Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

That America is faced with a misunderstanding regarding the nature and consequences of sin is an understatement. Christians need to guard themselves against becoming a victim to society’s definition of sin lest sin be minimized in their eyes. What better source to learn a biblical doctrine of sin can be found than the opening chapters of Genesis?

The record of the beginning of sin is related in Genesis 2-3. Most of us can recite the story from memory. After God created Adam and Eve, He placed them in the Garden of Eden to dress and keep it (Gen. 2:15). He commanded them, “Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Gen. 2:16-17). Sometime later, the devil appeared to Eve in the form of a serpent, deceived her and persuaded her to eat of the forbidden fruit. She persuaded Adam to eat of the fruit. God appeared to them in the Garden, pronounced the curses upon Adam and Eve, and excluded them from the Garden and access to the tree of life.

From this account in Genesis, we can learn many lessons. Please consider the following:

What Is Sin?

We can learn what sin is from the Genesis account. Society has lost any meaningful understanding of sin.(1) Some explain sin as being (1) a violation of society’s code of ethics, (2) a violation of one’s personal code of ethics, or (3) a violation of rules taught to him by his parents. However, sin is none of these. Sin is the violation of the word of God. John wrote, “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law” (1 Jn. 3:4). (The violation of conscience is sin [Rom. 14:23; Jas. 4:17] because it violates God’s word which demands the maintaining of a pure conscience.)

As the first two created beings, Adam and Eve were not influenced by society to believe that eating a particular fruit was wrong. Their parents had not pounded these ideas into their heads. Rather, their disobedience was considered a sin simply because they violated what God said.

I cannot see anything wrong with eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. It would seem that to eat that fruit would be no different from eating any other fruit, such as an apple or an orange. What made the eating of one right and the eating of the other wrong was that God said, “Thou shalt not. . . .” Sin is the violation of God’s law!

The Cause of Sin

Even as modern man has lost sight of the definition of sin, he has also lost sight of its causes. We are told that sin is caused by the following:

1. Environment. B.F. Skinner, renowned psychologist, wrote, “We shall not solve the problems of alcoholism and juvenile delinquency by increasing a sense of responsibility. It is the environment which is ‘responsible’ for the objectionable behavior, and it is the environment, not some attribute of the individual, which must be changed” (Beyond Freedom and Dignity, p. 122). This concept has influenced many social programs in our country. Billions of dollars of federal money have been poured into ghetto areas to change the environment in the hopes of helping mankind. A couple of decades later, these projects look as bad as they did before money was poured into them. Changing the environment did not change the sinners.

What was wrong with Adam and Eve’s environment which might have caused their sin? They lived in Paradise. Every physical, emotional, and social need was provided for by God. Yet, they sinned. Environment neither caused nor prevented their sin!

2. Education. Some think that sin is caused by a poor education. A man with a fifth grade education, who reads poorly, commits a crime in some ghetto section of the city. Court appointed attorneys have argued that his poor education contributed to his poverty and forced him to steal. If we could but educate these people, thus enabling them to earn a better living, they would not steal. Hence, those in prison can receive a college education at state expense, as a means of preventing recurrence of crime. Has this worked? The man who robbed a liquor store of $200 with a gun is now able to rob a bank of $200,000 with a computer!

Was a lack of education the cause of Adam and Eve’s sin? Did Adam and Eve sin against God because they did not know better? The biblical account demonstrates that both Adam and Eve were aware and understood God’s law. Eve repeated God’s law to Stan when he tempted her (Gen. 3:2). Hence, sin was not caused by a poor education.

3. Heredity. Others have argued that sin occurs because man inherited a sinful nature. The Westminster Confession of Faith states that man inherited a sinful nature from Adam and then adds, “From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions” (Chap. VI, No. 4). This does not explain Adam and Eve’s sin. They were children of God (Lk. 3:38). Did they inherit a corrupt nature from God? Even the Calvinists state that Adam and Eve did not have a corrupt nature. Hence, one is not a sinner because of inheritance.

What is the cause of sin? The cause of sin is man’s willful choice to disobey God. Man has been created with free will, the ability to choose to do good or evil. Sin occurs because and when man, of his own volition, chooses to violate and transgress one of God’s commandments.

What Are The Consequences Of Sin?

