Keeping It in the Family
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, Romans 3:23 NASB
Have sinned– Let’s reconsider Paul’s declaration. If sin is basically disconnection (i.e., disconnection from the source of life—God—and consequently from His creation including other people), then Paul is declaring that each and every one of us experiences, at some level, a sense of disconnection. As a feeling, this is expressed as abandonment. We know we are not fully known, perhaps because like Adam we have reasons to hide, or perhaps because the past forces in our lives, over which we had no control, have left us afraid of the world around us. In other words, everyone has experienced some degree of emotional trauma. That is implicit in what it means to be a sinner. So for this investigation, we won’t focus our attention on the moral aspects of sin. There are plenty (probably more than plenty) of sermons, lectures, theological texts and legislated edicts elucidating our moral failures. No, for this investigation let’s focus on something else—disconnection as the price of sinning.
We might be very good at concealing our sense of abandonment. After all, we have practiced social engagement for decades, even if that interaction never really touches the center of our fragile existence. We have learned what to say and what not to say in order to achieve a modicum of acceptance. But it comes at a price. The price we pay in order to be included is silencing our screams of being forsaken for who we really are. Who among us can truthfully say that we have let someone else see through us, look into our most private fantasies, see our most hideous failures, observe us at our most vulnerable moments? There is reason to hide. Judgment is a very human sport. At the core, we have been abandoned, not only through our own choices, but also (and this is really important) through the choices made for us before we were born. We inherited certain beliefs about this world, about its disconnectedness and our abandonment. One of the reasons “all have sinned” has nothing to do with our individual choices. It has to do with being born into a disconnected world. In the words of Pedro Calderon de la Barca, “Pues el delito mayor del hombre es haber nacido.”[1]
But Paul cuts right to the heart of this abandonment. He declares that each and every one of us shares this essential disconnection. We are not different under the skin. We are all failures, all fearful, all filled with regret, all helpless. We just don’t want to admit it. We are practiced at offering consolation to someone else when that other person is exposed to the light, but our compassion, drawn from a true sense of identity, is never applied to ourselves. To do so would be to admit that we are naked and afraid. Most of our spirituality is other-directed, never allowing ourselves to be reflected in the mirror of another’s distress. We are the audience in the dark, watching some poor soul’s agony on the stage from a safe distance. We empathize. But that isn’t the same as actually being in the light. It is much safer to be the detached observer. Safer—and unsatisfying.
Perhaps we have spent too much time and effort cataloging moral failures as sins. I wonder if our attitudes toward each other and toward ourselves would change if we saw sin as nothing more than disconnection. Wherever there is disconnection, sin abounds. Isn’t that the real story of the Garden. Unashamed was the intended relation. Completely vulnerable because there was nothing to hide. But not anymore. Now human interaction is filled with concealment, so much so that we are left empty. And it is a great tragedy of human life that much of this disconnection is not the result of our individual choices.
“Brain development in the uterus and during childhood is the single most important biological factor in determining whether or not a person will be predisposed to substance dependence and to addictive behaviors or any sort, whether drug-related or not.”[2]
“In a very real sense, the parent’s brain programs the infant’s, and this is why stressed parents will often rear children whose stress apparatus also runs in high gear, no matter how much they love their child and no matter what they strive to do their best.”[3]
“The greatest damage done by neglect, trauma, or emotional loss is not the immediate pain they inflict but the long-term distortions they induce in the way a developing child will continue to interpret the world and her situation in it. All too often these ill-conditioned implicit beliefs become self-fulfilling prophecies in our lives. We create meanings from our unconscious interpretation of early events, and then we forge our present experiences from the meanings we’ve created. Unwittingly, we write the story of our future from narratives based on the past.”[4]
“Parenting, in short, is a dance of the generations. Whatever affected one generation but has not been fully resolved will be passed on to the next. . . ‘The generations are boxes within boxes: Inside my mother’s violence you find another box, which contains my grandfather’s violence, and inside that box (I suspect but do not know), you would find another box with some such black, secret energy—stories within stories, receding in time.’”[5]
Scary, isn’t it? Our parents gave us ingrained neurological patterns that provide us with interpretive mechanisms for understanding the world and our relationship to it. Or rather, we might say, our disconnection from it. We didn’t choose these patterns. We inherited them. And, of course, they inherited their interpretive apparatus from their parents, and so on, and so on.
Mate’s comment can be applied directly to Paul’s statement: “Disease is disharmony. More accurately, it is an expression of an internal disharmony.”[6] Sin is disease. It is the expression of internal disharmony—disconnection. And it wasn’t all our fault. But it will be if we don’t get to work on why we act as we do, why we believe as we do and what we can do about it. If we don’t do what is necessary to deal with what we inherited, we will just pack it up in a suitcase and hand it to our children, just like it was handed to us. And they will be disconnected too. That will be your fault!
Topical Index: sin, disconnection, disease, emotion, Gabor Mate, Romans 3:23
[1]“For Man’s greatest crime is to have been born.”
