Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Running Up the Down Escalator

It’s one of the many silly things my friends and I did as kids. We’d go into a department store and take turns running up the down escalator.

I suspect that most of you probably did the same thing at some point in your life, right? That being the case, you understand that it takes twice as much effort and “oomph” to make any progress because you have to contend with the never-ending, mechanized, downward momentum of the stairs. You have to keep going. You have to run and run hard if you ever expect to gain ground. And you don’t dare stop or pause, because the stairs never stop. Stopping – even just to catch your breath – means you’re going to lose ground. If you’re going to successfully run to the top of the down escalator, you have to keep moving forward at a pace that surpasses the flow of the stairs always coming at you from the opposite direction.

There are times when I think there are some parallels to this situation when it comes to understanding and fully embracing our heritage of teaching biblical holiness. At times I think we’re gaining ground only to discover that it’s been more like climbing a sand dune where you take three steps just to slide back two.

Recently, I was visiting one of the corps in our Territory just to observe a group of cadets as they carried out their Sunday assignments. Their responsibilities included teaching the various Sunday School classes the corps conducted. Fine. So wanting to be the proverbial “fly on the wall,” I went from class to class, spending a few moments in each of them in order to get an overall sense of how each cadet was doing.

The last class I poked my head into was the Adult class, which wasn’t being taught by a cadet, but by the corps officer himself. The folks in the class were having a lively discussion with their captain about the topic of “sin.” From the level of involvement from those in the class, it was overwhelmingly evident that there was significant interest in the subject and how it applied to them. As he was addressing their statements and questions, the C.O. said, “…of course we know that we all sin, every day…” Now understand that this “insight” was tossed out in a manner that seemed to imply “no one would ever argue the point I’m about to share…”


(*Insert a deep sighing sound here…*) Would someone please tell me why there is this dogged insistence in the belief that even as Christians sin will always be something “out of our control,” or that we have no say in the matter? Just where is it written that we’ll always be “…slaves to sin?” Are you really asking me to go along with the idea that we have to sin? If so, then explain to me just where Christ’s sacrifice fell short or was somehow inadequate to address our condition.
[NOTE: Remember the story of the Methodist missionary asking the crowd at a Camp Meeting, “What sin do you have to commit today?" (see the posting entitled “got holiness?”) Man, I love that question!]

Maybe it’s time we blow the dust off our Wesleyan understanding of what sin is and isn’t.

It isn’t…
...an unintentional mistake.
...temptation.
...a temporary lapse of judgment.

It is... (in the words of John Wesley)
..."voluntary transgression of a known law of God"

So let’s be clear… Sin isn’t an “oops.” It’s not some kind of covered over hole you unknowingly fall into and wonder “man, how’d I get here?!”

Let me say this as plainly as I know how… As Salvationists – and thereby, Wesleyans – we believe the Bible teaches that sin is always a specific, deliberate, fully aware, conscious, intentional act of rebellion to what we know God asks or expects of us. It involves both our head and heart. In our minds, we purposefully choose to disregard what we know we should/shouldn’t do, while in our hearts, we muffle the prompting and/or warning of the Holy Spirit (you know the feeling I’m talking about, right? That unmistakable, gentle prodding or pricking of our hearts…) That being the case, there is no time when the sanctified believer has his arm twisted behind his back, figuratively speaking, and is forced to sin against his will. The truth of the matter is that we intentionally blow past every exit, and pay no attention to every possible escape in order to willingly embrace whatever the sin might be.

But, hallelujah! it doesn’t have to be that way!!

Now does the possibility to sin stay with us after sanctification? Yes. But there’s no requirement that we sin! You can check out your Bible from the index to the maps… It isn’t in there!

If you do want to talk “requirements,” however, let’s talk about the repeated requirement laid out in Scripture to not sin!

John 5:14 (NIV)
…Jesus found him at the temple and said to him, "See, you are well again. Stop sinning or something worse may happen to you."

John 8:11 (MSG)
[Jesus said] "Go on your way. From now on, don't sin."

Romans 6:1-2 (TLB)
Well then, shall we keep on sinning so that God can keep on showing us more and more kindness and forgiveness? Of course not! Should we keep on sinning when we don't have to? For sin's power over us was broken when we became Christians and were baptized to become a part of Jesus Christ; through his death the power of your sinful nature was shattered.

1 Corinthians 15:34 (NLT)
Come to your senses and stop sinning.

1 John 2:1 (NIV)
My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin.


Can it possibly be any plainer…?

Listen… Our God’s not a god who frustrates or teases us by putting the cookie jar out of our reach. He doesn’t expect what can’t be accomplished, nor does He command what can’t be completed. He hasn’t merely directed us to “stop sinning,” He’s made it completely possible for us to do exactly that – stop sinning.

