I was contemplating the idea of sin earlier today. Granted, I wasn’t using a biblical context or verses to back up my thoughts, so it could be flawed from a Christian stance. I was thinking that sin as simply human imperfections. Pretty obvious, right? Why anyone would have a problem admitting their imperfections is beyond me.

This idea is an offspring of humanism, or humanist thinking. Of course humanism has its own set of debatable arguments, but the issue here is that Christianity finds almost nothing recognizable in it. You must understand that ‘sin’ is a term that is defined and employed by Christianity; outside of Christian theology ‘sin’ has no real meaning, just as ‘jihad’ has meaning only within the context of Islam. If we want to think about the nature and effects of sin, we must confront the source that defined and produced the term: the holy Scriptures. It would be intellectually irresponsible to hijack the term, apply one’s own definition to it, and then expect those who adhere to the Scriptures to recognize it as something from their belief system.

The important part of sin is repenting. Repenting isn’t bad either. Everyone should want to better themselves. And repentance isn’t meant to hound one’s self, but rather to acknowledge the Creator. Is this correct?

No, it is not. There are two types of repentance in Scriptures: worldly, and godly. A worldly repentance is concerned about the danger of sin, not the filthiness of it, as Robert M’Cheyne put it. Whereas godly repentance consists of a true sense of one’s own guilt and sinfulness, an apprehension of God’s mercy in Christ, an actual hatred of sin, and turning from it to God.

Most Commented Posts