[2]Gabor Maté, In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts: Close Encounters with Addiction, p. 188.
[3]Gabor Maté, In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts: Close Encounters with Addiction, p. 194.
[4]Gabor Maté, In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts: Close Encounters with Addiction, p. 370.
[5]Lance Morrow citation and comment in Gabor Maté, When the Body Says NO, p. 216.
You quoted Maté in “Don’t Say a Word” on 9/6/18
Habitual repression of emotion leaves a person in a situation of chronic stress, and chronic stress creates an unnatural biochemical milieu in the body.”[2]
“The person who does not feel or express ‘negative’ emotion will be isolated even if surrounded by friends, because his real self is not seen. The sense of hopelessness follows from the chronic inability to be true to oneself on the deepest level. And hopelessness leads to helplessness, since nothing one can do is perceived as making any difference.”[3]
Maté’s clinical observation is telling—and frightening:
“Not one of the many adults interviewed for this book could answer in the affirmative when asked the following: When, as a child, you felt sad, upset or angry, was there anyone you could talk to—even when he or she was the one who had triggered your negative emotions? In a quarter century of clinical practice, including a decade of palliative work, I have never heard anyone with cancer or with any chronic illness or condition say yes to that question.”[4]
Cancer, chronic illness or condition, disconnection, sin. It will “visit” the third and fourth generation (Exo 20, 34; Num 14, Deut 5). It’s right there in the text.
Leslee ; you have triggered a response of yesteryesr .. not quite sure of that spelling? nonetheless, The Well of emotions still were triggered,, the term being this…. Alone in a crowd of your friends. Remind me of a song back in the day which had The pharse”the tears of a clown, when there’s no one around “. If sin is missing the mark of the intentions that God has for us that pulled me far away.. is that not the intentions of this world? To be connected with this world is to be haters of God,. I was taught that man was originally meant to walk with God .We were given two eyes ,””in a Jewish Home”after Amelec and that experience the good I was given to watch out, because sin would always be crouching at the door. Causing us to doubt what God was able to do “protect us”.
Now that I am a believer after baptism or following the way of Abraham, crossing over, I am in a covenant relationship with God and His word is within me period along with his. Spirit . It is all about choices, the more good choices I make following that good eye, the more blessings I will be used to receiving and I will be more intentional of choosing that path. Hallelujah becoming an imitator of God period for the wages of following the natural bad eye what’s that abandonment by choice turning away from God and his plan.
I would gently refer you to Laurita’s post on this topic. Epigenetics is the phenomenon of altering brain chemistry and other physiological characteristics AFTER the fact of birth DNA by actions taken. Furthermore, it seems apparent from studies that the child is a product of the emotional/psychological and physical constitution of the mother not only at conception but through pregnancy. We are literally born with a worldview, an emotional connection to the world, that is passed to us through our parents. So, CHOICE isn’t actually as FREE as we might have thought. The underlying paradigms that set the parameters of choice are already in place when we enter the world. In this regard, “salvation” might be more akin to resetting some of the inherited paradigm than it is to escaping the terrors of this world. After all, the only real IMMEDIATE threat to us at birth is that we are thrown into an environment not of our own making with coping tools not of our own making.
Skip, it is completely unsettling to think that we have NO choice in the places where our choices have been chosen away by previous sin; and not just by our own sin! Why, that goes against everything we have been told by our society, political structure AND RELIGION. My parents’ (or society’s) sin cannot possibly have affected me!
We are surrounded by a culture that assures us that we have unlimited choices and that anything is possible and Nike says “just do it” and the popular religion tells us that we don’t even have to be ‘limited’ by the Law of God any more! Why, according to the world, it is choice to the very horizon and beyond: all we need is a little more will power!
But what about where the Bible tells us that we are slaves (no choice) to sin? Not to worry; modern religion to the rescue to assure us that Jesus set us free. Free from what, we never quite seem to get around to, but most of us I think got told that the Law kept us from freedom of choice and that the Cross gave that back to us some kind of way (there seems to be some sort of shortage of examples on that one). We all seem to think we are perfectly free to choose anything in any direction. Just ask most any addict or person suffering from a psychological disorder and they will tell you that their power to choose is not affected; they just have a disease that needs to be managed properly. People busy working their way to heaven also think all they need to do is try harder and choose better. Is something missing here? Um, something about that slavery?
Not “no choice” but NOT “unfettered freedom” either. Much of our “choosing” is already limited to the boxes we inherited. Can we still choose outside the box? Yes, but with GREAT difficulty, since for most of us this kind of “choice” isn’t even on the radar.
Free choice is not the same as conditional choice. We must learn the difference. Conditional choice is where I a: lack access to all choices; b: lack power to implement ideal choices; c: must ‘pay’ for choices by giving up other ideal choice options. These are NOT free choices! Most of them are versions of robbing Peter to pay Paul or of the lesser of the evils or of passing the buck. ALL of them consist of some sort of eating either my own tail (we call that narcissism) or of eating the tails of others (both forms versions of sin), therefore all conditional choices leave me – and all around me, too – with less choice at the end of the day; not more choice. This is how the flesh ‘lives’. Only truly FREE choice moves me away from death and into life, where more choices result from the last choices. We need to redefine what “free” means!
