The Dangers and Duty of Confessing Sin to One Another

“Open Confession is good for the soul,” or so the maxim goes. Perhaps it might also be said, “Open Confession is  good for your relationship with God and men.” While Scripture supports both of these statements, there is something of a haze that lays across the surface of the meaning of such statements in Scripture as, “Confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed” (James 5:16). Is James speaking of going around and confessing any sin that you can point to in your life to just about anyone you are in fellowship with in the church so that they will pray for you? Or, does he have in mind the practice of “keeping short accounts” with the brethren? Does he mean going to an offended brother or sister and asking forgiveness for a particular sin that was committed against them? Or, as the context might indicate, is James instructing  individuals in the congregation to come to the elders and confess particular sins of a scandalous nature in order to be healed of a sickness with which they had been chastened by God? While we may not come to a completely settled agreement on the precise meaning of James 5:16, there are 2 dangers and 3 applications of our duty that we should be able to agree upon when reflecting on this subject.   Continue at Nicholas T. Batzig

The Gravity of Sin

Christians are not meant to be spectators in the sanctifying process. Believers are commanded to strive against their flesh for the sake of holiness and spiritual growth. At the same time, true righteousness is only possible through the power of God. As we’ve seen in recent days, biblical sanctification is a cooperative work between the Lord and His people.

The apostle Paul spells out the paradoxical nature of that cooperative work in Philippians 2:12-13.

So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.   Continue at John MacArthur

Hope in the Struggle with Sin and Self — A.W. Pink

“He who is really honest with himself and has had his eyes opened in some degree to see the awful sinfulness of self, and who is becoming more and more acquainted with that sink of iniquity, that mass of corruption which still indwells him, often feels that sin more completely rules him now than ever it did before. When he longs to trust God with all his heart, unbelief seems to paralyze him. When he wishes to be completely surrendered to God’s blessed will, murmurings and rebellion surge within him. When he would spend an hour in meditating on the things of God, evil imaginations harass him. When he desires to be more humble, pride seeks to fill him. When he would pray, his mind wanders. The more he fights against these sins, the further off victory seems to be. To him it appears that sin is very much the master of him, and Satan tells him that his profession is vain. What shall we say to such a dear soul who is deeply exercised over this problem?…   Continue at Eric T. Young

The Disappearance of Sin

Worship services in evangelical churches do not mention sin, a major part of the gospel message, Dr. Cornelius Plantinga, senior research fellow at the Calvin Institute of Christian Worship, said Monday [March 24, 2014] at the Ethics and Public Policy Center’s Faith Angle Forum. ‘In very many evangelical and confessionally Reformed churches these days, sin is a rare topic,’ he said.

He came to this conclusion from his experience of speaking in different churches most Sundays for the past 30 years, talking to evangelical friends, observing the content of worship music used by evangelical churches, and reading the books and articles of Dr. David Wells, distinguished senior research professor at Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary, Plantinga explained to the conference of journalists.   Continue at Banner of Truth

The Anatomy of Sin's Seduction

To understand how the flesh dupes us, consider James 1:14–15 in light of the principles of deception:

. . . each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

James is writing to people trying to excuse their sin much the way Adam and Eve did in the Garden, pinning the blame on God. But James says that the whole guilt of sin lies in the sinner, as he is hoodwinked by the desires of his own flesh. He helps us unmask the con man within by exposing what the flesh wants, and how it goes about getting it from us.

