epitomized in the serpent, sometimes thought of as a reference to Satan—the origin of sin still comes down to the abuse of human freedom. Although Scripture tells us less about the origins of spiritual beings than it does about human beings, the evil (or sins) of Satan and demons would still have to be thought of in terms of the abuse of free will. If sin did not occur because of evil choices first made by Satan, then Satan would have to be viewed as an eternal presence of evil alongside that of a good God. However, such a dualistic view has never been accepted in the history of the church. (Alternatively, Satan may be viewed as a being created evil by God, but this view would call into the ultimate goodness of God.) Therefore, whether sin originated through Adam and Eve or through Satan, it came about because of evil choices. Ignorance View Augustine promoted his view of sin, in large part, in opposition to a view of sin propounded by Pelagius, whom Augustine accused of minimizing the depravity of sin. Although Pelagius left no writings with which we may adequately evaluate his theology, he was thought to view sin as ignorance. Thus, sin is the result not of morally corrupt decisions but of an almost innocent ignorance on the part of people. On the cross, Jesus forgave those who crucified him, saying, “Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing” (Luke 23:34; cf. Acts 7:60). From this perspective, every person is born with relatively the same potential for living in righteous as well as unrighteous ways. Those who view ignorance as the primary predicament of humanity emphasize a corresponding social predicament, namely, the lack of education, including moral and spiritual training. In order for people to live righteous lives, they need moral and spiritual illumination through appropriate education, mentoring, and other aids for nurturing righteousness. In a post-evolutionary world, some Christians view sin as the natural result of people’s animal nature. In trying to deal with conflict driven by survival instinct and cultural deprivation, people naturally acted in ways that resulted in evil choices. As people evolve physically and culturally, they must also evolve morally and spiritually. This progressive understanding of human development, it is thought, represents the greatest hope for the future of humanity. Other Christians conceive of sin primarily in societal rather than individual terms. This does not minimize the tragedy of sins and the effects of sins committed by individuals. However, the core of the problem can be traced to social rather than individual sources. The social dimension becomes more important in conceiving both the origin and the consequences of sin. Societal forces, more than anything else, explain the root of sinful influences on people, causing individuals to sin. All sins, in 160 effect, have social causes and effects. Thus, societal steps need to be taken along with individual steps in overcoming sin. Soul-Making View Some Christians in the ancient church thought that God created people for the purpose of growing and developing into greater conformity with the image and likeness of God. Irenaeus, for example, thought that people were born with the potential for living in righteous as well as unrighteous ways. Unfortunately, all people sinned due to evil choices that they eventually made. However, the sins committed by humanity are a part of God’s plans for their lives. God directly intended for people— past and present—to live in a context in which sin inevitably occurs. Only in the context of freedom, where wrong as well as right choices occur, do people learn to become responsible, mature in their decision making. Only in the context of freedom, where betrayal as well as love occur, do people learn to relate to others, including God, of their own volition. This soul-making view of the origin of sin differs from the volitional view in that God is viewed as being more directly responsible for the origin of sin. Although people have sinned due to their evil choices, God created them in such a way that sin eventually occurs. Certainly, this may seem to be a harsh way for God to refine people in their likeness to God. However, it gives greater recognition to the intentional rather than unintentional explanation for how sin and evil could have occurred in a world created by God to be good. Like a parent, God introduced people to a challenging context in order for them to learn how to love and relate with God freely. It is better for them to endure temptation, pain, and suffering and then be redeemed from it than to have never experienced any challenges in life. Some have thought that an Irenaean-type theodicy provides a more coherent view of how sin could fit into the ultimately beneficent plans of God for people and the world as a whole. Although God knew that life would be hard for people, a greater good could be achieved by having them endure sin and evil as well as pain and suffering. By experiencing the hard knocks of life, people would be able to grow and mature, as well as appreciate what they accomplished, individually and collectively. Existential View An existential view of sin involves the broken relationship between God and people that occurs when people respond in an inauthentic way to the trials, temptations, and anxieties they experience due to the finite aspects of human existence. In the world, people are thought to experience a tremendous amount of anxiety (the anxiety of finiteness) because of their many limitations personally, socially, and spiritually. As a result, people experience themselves as being quite alienated in a world that often seems absurd from a rational perspective. An inauthentic response to the anxiety that results from a sense of finiteness and absurdity leads to endeavors to build a false sense of security. The endeavor to build security often occurs at the expense of others—in false relationships with others and with God. In a sense, a betrayal of God and of others occurs, treating them as means to an end, rather than as an end in themselves. This betrayal of relationship constitutes sin. Human thoughts, words, and actions that occur independent of God and at the expense of others are considered sinful. 161 This contemporary view of sin emphasizes the interpersonal dimension of sin as betrayal rather than sin as breaking a rule per se. It does not exclude the notion of breaking a rule, but it places the idea of a personal relationship with God and with others as most important in determining authentic human existence. Relationships rather than abstract rules or instituted laws constitute the most meaningful aspects of people’s lives. Conclusion Sin represents a tragic yet real occurrence in the lives of people. Christians throughout church history have held no consensus about the origin of sin. However, there is consensus that all people sin and that sin has serious consequences. It is in opposition to sin and its effects that Christians struggle today. They struggle, of course, knowing that God was the first to struggle against sin, especially through the salvific person and work of Jesus Christ. Once Christians understand something about sin’s origin, it will become easier to recognize and understand sin in the world. It will also become easier to struggle against it along with God, who leads in the battle against sin and its consequences. Thorsen, D. (2020). An Exploration of Christian Theology (2nd edition). Baker Academic a Division of Baker Publishing. Ebook edition.

******CLICK ORDER NOW BELOW AND OUR WRITERS WILL WRITE AN ANSWER TO THIS ASSIGNMENT OR ANY OTHER ASSIGNMENT, DISCUSSION, ESSAY, HOMEWORK OR QUESTION YOU MAY HAVE. OUR PAPERS ARE PLAGIARISM FREE*******."