Choice either slowly enslaves or empowers, depending upon whether or not it is conditional or free. This is all the difference between sin and righteousness, for all righteousness is about freedom – more choice instead of less – while all sin is about a slide into a hole; a bind; even if it is imperceptively done.
Your post triggered this thought. Humans inherit stuff that can be managed by choices (change in diet) once awareness has occurred … high blood pressure, genes that makes one more susceptible to break cancer, as well as other diseases. Some choices are made for us that way.
I think pain is the biggest of mercies. There are people born without a sense of pain. These children jump off buildings and break their leg and go right on, further injuring themselves. They historically die young. Sin sears not only the conscience: it numbs the psyche as well as crippling the body and puts us into what Stephen Wolinsky (Trances People Live) calls “trances”: altered relationships with reality. These trances are as dangerous to us as an inability to detect pain, for they are our attempt to silence the pain we have no remedy for (in the flesh, anyway) but I think they can also keep us from being able to differentiate between what is death and what is life, too.
Mate’ invites us to consider that we have a deep level of interaction with reality, far beyond our chosen consciousness; our cognition and what we THINK we believe, too. He calls it “intuition”, or “authenticity”, I think, and recognizes that it resides at gut level. New science is beginning to confirm this on a physiological level, too. I think this is what the Bible refers to as “belly”; “liver” “reins (kidneys)”; “heart”, and also recognizes that out of this area “flow the waters of life” when we are reconnected to our Source.
I am beginning to consider the thought that even trust (or lack of it) is a supercrunch of our ‘self’, far beyond reach of the cerebral cortex. Mental assent can be easily changed by threat or by appeal to a desire, even. We can think we agree with something, cognitively, but what about the rest of us that ‘knows better’: that has had a different experience? All sin creates what we call “trust issues”, and these lie far beyond the reach of most people’s awareness. What do we do about them? Mental assent to doctrines? I don’t think so! Sure didn’t work for me!
I am looking forward to further TW’s where hopefully Skip will explore “what is necessary to deal with what we inherited” because I know I am still struggling with mine.
In the past we looked at some of the work of Bessel van der Kolk. He wrote about the physiological connection between trauma and brain/body interactions. Now I wonder if we don’t need the same kind of vision about the spirituality in Man. Perhaps we need a book titled, The Soul Keeps The Score (yes, I know “soul” is a Greek idea). Of course, Hebrew nephesh already recognized this inter-relatedness long ago.
As Skip focus is… “disconnection as the price of sinning” plays into how memories or trauma is stored deep within our cells that in turn affect our neurons that are deposited throughout our body. In essence our minds exist throughout our body and not just in our head. So true!
To add a bit more depth, “neuroglia” is a general medical term that explores the connective/glue tissue of neurons. It’s noted neurons are located mainly in the brain (central nervous system) as well as in the heart, kidney, gut/stomach tissue. And if you add the work of Bessel van der Kolk and Mate, the story board becomes clearer… we are “one” the wholeness of bodymind.
Treating the person (whole) and not just the symptoms (parts of the whole) is highlighted. While it appears quantum leaps are being made in the biology/physical aspect of healing, the psychology/emotional aspect of the patient is relegated to separate treatment. These are now two different branches of medicine/healing in modern society with the emphasis on the biology (form, structure, parts. etc.). The gap is beginning to be recognized and somewhat addressed but still eons apart.
Until it is recognized those dispersed neurons throughout the body are still there… wounded, abandoned, rejected, and dismissed not just by medical professionals but mostly by ‘the self’, the denial comes with a very high price. The disconnect/disease remains, unattended, unrecognized and unresolved. I call it “frozen”.
I have thought about a couple of ideas. We as children record and mimic every thing around us, in stereo. The action and the emotion. The play back is in stereo also.
Second, at the moment of conception of a child, what is the emotional,chemical, physical condition of both parties? This may be why siblings are so different….just thinking
Dan, I think you may be referring to epigenetics; or, extra-genetic transfer of information. This can happen via other mechanisms than the DNA; one being that the semen itself carries info. We do know that mindsets and attitudes and even emotional characteristics are inheritable through means that are still mysterious. The mother, in particular, heavily influences the child; her take on reality becomes the child’s, but the father’s voice is also recognized by the baby in utero. The particular biome of the mom is transferred, ideally, at birth, and that biome enables the baby (y’all, I am no expert, I am just passing on stuff I think I learned) not only to digest and immunologically adjust, but also interact with other life in the surrounding environment.
I think you are pointing out that the whole package is important. I agree!
See my comment to Brett.