First, the goal the flesh aims at is death (verse 15). What- ever sin pretends, it will end in death. The flesh wants us to believe that the consequences for dallying with sin will only be slight (not as much blessing from God, a cheaper seat in heaven). Knowing this is our first means of arming ourselves against deceit (as knowing that the used-car salesman will do anything to sell you a car helps to protect you from driving home the lemon while he laughs behind your back).   Continue at Alistair Begg,

Whitefield’s Sin Exposing Spotlight

Whitefield was convinced that any presentation of the gospel must begin by exposing the listener’s sin and his dire need for salvation. This necessitated the preacher’s confronting his hearers’ rebellion against God and warning of the eternal consequences of their rejection. Whitefield plainly understood that none rightly desire the gospel of Christ until they know of their own condemnation before God. Whitefield preached those truths that reveal sin, namely, the holiness of God, the fall of Adam, the demands of the law, the curse of disobedience, the certainty of death, the reality of the final judgment, and the eternality of punishment in hell.

When addressing the unregenerate masses, Whitefield sought to ensure that their depravity was fully laid bare. Martyn Lloyd-Jones aptly stated, “No man could expose the condition of the natural unregenerate heart more powerfully than George Whitefield.” Only when confronted with their sinfulness, Whitefield insisted, would unbelievers seek to embrace Christ as their Savior and Lord. He peeled back the outer layers of people’s self-righteousness in order to bring about self-awareness of their sinful hearts.   Continue at Steven Lawson

Is It Sin to Experience Same-Sex Attraction?

There is no way around it. Dealing with same-sex attraction is messy.

There are many issues that, at least on the surface, do not seem clear. Take this question, for example: Is same-sex attraction (SSA) itself sinful, and if so, how should we deal with it?

Here is my humble attempt at an answer.

Taking Our Cues from the Bible

First, note briefly three biblical observations:

1. The Bible explicitly says that impenitent homosexual acts, not homosexual desires, keep a person from inheriting the kingdom of God. “Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6:9–10).

2. The Bible does not seem to explicitly mention same-sex attraction. It is possible that the “dishonorable passions” in Romans 1:26 could be dealing with SSA, but it’s unclear whether this is a reference to simply experiencing an attraction, or following the attraction into active lusting.    Continue at Nick Roen

5 Things God Teaches Us in the Tragic Deaths of Ananias & Sapphira

The story of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5 lets us know that despite the explosion of growth in the early church, they had moments of weakness, even gross sin. I believe that their deaths serve as a warning to the Church today, and that God has a lot to teach us—if we are willing to hear:

1. In the church, there are two kinds of people, and it’s nearly impossible to distinguish them from the outside.

On the outside, Ananias and Sapphira look just like another church member named Barnabas (introduced in Acts 4). Barnabas had just sold his property and brought the money to the apostles, and to the casual observer, Ananias and Sapphira were doing the same thing.

But deep in their heart lingered a love of money and a desire for people’s praise. So they conspired together to present a portion of their money while passing it off as the entire amount. This is worlds apart from the attitude of Barnabas, but looks very similar.   Continue at Pastor J. D.

Did the Devil Make Me Do It?

I just sinned. Did the Devil make me do it?

The authors of the New Testament almost never speak about a Christian's sin in terms of demonic influence. Paul refers to false teachers who have been captured by the Devil to do his will (2 Tim. 2:26) and ill-qualified elders in a church who are in danger of falling into a snare of the Devil (1 Tim. 3: 6-7). But when he speaks to believers about their sin it's usually in direct terms. So, for example, in Ephesians 4:25-32 Paul instructs us:

Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another. Be angry and do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger, and give no opportunity to the devil. Let the thief no longer steal, but rather let him labor, doing honest work with his own hands, so that he may have something to share with anyone in need. Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear. And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.

Paul does indeed mention the Devil in this passage, telling us not to give him an opportunity to tempt us by clinging to anger and rage. But while our sin might give Satan an opportunity to advance his agenda through us, Paul doesn't understand our sin to be fundamentally caused by the Devil and his demons.   Continue at Mike McKinley

God’s Commitment to Forgetfulness

For I will be merciful to their wrongdoing, and I will never again remember their sins. (Hebrews 8:12)

It is I who sweep away your transgressions for My own sake and remember your sins no more. (Isaiah 43:25)

Last Wednesday, my daily devotional reading was near the end of the book of Judges, where Samson met his fateful end after a life of disordered love and disobedience. As I closed my Bible that morning, I recalled how the sad epitaph on Samson’s life in Judges (“he killed more in his death than he did in his life”) is not repeated in the New Testament. The author of Hebrews lists Samson as a man of faith. Period. How kind of the Lord, I thought, to put Samson’s flawed legacy in the background and simply list him as a hero, one who “gained strength after being weak.”