So let’s settle this business once and for all, and let go of the devil’s lie that we are – and will always be – bound to sin. The Bible teaches otherwise, God requires otherwise, and through His Son’s sacrifice and the gift of His Spirit, our Father has made it possible for us to have all the power we need to say “no” to sin.

Keep your altar ready and your fire hot...!

Willis

5 comments:

  1. Just want to say that I picked up your blog from armybarmy today and your writing is very helpful. Challenging, but also affirming. You surely don't need any encouragement from me, but take it anyway.

    Grace and peace.

    Stephen.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Stephen:

    Any and all encouragement is gladly and gratefully rceived. Thanks for your vote of confidence!

    Willis

    ReplyDelete
  3. This "voluntary transgression of a known law of God" - is there a clear list somewhere of what qualifies as a 'known law'? If so, what level of interpretation is there as to whether a transgression has taken place, and who makes that interpretation? For example, is gluttony a sin? If so, at what point does eating become gluttony, and who decides the point of distinction between the two? Is lying a sin? What if a lie was needed to protect someone from another who wished to do them harm?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks so much, Jack, for your thoughts and questions, and please forgive my somewhat late response to you. Since I’m still something of a rookie at blogging, I’ll confess that I don’t always remember to check my site to see if anyone has offered any comment on the postings! I’ll try to pay better attention in the future.

    Now let me try to field your questions…

    I think (hope) you’ll agree with me that the lion’s share of God’s laws can be easily known and/or measured. The Bible gives us plenty of “black-and-white” instruction (do this / don’t do that / behave this way / stop behaving that way). Fine.

    If I’m reading you right, it seems that the main issue you’re raising relates to matters where things are not so clearly laid out; the “gray areas” (i.e. gluttony and lying). If you’re asking me to give you a clearly measurable, quantifiable dividing line (something like, “two hot dogs are fine, but having a third clearly crosses into gluttony”), then I’m afraid my answer won’t scratch your itch. You see, in these sorts of situations where there is no clear instruction (“When thou eatest hot dogs, one or two only shalt thou eat. Thou shalt not eat a third, as three would be unto you a sin.”) we turn to other criteria such as intent and motivation:


    INTENT – the purpose that accompanies an act.

    With the full knowledge that my actions are detrimental both to myself and those around me, if it’s my intention to satisfy a legitimate need (nutrition) in an illegitimate way (eating everything that comes within arm’s reach), well yes, that’s sinful. Do I intend to address a valid concern through invalid means? Am I intentionally satisfying my needs to the willful exclusion, damage, and/or detriment of others?


    MOTIVATION – the reason for doing something or behaving in a particular way.

    In doing what I’m doing (or about to do), am I seeking self gain, or the satisfaction of some worldly appetite? Am I manipulating circumstances in order to gain a personal advantage? Am I in control of my passions and cravings, or are they controlling me?

    I think that the Bible is perfectly clear that, as believers, everything we do should be motivated by Christlike love – love for God, and love for others as Jesus laid out in Matt. 22:37-40 – from a pure heart. An act carried out from the motivation of Christian love could hardly be considered as sin. For instance: During WWII, would it really be considered a “sin” for German Christians to hide Jews and intentionally lie to the Nazis about it? On the basis of Christ’s teaching about loving God and others, I don’t think so.

    Wesleyanism holds that intent and motives must be considered in determining what is and isn’t sin.

    Does any of that help at all, Jack? I hope so.

    Thanks again for responding.

    God bless you…

    Willis

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanks for your response Willis. The main point of my comment was to illustrate the difficulties I have with the concept of being 'sinless'. It seems to me that there are two many areas that are open to interpretation and personal opinion as to whether they are sinful or not - enough to make the idea of declaring oneself as 'holy' being purely an opinion that others may disagree with. I'll give some other examples - if you have to kill someone who was shooting in a schoolyard, would that be murder if you were doing it to save children's lives? You could be of the opinion that you were acting out of love in protecting children, whilst others would also say it was murder. If you steal to feed your starving family, is that a reasonable motivation for 'sinning'? Keeping the Sabbath holy - your definition and my definition could be quite different.

    So to me the whole idea of holiness is so highly dependent on individual circumstances and opinions that the concept becomes meaningless. If I feel I am holy does that make me holy? Everyone else may see things quite differently - but should that matter to me? If I believe it, is that all that matters?

    I see and read too many things from people proclaiming personal holiness, that really seem to believe that there are holy and sinless people who act only out of the 'pure love of God', that in reality come across as arrogant people who look down upon what they see as the unsanctified masses in the church.

    ReplyDelete