Laurita, good ‘snapshot’ of the implications of epigenetics! Thank you sister. I’ll be attending a talk of the current state stem cell research as it applies to geriatric patients (dementia/alzheimer/parkinson’s). Should be interesting to discover how the transfer of someone else’s cells and possible contaminate of memories/trauma may alter the recipient. If that is even on the agenda as a concern, maybe or not. The talk is being given by a well known Chief Flight Surgeon (retired Air Force) Aerospace Medicine. I’m intrigued!
That was absolutely excellent Skip. So well written and understandable, speaking directly into my “soul”. God is so on top of things. That’s why I love Psalm 139, It touches so firmly on pre-birth activity. He knows our thoughts afar off! David said he was blown away by all of this! He said it was so high he could barely attain unto it! David could have originated the phrase “it blows my mind!”. I’m also reminded of Hebrews 4:13.
Yesterday, in writing to a friend, I wrote, “how long will it be before I stop letting the past keep me from the present where God wants to manifest himself in my life“.
It’s so comforting to know that I am not alone in my struggle and desire to be “known”. No longer hiding in fear, coming out of the shadows. Having greater degrees of connection. Greater degrees of being known.
Maybe we always think of having one big dump and feeling The relief, but maybe it comes in little dumps! Excuse the graphics !
It fits in so well with the idea from Alcoholics Anonymus in regards to 100% or nothing.
Gotta be grateful for little steps! We are on a journey of being known. But little by little despite the fear that threatens us, we begin to step into the light, shushing away the darkness! Exposing the lies AND the truth that has kept us captive!
Shalom, family of God!
Where be the voice of our resident Biblical fundamentalists Jerry and Lisa? I would very much like to hear their take on this topic. My concern is where is all this leading? Will there be a suggested cure for what emotionally ails us, our epigenetic angst, our unspeakable “sins” of birth? Will it be Jung or Yeshua to the rescue? Will our salvation even involve the cross? Why did Yeshua need to suffer and die if all we really need is enlightened psychotherapy? Does anyone recall the Christian occult movement back in the day called “Healing of the Memories”? I pray we aren’t headed back to those days. Should we, like Nicodemus, ask to go back into our mothers womb in order to fix everything wrong with us? I doubt if any mothers, then or now, would agree with such a cure. Are we changing “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling” to “Work out your own salvation with Freud and Jung”? Or are we to the point we can throw out salvation as an antiquated term and end up with an exercise CD “Work out with Freud and Jung”?
Don’t over-react here, Michael. We’re just exploring. Human being in the world is a very complex enterprise and fraught with many interconnected planes. Isn’t it possible that the salvation we long for addresses itself to ALL of these planes without excluding any? Why should we think that healing of memories is any less important than healing of bodies (and I know nothing of the occultist movement you mention)? Isn’t salvation also release from past trauma? Does studying Jung prevent me from listening to Yeshua? When Paul says “work it out” doesn’t that also include working through the baggage I have been given at birth? I am the result of a long line of generations. Even the Hebrew notion of “ish” notices that. And if that is so, then am I not also asked to examine how that long line has shaped me so that my salvation actually changes the trajectory of the line?
Doesn’t salvation includes spirit, soul & body (1 Thes. 5:23) and having personally done Jungian depth analysis before committing my life to Jesus Christ and knowing Christians that ministered on the East Side of Vancouver where Dr. Gabor Mate practiced, I feel they have challenged (iron sharpens iron) my Christian walk to dig deeper into the teachings of Jesus whose life demonstrated the redemptive love of the Father and who said, “behold I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow and the third day I shall be perfected”. When my dad died in ’85 who accepted Jesus Christ in his last week yet was given a Buddhist funeral, I remember sitting in the service and asking, “Why Lord?” and distinctly heard the words, “I’m not only the ALL but the All in All”.
In the Greek world, of course salvation is body, mind and soul. But it is also HERE AND NOW, not just in the bye-and-bye. In the Hebrew world, nephesh is the summary word of person and personality, homogenized without separation (as Eastern medicine is teaching the West). So it is also HERE and NOW. The shift away from “spiritual and eternal” to “person and process” is important and necessary.
Yes, salvation is “Here and Now” but it is not so easy to live in the present as parts of us cling to the past or live in the future or as you say ‘bye & bye’. Dr. Mate’s teaching on “How to cultivate presence, being with what is…”, we can all put into practice….being present with your pain, fear, feelings of hopelessness or being present with your faith in the Word and promises of God spoken to you. I’m convinced that if it is not happening in your life NOW, it’s not happening. Jacques Ellul says that “it is important that we make a distinction between truth & reality. Jesus Christ’s work is the very work of truth. He is truth but when he came into the world of reality. reality did not receive but rejected him, truth. Yet this does not annul the fact that his incarnation was the entrance of truth into the real world and that his death and resurrection are the victory of that truth. The powers of darkness have been defeated and have no more power to keep truth from existing (Jn.1:5), from acting and from fulfilling itself. But this truth has penetrated reality at only one point, the incarnation of Christ…this is where man’s work lies…to help bring truth and reality together. We are to introduce in the places God has given us in some small way the victory won in truth by Christ into concrete existence – into the very heart of this materiality, thereby, snatching man’s work from Satan’s grasp and, as it were, giving it back to man preparing it for God’s purposes…Such may be the true greatness of man. But what power do we have to do such a thing? There is no other way than that taken by Jesus in his incarnation. But today’s incarnation (not the child born in Bethleham but the manchild born in Rev. 12) must be of that of an already victorious truth in the the heart of the City. Such is man’s true calling.”