God told the consequences of sin when He said . for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shall surely die” (Gen. 2:17). That physical death is not intended should be apparent from the fact that Adam and Eve did not die in the day that they ate of the fruit.(2) The death which was intended by the original statement did occur in the day that they ate of the fruit; it was spiritual death. H.C. Leupold wrote:

In this instance the expression beyom, “in the day,” is to be taken very literally and not in the sense “at the time,” a meaning that would not fit here. For the thought actually to be expressed is the instantaneous occurrence of the penalty threatened, which is also again expressed in part by the imperfect with absolute infinitive, “dying thou shalt die””certainly die.” This at once raises the question, “Why was this penalty not carried out as threatened?” We answer: “It was, if the biblical concept of dying is kept in mind, as it unfolds itself ever more clearly from age to age.” Dying is separation from God. That separation occurred the very moment when man by his disobedience broke the bond of love. If physical death ultimately closes the experience, that is not the more serious aspect of the whole affair (p. 128).

That spiritual death is intended by the statement in Genesis 2:17 is confirmed by Paul’s discussion in Romans 5:12-21. Hence, the consequences of sin is death (Rom. 6:23)-separation from God.

The text in Genesis is relevant to some of the modem discussions regarding what happens when a Christian sins. Consider these circumstances: (1) Adam and Eve were children of God by creation (Lk. 3:38) and in spiritual communion with God; (2) The one act of disobedience brought spiritual death; (3) The same consequence for sin came upon Eve, who sinned through the devil deceiving her (1 Tim. 2:14), as came upon Adam who sinned high-handedly.

Some become alarmed when someone intimates that “one sin separates a person from God.” God said, “. . . for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” The Lord said that the punishment for sin is “death.” What is “death”? The primary meaning of the word death is “separation.”(3) “. . .For in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die (i.e., be separated from God).”

When would this separation occur? Is separation from God so ambiguous that one cannot tell when it occurs? Apparently not! God said, “. . . in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die (i.e. be separated from God).” If someone quibbles that a person is not separated from God the instant that he sins, surely he will not quibble with the language of the Scripture” in the day.”(4) If it is more acceptable to use this word than “instant,” I am willing to start using it. “In the day that a Christian sins he will surely die.”

Conclusion

We must be careful not to become influenced by the thoughts of our day which minimize the seriousness of sin. Sin is an act of transgression of God’s law. It was so serious that only the death of God in the flesh could atone for it. It occurs when man of his own volition chooses to disobey God. Its consequence is separation from God, spiritual death.

The grace of God has provided a means by which sinful man can be reconciled to God. Jesus gave His precious blood on Calvary in order that forgiveness of sins could be provided for man, while yet maintaining the justice of God. In order to have an adequate appreciation for the the gift of God’s grace, we must understand the seriousness of the problem of sin.

Endnotes

1. Julian Huxley wrote, “Sin and the sense of sin will always be with us, to torture and weigh down; but, as I have said elsewhere in this book, the religion of the future will try to prevent man’s being afflicted with the sense of sin, rather than encourage it and then attempt to cure it” (Religion Without Revelation, p. 146). The success of the movement to do away with sin cannot be denied. Things which were formerly considered sinful are now considered a sickness.

2. The attempts to limit the death to physical death have resulted in a number of interpretations of Genesis 2:17, including the following: (a) “The threat was not fulfilled ” (John Skinner, International Critical Commentary, p. 67); (b) man began to die (became mortal) when he ate of the fruit (Keil and Delitzsch, p. 105; Thomas Whitelow, Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 1, p. 46).

3. The word “death” is used in a number of senses in the Scriptures but in each of them, the idea of separation prevails. When a person dies physically, his spirit is separated from his body; when a person dies to sin (Rom. 6:2), he separates himself from sin; when a person enters hell, the second death, he is eternally separated from God. Hence, the meaning of “death” must be understood as “to be separated from God.”

4. The Hebrew construction is such that it means “the day of” or “the time of” (see Brown, Driver, and Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, p. 400). H.C. Leupold used “instantaneous occurrence” and “the very moment” to describe when sin separates from God (op. cit.).

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 23, pp. 706, 728-729
December 6, 1984

By Larry Ray Hafley

The doctrine of original or Adamic sin states that every person is born in sin. Because of Adam’s sin, all men are corrupt and guilty of sin at birth. Note the testimony of the Philadelphia Confession of Faith.