Later that day, Johnny Hunt spoke at LifeWay’s chapel and delivered a truth-filled message about how God’s grace overcomes past regrets. He brought up God’s promise to “forget” our sins, to never bring up our past again, and he pointed to the New Testament’s discussion of Old Testament heroes as proof.

Think about it. No matter how flawed our heroes are shown to be in the Old Testament, they are presented at their best in the New.  Continue at  Trevin Wax

Isolation Transforms Sin from Activity to Slavery

This post is not about avoiding temptation, as important as that is. This post is about the transition of sin from activity to slavery; the aftermath of sin that keeps us ensnared even after the promises of sin have proven themselves empty. For some reason, even after sin has proven itself to be a “bad idea” we resist taking the steps that would lead to freedom.

The first thing that sin does is that it breaks relationship. Towards God sin is idolatry. God is demoted as we trust something or someone else to give us what we really want. This is why sin is called spiritual adultery (James 4:4); we are breaking our covenant with God.

Towards people sin is a form of dishonor. We violate the terms of decency, honesty, fairness, or respect in order to gain comfort or avoid discomfort. We choose to harm or disadvantage others in order to protect, entertain, or benefit our self.  Continue at Brad Hambrick

Can a Christian Be in Habitual Sin?

John Owen, with great pastoral care and sensitivity, answers the question:

Discourse IX (Delivered April 19, 1677)

 
Question. Whether lust or corruption, habitually prevalent, be consistent with the truth of grace?
 

Answer. This is a hard question; there are difficulties in it, and, it may be, it is not precisely to be determined. I am sure we should be wonderfully careful what we say upon such a question, which determines the present and eternal condition of the souls of men.
Supposing we retain something of what was spoken in stating a lust or corruption so habitually prevalent, because this is the foundation of our present inquiry, I shall bring what I have to say upon this question to a few heads, that they may be remembered.
 

I say, then, --
 

First. It is the duty of every believer to take care that this may never be his own case practically. We shall meet with straits enough, and fears enough, and doubts enough about our eternal condition, though we have no lust nor corruption habitually prevalent; therefore, I say, it is the duty of every believer to take care this may never be his case. David did so, Ps. xix. 12, 13, "Who can understand his errors?" saith he, "Cleanse thou me from secret faults. Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins: then shall I be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression."    Continue at Underdog Theology

The Worst Sinner You Know

Are you the worst sinner you know? How you answer that question says a lot about your theology as well as the condition of your soul. Some Christians find this questions to be difficult, if not inappropriate. So let me tell you up front that I am convinced the answer to this question, when posed to a Christian, ought to always be, "Yes. I am the worst sinner I know."  Many balk at this idea--pointing to people who are constantly overwhelmed by guilt and find no relief. Such theology can seem cruel. Yet when properly understood this leads to deliverance rather than to despair. Knowing ourselves and knowing our Savior highlights our transgressions and Christ's glories in such a way that we are both humbled and made happy by the grace of God in Christ.

The Apostle Paul wrote of himself in a way that demonstrates what he believed about himself. First he said he was "least of the Apostles" (1 Cor. 15:9), then "least of all the saints" (Eph. 3:8), and, at the end of his life, he saw himself as the "foremost" of sinners (1 Tim 1:15). This, combined with Paul's ongoing struggle with sin described in Romans 7:13-25, gives a picture of the Apostle's self-image. Though now a saint he remained, in his own eyes, the worst sinner he knew due to his wicked past and even his present corruption. Note what the Second London Confession has to say about the sin nature in believers:   Continue at Joe Thorn

Whatever Is Not from Faith Is Sin — Really?