Defining the problem does not define the cure; never fear; but surely it is necessary when the ‘cure’ that has been foisted on us is clearly not working; either on the couch or in the pew.
On a side note: what is even more troubling, to me, anyway, is the smell of polemics between pew and couch, and never the twain shall meet. ‘Spiritual’ things must NEVER look anything like ‘secular’ things. It alarms me when both sides agree!
There is nothing about “free” (which is the true cure) that anybody on the planet (in the flesh, anyway) has been able to come even close to – you could not be more right – but if we are told we are ‘free’ when we clearly still are not – in both pew and couch, mind you – I say somebody got sold a pig in a poke somewhere. Let’s take a peek in the sack!
I’ve learned that the couch nor the pew are a replacements for true spiritual connection … real connection to the Creator and my higher self. I too am troubled by how folks want something magical over that which is ultimately relational.
I understand Michael. Does non sequitur come to mind?
The art and science of life is a beautiful thing if we use it properly. This Spirit that leads me into all truth includes an awareness that I have anxious thoughts along with desiring a clean heart and a renewed spirit. I’d like to think that these thoughts that are not a part of the Original script for my life came from somewhere. I am less focused on who is at fault (where they came from) than how they’ve become a distraction from my Organic Self… it is good for me to know that what’ve lived with doesn’t belong and is not healthy. I majored in Psychology and I see the helpfulness in understanding certain dynamics of human behavior. These truths make the born again process all the more valuable to me. Not born again for escapism but open to choices … the right to become Sons of the Most High. Before pursuing this degree I led a Bible Study group. I believe prior to this degree I was a bit rigid in my approach to the brokenness of others. “Oh how those memories get in our way” says Gladys Knight. However I can create new memories through new choices/actions/behaviors/submission to the Spirit of Truth and be transformed by this renewed mind. I can break the pattern!
As a person who gave birth at 18, whose family consisted of no college educationed folks, who went back to school after age 40, and whose offspring became a Pediatrician and Harvard graduate… I know I’ve been changed. No fixed mindset when it comes to my past. For this I am eternally grateful! Just sharing.
But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
John 1:12-13 – NASB
Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. John 3:5-6
Can we focus for a moment on the suitcase we’ve been given
to get us OUT of dodge, rather than dwelling on all the baggage
that got us here?! The good Lord has impressed upon me His
extraordinary plan to bring us back into His kingdom as the whole
beings we were created to be — in the spittin’ image of His Son
whose very life He’s deposited in us at the commingling of His
divine choosing and our humbling acceptance, of realizing we’re
broken sinners in desperate need of His love and assistance.
And when that supernatural experience of salvation sets in, we’ve
no need or desire to look back, but rather instead, we find ourselves
propelled onward with the dynamic expectation of how He and we
are going to carry on with all the changes He so lovingly lavishes on us,
and which are designed to result in His will being done on this earth
as it is in heaven.
Now back to the original program . . .
Rich I found this discussion by John Eldrege on the “agreements’ we make with the adversary as foundations stepping stones on a path to healing. One way of walking out of bondage into freedom and life. If we want life we need to agree with it ” today I set before you life and death blessings or the curse choose life” This conversation explains one way to understand how death slips into hold us back, it is not an intellectual- processing thing rather a heart driven choice to side with God. https://www.ransomedheart.com/podcast/agreements-part-2
Mark, thank you for a very basic reminder of HOW to meet life correctly. I enjoyed the broadcast. It is encouraging and necessary for us to remind each other over and over of the ways to overcome, and how that translates into everyday living. The understanding of agreements with the respective kingdoms and how to make or break them is a foundational tool to use to be able to walk in freedom.
This method and understanding has been a key to my ability to walk in freedom. Thank you again for sharing it. Hopefully we all already know it, but it still helps to be reminded of what getting free and staying free looks like on the ground.
Wow. This requires some intense reflection and introspection and comparitive analysis with Paul’s formulations of sin in the context of Romans. However, since Yom Teruah is knocking on my door, I’ll have to reply tomorrow.
This is lengthy, and wonder whether I should even say it. You know, the shame that results from exposing one’s point of view which is followed by the commensurate critiquing, caricature, and heel-grinding, ultimately leaving one’s mental musings as dust for the wind? [Skip, I feel your pain!] On the other hand, as the Jewish community is teaching me, every opinion is important, because truth may even be found in the heretic (one of differing opinions). My prayer is that I can communicate this in a way that honors Adonai, Skip, and his readers. From my limited perspective of history, culture, the Bible, and myself, I offer these musings from my kitchen table, in the form of a pseudo-scholarly rebuttal. I welcome your feedback and heal-grinding!