By this sin (eating of the forbidden fruit-LRH) they (Adam and Eve-LRH) fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of the soul and body. They being the root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation. From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions (Chapter 6).

Contrary to New Testament Concepts

This doctrine is contrary to at least four New Testament concepts; namely, sin, forgiveness, the death of Christ, and the judgment.

(1) The Concept of Sin. John said that “sin is the transgression of the law.” When one commits sin, he transgresses (goes against, crosses) the law (1 Jn. 3:4). “All unrighteousness is sin” (1 Jn. 5:17). Anything that violates God’s righteousness is sin. One who works apart from or against God’s will and word is guilty of sin. He performs iniquity; he acts without divine authority (Mt. 7:21-23). Sin is the child of lust (Jas. 1:15). When one is drawn away of his own lust and enticed, lust conceives her offspring, sin, and gives it birth. We are separated and alienated from God “by wicked works” (Col. 1:21). It is our sins which are produced by the fulfilling of the desires of the flesh and of the mind (Eph. 2:1-3; Col. 2:13). This is the New Testament’s concept of how one becomes guilty of sin. There is no Scripture which teaches that sin is inherited.

(2) The Concept of Forgiveness. The word of God does not describe the forgiveness of inherited sin. It does not mention forgiveness of the “guilt” of original sin. The New Testament speaks of “your sins” and of “thy sins” (Acts 3:19; 22:16). One is forgiven of his own acts of transgression, iniquity and disobedience. “For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more” (Heb. 8:12).

“The body of the sins of the flesh” are put off, cut away, when God forgives (Col. 2:11-13). As the sins are those one commits, the forgiveness applies to those sins. If as the doctrine of original sin avers, all men are born guilty of Adam’s sin, why is the Bible devoid of any reference to the forgiveness of it?

(3) The Concept of the Death of Christ. Christ “was delivered for our offences” (Rom. 4:25). “Who his own self bare our sins in his own body” (1 Pet. 2:24). It was “in the body of his flesh through death” that Jesus reconciled us to God (Col. 1:21,22). “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). Each individual can consider that Christ died “for me” (Gal. 2:20). Why is that? Because our sins, our guilt, is of our own doing; because forgiveness is of our sins and iniquities (Heb. 8:12; Isa. 59:1,2); the death of Christ was for my sin, my guilt, my salvation; hence, “for me.” The death of Christ and the shedding of His blood is never said to be for the purpose of removing inherited, original sin. However, if original, Adamic sin is universally pervasive, as the creeds of men allow and allege, should we not expect to find a reference that decrees and declares that the death of Christ removes that sin?

(4) The Concept of Judgment. New Testament judgment scenes vary in many respects, but in this one item they are all constant and consistent-man is judged by how he has lived, by what he has done. Contemplate and consider the judgment pictures of Matthew (chapters 5-7, 13 and 25). See the awe and dread of Revelation 20:10-15. Hear the admonition and warning of Galatians 6:7-9, Matthew 16:27 and Revelation 3:23. What is the single fact of all these passages? Individuals are judged by their own works. They are rewarded “according to their works.” Is there a judgment view of one being condemned on account of what Adam did? Is anyone ever renounced for not ridding himself of the depravity he is supposed to have inherited from Adam? No, but if original sin exists to the extent that men claim, is it not strange that not a single, solitary judgment scene features some creatures lost because of it?

Conclusion Of These Concepts

The doctrine of original sin, if true, would be an innate, inherent part of the nature of sin, forgiveness, Christ’s death and the judgment. Yet, the Bible, in discussing these four themes, never once links it to them. There absolutely could not be such an omission if the doctrine of original, Adamic sin were true. Therefore, these four fundamental facts are fatal to the theory.

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 23, pp. 713, 716
December 6, 1984

By William C. Sexton

When the 52 Americans came home from Iran, we as a nation and in various communities celebrated, expressing appreciation for their safe return. We have heard them referred to as “heroes.” We have heard some of those who returned relate that their captors wanted to be martyrs!

The Christian is challenged by what takes place in his nation and community, to analyze and evaluate behavior in terms of God’s will. Each child of God needs to ask, what is involved in the terms and concepts of heroes and martyrs? Is there value ascribed to such by God’s revelation? How can I act appropriately to such? Is there a danger related to behavior in regard to such?

