The Surprisingly Liberating Implications of the Doctrine of Sin

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Popular culture has little tolerance for the doctrine of sin. There is powerful consensus of pop psychologists and agony aunts that sin is a pointless and destructive myth: a theological fad used by churches to fill their coffers and control the laity. Sin creates needless suffering because it causes guilt, which leads to repression, which leads to unsatisfied desires. But, like it or not, we must deal with the fact that we are agents who must answer for our actions. There is a vast gap between the good that we should do and the deeds that we want to do and, as a consequence, we do not behave as we ought. In this context, the doctrine of sin – which cannot be comprehended without considering the good news of Christ’s Kingdom and his call to repentance – offers the human race humility and hope in equal measure.

So the idea that “sin” is psychologically damaging has little purchase: the doctrine enables us to face who we are and take responsibility for what we have done without feeling despair. The doctrine of sin does not, as is commonly assumed, teach that human beings are evil beings. As depressingly unavoidable as our depravity seems, corruption is not an essential part of human nature. We might be sinful, but we are not intrinsically evil. The doctrine of sin is the doctrine of the Fall; and if human beings are fallen creatures we must once have stood in a better state. We might be damaged goods, ruined by our collective choices, but we were good. God loves and accepts us, not for what we are, but for what we could be and were always meant to be.

Furthermore, there is little doubt that the doctrine of sin can be  politically and socially liberating. According to the Christian scriptures no-one is righteous: all have sinned and fallen short of God’s glory. Christ died and rose again for every human being without exception and God commands everyone, everywhere to repent. Text after text clobbers the reader with the consequences. Human pride is impossible; we dare not judge others because one day we also will be judged. No-one should do anything out of selfish ambition or conceit, but each in humility should consider others more important than themselves.

So no-one who takes the biblical doctrine of sin seriously can look down on his “inferiors” or up to his “betters”. No one human is worth more than any other if Jesus died for all. Elitism is impossible if we are obliged to show mercy as we have been shown mercy. No one can merit salvation through their own good deeds, so God does not respect anyone’s social status or achievements. No class or creed, no race or profession, can consider itself superior to another. Indeed, the meek and the poor are more likely to enter God’s kingdom because they are less likely to boast in their merits and are more likely to depend on him like little children.

Scripture makes pride and boasting are impossible, and insists that no person is good enough to have absolute power over another. In this way, Christian theology provides the principles which underpin the doctrine of equal human worth. This is well, for mere empirical evidence simply does not support the notion of equal human dignity. No two humans seem to be equal in intelligence, wit, beauty, athletic ability or entrepreneurial acumen. Each person has a different role in his society so different responsibilities weigh on him: every member of a population carries a different burden than her neighbour. Surely, as a matter of empirical fact, some people are worth more than others? Not if every person is equally dependent on and responsible to a loving God.

If Christ’s death was the only answer to sin no political class and claim supremacy over others, for no political programme can offer salvation.  So a Christian should not genuflect to the cult of expertise because experts can be proud and self-seeking. We should not worship the free-market because self-interested individuals are capable of myopic, impulsive and irrational behaviour. Theocracy cannot save us, because God’s people only know Him in part. His Kingdom cannot be fully present until we know him face to face. The problems of humanity may have been made by man; but if our minds and hearts were damaged in the process we cannot rely on man-made solutions. Even the Church must be continually reformed. So the doctrine of sin cautions us to protect our political freedom and frees us from those who would  rule us for our own benefit.

This entry was posted in Quick Thoughts. Bookmark the permalink.