Moreover, I will attempt to take up a portion of Skip’s mission for his website and “Recover the meaning of Scripture, one Hebrew or Greek word at a time” while at the same time hopefully giving due recognition to the context in which those words are placed. It is impossible to determine meaning of words apart from context: historical, grammatical, cultural (Sitz im Laben), purpose, theme, audience, etc. Once we have meaning for the original audience, we can hopefully apply it in our modern context. However, the application cannot contradict the meaning of the original author, otherwise we have in essence substituted our views for that of the original author (exegesis vs. eisegesis).
Concurrently, I wish to interact with Skip’s rendition of sin as filtered through the modern (and likely Western) notions of psychoanalytical and neuro-biological science (definitively inspired by Platonism). Let’s begin.
“All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”
In the context of Paul’s mission for the gospel of God to the believers in Hellenistic Rome, what does “sin” in Romans 3:23 mean? In the context of Rabbi Shaul’s understanding of the Tanakh, Torah, and his view of humanity in general, what does it mean?
I think we can all agree that from a Biblical perspective, the essential denotation of sin is to “miss the mark.” What that mark or target is can be a variety of things. But generally speaking, it refers to missing the mark of God’s righteousness or justice as revealed most clearly in Torah. Paul goes through a lengthy description in Chapter 1 of what that looks like. “For God’s wrath is revealed from heaven against all godlessness and unrighteousness of people who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth….claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images…they exchanged the truth of God for lie and worshiped and served something created instead of the Creator…God delivered them over to a worthless mind to do what is morally wrong—they are filled with all unrighteousness, evil, greed, and wickedness, envy, murder, quarrels, deceit, malice…arrogant, proud, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient…although they knew full well God’s just sentence—that those who practice such things deserve to die—they not only do them, but even applaud others who practice them.” (vv. 18-32, HCSB)
What is clear from Paul’s description of humanity’s idolatry and reckless abandonment of dependence upon God, is that it is a choice, otherwise known as the exercise of free will. Why do people sin? They choose to. He goes on in Chapter 3 to summarily apply this horrific nightmare of moral recklessness described in the preceding two chapters to both Jews and Gentiles. “What then, are we better than they? Not at all! For we have previously charged [in the previous two chapters] that both Jews and Gentiles are ALL under SIN[‘s power, control, or condemnation], as it is written, ‘There is no one righteous, not even one…” However, since this is the first time Paul uses the word sin in his letter, there is a question of whether he is equating sin with the previously defined behaviors OR whether is he equating sin with the motivation for sinning, or even the consequences of sin. More on that in a minute. Regardless of what Paul’s particular meaning of the word is, what is clear from verses 10 through 18, the element of human choice is clearly in view. When we get to verse 23, the basis for Skip’s article for TW, we again find a cursory summary of the predicament of humanity’s choice—ALL have sinned and missed the mark (fall short of God’s glory).
When we arrive in Chapter 6, we find some peculiarities and further elucidation on what Paul means by the word sin. Paul asks the question, “Should we continue in sin…? [implying human choice]. How can we who died to sin still live in it?” Wow. Notice what Paul says. Whatever sin is, if we have thrown our allegiance [faith] to Messiah and find our identity in Him (vv. 3-7), we died “with reference to” sin (dative of reference). Notice that the text does not say that sin died, although that may be the intended outcome. It says that we died. Given that all of us are still living, what does Paul mean? It is my contention that within the context of Romans 6, Paul is using sin as a description primarily of the motivation for acting independently of Him thereby resulting in violating God’s command (in obedience to the evil inclination) and harming fellow travelers on this planet. In verse 6 he speaks of “sin’s dominion over the body.” Sin is a king. It rules and reigns. It is a rudder that directs our tongues, our hands, our feet, and our actions. However, I don’t know if we can discount the possibility that Paul is also including the choices we make as a result of the motivation. “how can we…still live in IT [sin]. [Or he could be saying, “How can we….still live under sin’s dominion, power, and control.”] This idea of sin as motivation or evil inclination is further developed in Chapter 7. Paul points to the command to not covet in Torah, v. 7. What is covetousness? Is it not an evil (moral, bad, wrong) desire first, that leads to sinful behaviors (stealing, adultery, lying, etc.)?
He continues in Chapter 6, v. 11, “So, you too consider yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Messiah Yeshua. Therefore, do not let sin reign [as king] in your mortal body, so that you obey its [the body’s] desires. And do not offer any parts of it [your body] to sin as weapons for unrighteousness [injustice]. But as those who are alive from the dead, offer yourselves to God as weapons for righteousness.” Again, human choice—free will—are center stage here. But we cannot leave out the amazing, life-altering reality of verse 14: For sin will not rule over you, because you are not under law [compulsion, duty, or the judgment of curse of the Law are all possible interpretations], but under grace [God’s favor]. Hallelujah!