Recognition Of Noble Character And Courageous Action

Jesus told us to fear God above every other force (Lk. 12:5-9) and to find inner strength to be faithful to God in the face of opposition! He affirmed that a person who confessed Him before others, even if in doing so he lost his life, would be honored by Him before the Father. Many times we are faced with the possibility of losing (in one way or another) by being loyal to Christ in our verbal and nonverbal behavior! Also, we often view responses to this challenge in others. What should our response and evaluation be?

Paul pointed to Stephen (Acts 22:20; 7:54-60) as a “martyr. ” He had stood by and given his consent to the “death” of that faithful disciple. His response was not noble or commendable! The “church in Pergamos” had remained loyal as they had seen one of their brothers named Antipas be a “faithful martyr” (Rev. 2:13). The Harlot (Rev. 17:6-one of the deceitful and successful enemies of God’s faithful) was “drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.”

The word for “martyr” is maturon and is translated “witnesses”(Heb. 12:1). They formed a “cloud,” great number, of faithful people (mentioned in Heb. 11: 140) surrounding us. We refer to Hebrews I I as the chapter on “heroic faith.”

These many individuals from different parts of history are displayed there for us, as persons who have achieved by faith, providing us with examples to motivate us to move onward and upward!

Need For Winner-Figures

I see evidence that we all need heroic-figures to excite us and set a fire in our emotional makeup. To give us the “inner strength” to stand fast against the power greater than ourselves, believing that where others were supplied with I ‘other strength,” that we, too, will be enabled to overcome against the odds!

Nations build monuments, communities do the same to remember historical success: look in State houses at the pictures depicting events and persons important to the past achievements, etc. Christians, in like fashion, need persons to associate with in our minds who have succeeded against opposition similar or greater than those we face! Moses, Noah, Abraham and Sara, Paul and others are all there on the pages of inspiration! Let us spend some time with them and be encouraged to move with the same determination and trust they did.

What Is Indicated By The Persons And Qualities We Hold Up As Heroic?

Jesus is our model (1 Pet. 2:2l)-our pattern I But He is more than just a heroic figure, with great qualities. He is the “only begotten Son of God” (Jn. 1: 18). He must be seen as our Savior, trusted as Deity, who invites all to come and be saved by and in Him (Mt. 11:28-30; 2 Cor. 5:17; Eph. 1:3).

Qualities of life which are sanctioned and supported by Him are what should be admired. If we do not admire those qualities, then such indicates something about us. If we do indeed admire those qualities and people who exhibit them, then such is indicative of our proper mind-set! We need to be activated by such, and then we will demonstrate our character.

If we are excited and become appreciative of Karl Marx, Jesse James, or by rock music stars, people who seem to have been successful by being immoral, or even religious leaders who aren’t really interested in Bible authority, then we are in for a lot of trouble-ultimately failure!

Influences That Heroic Figures Have On Us

Just as our heroic figures indicate where we are, they also predict where we are going! If we have our eyes fastened on Jesus, and He is the author of our faith (Heb. 12:1-2), and we are impressed with His enduring the cross, not allowing the present pressures to turn Him around, we, too, can be successful I We need to see the value of being associated with Him and others of faith in our mind often so that we can actively participate in a winning race!

If, on the other hand, we look to others who scheme, seemingly get by with evil for awhile and profit from it, then we shall gradually be molded into their likeness. And as they shall ultimately lose the battle and suffer eternal ruin, we shall come to that end, too!

Therefore, it is extremely important that we esteem the right figures! Read and understand Hebrews 12:1-2. Be activated by the instruction therein.

Having A “Martyr Complex” Is Not Beneficial

Those who returned from Iran spoke of their captors as having the idea that the U.S. government would come in and kill the religious zealots, and they would thereby become “martyrs” for Iran and Islam. Such was seen as an obsession that was not healthy and good, and the captives were determined that such not happen, if they could help it!

Let us recognize that it is worthy to be willing to die for the cause of Christ (Mt. 5:10-12; 1 Pet. 4:12-16), if indeed such is necessary to maintain our loyalty to Him. Also, there are times when Christians shall receive persecution because of their stand for the truth of the gospel and behavior required by the gospel message. When that is the case, we need to be willing to stand firmly, not giving an inch (cf. Gal. 2:4-5).

