Pages

The Bad News Part 2: Speaking of Sin as a Universal Problem

Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned...
Romans 5:12

One of the reasons it is so hard for us to share the problem of sin with other people is that we aren't broad enough in our discussion of the problem of sin. A very natural response to the statement "You have sin in your life" is either a harsh charge of intolerance (see Part 3), or the more benign, "yeah, but no one is perfect." In fact, most people when faced with their sins will simply turn to the rest of the world and state how comparitively normal they are. Where we see a problem of sin, they see normalcy.

I would contend that they are right. Sin is normal. It may seem like a problem, but it's everyone's problem. It's like the national debt: Yeah, it's there and it stinks, but what can we really do about it.

So how do we help our friend see the weight of his own personal sin debt against God and his need for a Savior? I believe it actually helps to start with talking about sin as a universal problem. The Bible speaks of sin as a disease that entered humanity through the sin of Adam, which has resulted in our own disobedience. This means that every human is born into a sinful state as an enemy of God. The result is a world full of every kind of evil, which is evident today. This is the doctrine of original sin, a teaching of the Bible that needs to be reclaimed and understood by the church.

Talking about the universality of original sin does a few things.

First, it puts all of us in the same boat. No one is holier than anyone else. Finally the pope and I have something in common!

Second, it shows how the evil we see out there in the world is a result of the evil I see right here in my own life and heart. The damage done by termites to the destroyed foundation of a house is the result of thousands of tiny creatures taking tiny bites of wood. The result of evil in the world is enormous, but it's the result of the evil of individuals.

Third, it gives the proper persepctive for assessing sin responsibility. If you start with individual sin and compare outward, individual sin seems small and inconsequential. When you start with the evil world and the disobedience of all humanity, it's easier to see your own part in it.

Fourth, salvation is seen not as a personal choice for living morally, but a freedom from the world's slavery to sin.

And finally, focusing my friend's attention on the universal problem of sin will allow me to humbly share Jesus and his Good News. You now approach the topic as sinner saved by grace, not a religious zealot.

For further reading, look over Romans 5, where Paul discusses the universality of sin through Adam as compared to the grace that comes to all people through Jesus.

btemplates

3 comments:

Kim Shatzer said...

Conjures up thoughts of that age old debate...is man inherently good or bad. Popular culture and management theory drives that "man is inherently good" angle. Not sure how people buy that with all the evil in the world. On the good/evil continuum---we would probably all be consistent on our placement of Hitler, Stalin; Mother Theresa and Billy Graham, etc. But where does the line go between good and evil on that continuum. I guess some would think that is God's job. Problem with that is that there are some days/minutes I am in company closer to Mother Theresa and Billy Graham and other days/minutes I'd give Hitler and Stalin a run for their money for their spots. Thankful that it not a range with an arbritrary line drawn. That the only remedy for the sin problem and the continuum is the Blood of Christ. I think people can "get" this logic and causes thinking and conversation.

Kyle Bushre said...

Great point, Kim. I like to draw that continuum and then mention the part of the Sermon on the Mount where Jesus says we are to be perfect like our Heavenly Father is perfect. Jesus draws the line at perfection. So who can be saved? Exactly...

I knew most pop culture and psychology comes from the "man is inherently good" perspective, but management theory too? Interesting.

Kim Shatzer said...

I think its "Management Theory X"--that espouses that employees are bad and need to be watched closely lest they do bad things; "Management Theory Y" is that employees are good and want to do good. They don't need to be patrolled but enriched. Idea is that you approach managing people differently based on which theory you believe.

Post a Comment