While it seems that Paul’s theology of sin is pointing away from the manifested behavior itself, he is not ignorant of this view and may even be conflating them at times. For instance, if we look at the Hebrew parallelism in 4:7, we see Paul employ David’s usage of sin where he equates lawless acts with sins. If this is the meaning he carried through from the first three chapters, we may have Paul equating sin with sinful deeds in the first four chapters. But, since Paul isn’t alive, we can’t ask him.
Regardless of which meaning he employs, what can we conclude from Paul’s description of sin in these verses? First, sin is essentially a choice to live independently of God and his will. Second, this necessarily implies that this choice is both a moral and personal one. Third, sin is a strong motivating factor, like a king or master, of a life that is alien to Messiah’s death and resurrection life. Fourth, if we have surrendered our will to Messiah’s, we are no longer under sin. We can be free from sin, really! At least according to Paul’s midrash. [Whether that is rooted in reality is another matter which we will not delve into here.]
So what about the consequences of sin? Paul gives a succinct description of that as well in Rom. 6:23, “The wages of sin is death.” What is death? Death is separation: separation from God, separation of others, separation from life, even from ourselves (as God created us to be). This is an important distinction. Sin intrinsically involves a moral choice that results in disconnection. Skip draws upon this notion at the end of his first paragraph when he says, “…disconnection is the price of sinning.” And thus we shall transition to “Keeping It in the Family.”
I appreciate Skip’s willingness to interact with modern psychology and behavioral theories. It makes for good discussion and reflection. It is always good to challenge old norms. However, for me, this Today’s Word appears simply incoherent and disconnected from the Biblical text.
For instance, he writes, “…everyone has experienced some degree of emotional trauma [a consequence of sin]. That is implicit in what it means to be a sinner. So for this investigation, [here it comes] we won’t focus our attention on the moral aspects of sin [bold, mine throughout].” He goes on to say in paragraph 2, “One of the reasons “all have sinned” has nothing to do with our individual choices.” In paragraph 4, “Perhaps we have spent too much time and effort cataloging moral failures as sins. I wonder if our attitudes toward each other and toward ourselves would change if we saw sin as nothing more than disconnection.” He continues, “Now human interaction is filled with concealment [a choice], so much so that we are left empty [a result of a choice]. And it is a great tragedy of human life that much of this disconnection is not the result of our individual choices.
In support of this thesis that sin not the result of our individual choices, he cites four paragraphs from a behavioral psychologist postulating propositions about the imprinting of “sinful” determinism into the genetic code or psychological makeup of children. The conclusion drawn from this by Skip is that subsequent behaviors [choices] of children draw intrinsically upon their parent’s mistakes [moral], but “We didn’t choose these patterns. We inherited them.”
As I read this, I was struck by the thought that this line of reasoning presents one of the most cogent arguments for the modern day theological notion of a sinful nature, notwithstanding Paul. As Laurita has pointed out, it’s amazing when theology and psychology/biology meet. However, I would surmise that such a notion was not Skip’s intent. But it is interesting where some of our platonic musings and syllogisms ultimately lead us.
But what troubles me the most about this comes when Skip says, “Mate’s comment can be directly applied to Paul’s statement: ‘Disease is disharmony. More accurately, it is an expression of an internal disharmony.’ Sin [as an amoral imprinting?] is disease [a cause]. It is the expression of internal disharmony—disconnection. And it wasn’t all our fault.” This is simply incoherent.
How can anything that Mate states regarding predisposition be attributed to Paul? I would submit that this description is categorically anti-Paul. If anything, this reformulation of sin as an amoral predisposition is a good example of eisegesis—reading a subsequent authors application or interpretation into the Biblical text. To suggest that sin is in any way amoral is to attribute a meaning to Paul that simply doesn’t exist in Paul’s writings, or the rest of the Bible for that matter. It sounds more like Progressive Christianity than Biblical Theology.
There is no question that the sinful choices of parents affects the psyche and behaviors of children. It is indisputable that the average person today carries around emotional baggage and psychological/neurological damage. But that isn’t sin. It is the effect of sinful choices albeit not my own. But does that eliminate the fact that as a person with free will I choose to act on that emotional baggage in sinful ways? [If it does, what we have is behavioral determinism.] Does this exclude the notion that I am dependent on the flesh to guide me? If so, sin becomes nothing more than amoral misdirection. Hey, it’s not my fault. I’m free! Wait, isn’t this very notion what Paul describes as sin? Alternately, where is the evidence that proves that abusive treatment by my parents necessarily results in sinful choices? How does one explain a Yeshua Mashiach, or a Corrie Ten Boom? Maybe by Incarnation or Immaculate Conception, but certainly not by the choice of human will [sarcasm]!