Yet, let us say something here that may not be taken so easily by some. Anyone can act so inappropriately and unacceptably toward others that they will be opposed and disliked! I’m fearful that some have developed the “persecution complex,” and they go out looking for opposition and unfavorable treatment. When they receive it, theyfeel good, patting themselves on the back, saying, “I’m being persecuted for righteousness’ sake. ” Such is as far from the truth as the east is from the west!

Recently I was in a member’s home, and we were studying with a couple of Jehovah’s Witnesses. We had covered a lot of things, peculiar to their belief, and we came down to “death.” One pointed to Revelation 20:14-15, and one said, “You see, ‘death is fire,’ that’s the end!” I said, “That’s sillyl ” One jumped up saying, “Such Venom,” his eyes were sparkling. Later as I reflected on what he had said and his reaction, I recalled a statement by brother Fred Holthouser, who was converted from that group, which indicated that they delight in such persecution. I realized that I’d played into their hands.

But I believe that I see brethren, from time to time, in their writings and as they behave otherwise, justifying what they are doing because they find people opposing them and they feel good, identifying such as evidence that they are truly serving God.

I believe that it is possible for any of us to over-use that principle. If we are opposed, let us ask ourselves: “Was it really because of God’s word and His plan, or was it due to the way that I acted and conducted myself that caused them to react that way?” I pray that when people react unfavorably toward me and the message that I present, that it will be because of God’s word and not me; however, I’m not so puffed up tht I’ll claim that such is always the case.

Yes, there are heroes and martyrs, and they need to be admired by real children of God. Qualities that attract our attention and awaken admiration within us reflect our character and predict our destiny. There is a danger of developing an unhealthy condition relating to persecution, however, and using it to justify our un-Christlike behavior.

This points to the need for reflection and re-evaluation concerning heroes and martyrs. Are we sure that we are able to identify the real heroes? Are we as appreciative of the real heroes and martyrs of the faith as we should be? Is it possible that we are seeking to play the role of being a hero without actually living a heroic life? I feel that such questions are challenging and pertinent to our time. If you feel otherwise, I promise to give serious consideration to your feedback.

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 23, pp. 710-711
December 6, 1984

By Hoyt H. Houchen

Question: Why do we not bow (kneel) in services? I want to do it but I feel that it might distract others. It would make me self-conscious because no one else does.

Reply: God is much more interested in the posture of the heart than the posture of the body when we pray to Him. Whether we pray standing, sitting, lying down or kneeling, our heart should always be humble and our praying always done with a contrite spirit.

The Bible mentions several different body postures when people prayed. Kneeling is one example (2 Chron. 6:13; Ezra 9:5; Dan. 6:10; Lk. 22:41). Standing is another example (Mk. 11:25; Lk. 18:13). Jesus our Lord prayed while He was hanging on the cross (Lk. 23:34,46). Kneeling is not to be necessarily considered as the most humble posture. The Bible also gives examples of some who fell prostrate when they prayed, as did the elders at the feet of the Lamb (Rev. 5:14). Moslems today prostrate themselves on the floor or the ground when they pray to Allah.

One should assume the posture of the body when praying which he believes is the most appropriate. Circumstances will usually determine the most appropriate body posture. one can bow his head while sitting; but kneeling would not be the best posture for prayer, especially in a public place such as restaurant. It is not recommended that one even bow his head if he is praying while driving his automobile.

We must be cautious that we do not emphasize the posture of the body rather than the posture of the heart when we pray. One may kneel while others are standing to pray, but this does not mean that he is necessarily more humble than those who are standing. Kneeling for prayer in services is not feasible for most people due to most of our seating arrangements which are not conducive to it. There would be more shuffling and disorder which would distract from the service. Certainly we should never assume a posture in prayer that will be distracting to others or that will make us self-conscious. Attitude is important to God when we pray. We should always be in a prayerful mood, remembering the words of Paul, “pray without ceasing” (1 Thess. 5:17). Too, we should never bind any one bodily posture to the exclusion of others. To do so, would be making a law which God has not made.

Guardian of Truth XXVIII: 23, p. 709
December 6, 1984