But this leads us back to Paul. Sin isn’t genetics; sin isn’t even merely psychological. It is essentially and intrinsically moral (a decision of the will) because it involves a choice of either dependence on God or dependence on the flesh, allegiance to God or allegiance to me. The problem we all have is figuring out when, how, and where we rely upon a sinful motivation or behaviors that are alien to our life with Messiah, YHVH, and our fellow man. We know we are running afoul of God’s desires when we receive feedback either from the Holy Spirit or a fellow human. Sin causes shame and alienation. It should! If it didn’t, who would want to change. Remember the immoral man in 1 Cor. 5? “Put him outside the camp!”
We forget that God provided covering for Adam and Eve as an act of his grace, not as a punishment. If we all went around parading in our emotional nakedness, un-silencing our screams of being forsaken for who were really are, divulging our private fantasies and our hideous failures, would we not be traumatizing others, especially children? Would we ourselves be further traumatized by those who are unfit to handle such brutal honesty? Rather, I think that in the midst of this world of brutality and sinful interactions, just like Paul’s day–if not more so, we have the security of a heavenly Father to whom we may cry out, “Abba”. We have not received a spirit of slavery [to anyone or anything] to fall back into fear. (8:15). He is the one from whom we receive ultimate security and identity, not a fellow human.
Relying on others for our security and identity steps in the direction of idolatry. For those suffering with BPD or NPD, even coming to grips with admitting one has the disease is not a likely prospect. Getting help is even further down the list. Living with someone who exhibits these behaviors associated with this condition is hell on earth! The mind-numbing, reality twisting abusive behaviors are detrimental to the abuser and the codependent partner. But each has their own set of sinful choices to deal with. This usually means the partner needs to leave, isolate, and ignore in order to heal—all behaviors that someone with BPD or NPD interpret as “sinful” and “hurtful to me.” Are they? No. There are some people who refuse help and cannot be helped! A person being vulnerable with someone like that will end up with deep psychological wounds to her self. There are some people who even God cannot help! E.g. Pharaoh. So why do we think we can fix them?
This is not to say that we do not need help. We are all helpless and hopeless (without God and each other), even if we aren’t psychopaths. Thank God we are on his path, walking toward him. We are fellow beggars telling each other where to find bread. Skip has been a big encouragement in this regard. His humility and authenticity are contagious. Thanks, Skip, for risking your reputation to push the envelope and spur on us to godliness. And, thanks for opening the forum to all. You are courageous!
I liked this, Daniel.
Sin (others’ as well as our own) can cause suffering and put us in compromising situations (binds), but still not be held to our account IF we did not have awareness of our choices or that it was sin we were agreeing with. I believe we are only held responsible for what we actually have authority (choice) over. I was handed the responsibility for the choices of others and told that it was my fault. I was left holding many bags. I had to quit accepting a whole lot of baggage that had the names of others on it. That included a lot of downright abuse and results of historical abuse, ignorance and neglect. It was ‘mine’ until I realized I didn’t have to show up at that terminal to pick it up. Garbage – even the garbage generated by all previous sin – belongs in the cosmic trash can; not in my garage. I have to quit claiming it (thinking that it is just ‘who I am’) and start confessing (naming) it so as to hand it over!
Also, if we are sinning but honestly think it is righteousness, I think we can suffer consequences UNTIL we recognize it for sin, but not be held accountable for it until we can see it. Sin may be the quintessence of unfairness, but YHVH’s grace and mercy provide the missing justice. The trade being that I have to agree to quit pursuing justice ‘on my own’ (i.e. unforgiveness).
Thanks Laurita. What I hear you saying is that there are some sins that God holds us accountable for and there are others that he does not. Is this accurate? It seems that there is still confusion between sin as a moral choice, the consequences of sin, and the sin of others being inflicted on us. Could it be that the consequences for any sin (still a choice of missing the mark) are simply delayed and God is waiting for our return? I’m not sure that sin can ever be divorced from personal responsibility (except for one exception, THANK GOD for Messiah). Maybe my definition of moral is too dualistic and platonic. You seem to be making a distinction between natural consequences for sin (bad choices done in ignorance which result in our defacing God’s image in us and others, but do not merit his divine wrath) vs. God’s reckoning our intentional sin as worthy of spiritual, physical, or eternal death. [I’m just wondering how that distinction played out in the city states that God told Israel to wipe out, man, woman, child, beast, everything.] Regardless, it must be God’s divine election and his grace that enables us to escape the consequences of both. Maybe we have to chalk it up to one of the hidden things held in God’s infinite wisdom that we don’t have access to, but are still responsible for the things that are revealed.
People can wear out God’s mercy and grace. It is not that He is ‘punishing’ us (I think that is reserved for the Judgment); I think of it as more that He comes to points where He quits fighting us and our agreement with death, and agrees with us in those choices and gets (His grace and mercy) out of the way. Those people had been asking for extinction for a while. We are fast reaching those points again, I think. I see us asking for extinction by our choices today, too.
I think we presume much on grace and mercy when we act like we ‘deserve’ them by accusing Him of injustice when He does not keep being merciful and gracious even though we persist in choosing destruction in defiance of both. At some point, I think He respects our choices because He respects the free will He gave us to make them with.