People from the time of John Chrysostom (347–407) have tried to limit the meaning of Paul’s words in Romans 14:23, “Whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.” Chrysostom cautions, “Now all these things have been spoken by Paul of the subject in hand, not of everything.”

Leon Morris follows this limitation and says,

Whatever be the truth of actions done before one becomes a believer, Paul is not discussing them here. His concern is with the believer who sometimes does things that are not motivated by faith. (The Epistle to the Romans, 493)

But Lenski says, No!

Is this to be restricted to the Christian alone and to the matter of the adiaphora alone, namely to faith in this domain? No; it covers this domain only because it is a part of one that is much larger. (The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, 854)

What do you think?

Here’s the context to help you get oriented (Romans 14:21–23):

It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble. The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.

Augustine in his Lectures on the Gospel according to St. John cites Romans 14:23 as a universal statement covering all human conditions:    Continue at John Piper

Sin Is Cosmic Treason

The question, “What is sin?” is raised in the Westminster Shorter Catechism. The answer provided to this catechetical question is simply this: “Sin is any want of conformity to or transgression of the law of God.”

Let us examine some of the elements of this catechetical response. In the first instance, sin is identified as some kind of want or lack. In the middle ages, Christian theologians tried to define evil or sin in terms of privation (privatio) or negation (negatio). In these terms, evil or sin was defined by its lack of conformity to goodness. The negative terminology associated with sin may be seen in biblical words such as disobedience, godlessness, or immorality. In all of these terms, we see the negative being stressed. Further illustrations would include words such as dishonor, antichrist, and others.

However, to gain a complete view of sin, we have to see that it involves more than a negation of the good, or more than a simple lack of virtue. We may be inclined to think that sin, if defined exclusively in negative terms, is merely an illusion. But the ravages of sin point dramatically to the reality of its power, which reality can never be explained away by appeals to illusion. The reformers added to the idea of privatio the notion of actuality or activity, so that evil is therefore seen in the phrase, “privatio actuosa.” This stresses the active character of sin. In the catechism, sin is defined not only as a want of conformity but an act of transgression, an action that involves an overstepping or violation of a standard.   Continue at R. C. Sproul

Gay Marriage and the Eclipse of Religious Liberty

Ever since the court handed down its DOMA decision yesterday, it has becomeincreasingly clear that we are one lawsuit away from gay marriage being ensconced as a Constitutional right. My hunch is that such a lawsuit will come sooner rather than later, and that the matter could end up before the Supreme Court in relatively short order. President Obama is already saying that gay marriages performed legally in one state should be recognized by every other state in the union. This matter will be litigated, and—as Scalia noted in his dissent—that other shoe is going to drop.

In any case, the Supreme Court has led us to the precipice of legal gay marriage in all fifty states. As gay marriage moves forward, there is a real question whether proponents of gay marriage will allow any legal accommodation for the consciences of those who hold marriage to be the union of one man and one woman. Observant Christians, Jews, and Muslims would all have religious reasons for defining marriage in the traditional way, but will their religious liberty be respected as gay marriage becomes the law of the land?   Continue at Denny Burk

See also:

What has the Gay Lobby Revealed to You about Your Faith

Where the Prop 8 ruling leaves us?

How Should You Explain the Same-Sex Marriage Debate to Your Children?

Supreme Court Defies God’s Clear Teaching on Marriage
 

7 Lessons for Christians from the “Gay Victory”

Satan Wants To Help You

Satan wants to help you—to help you sin. He is hell bent on taking you to hell with him. Thomas Books, in his book Precious Remedies Against Satan's Devices, drew up a list of the devices Satan uses to draw you—yes you!—to sin. Here are six of them:

He presents the bait and hides the hook. Satan shows you the pleasure and the profit that may flow out of yielding to sin, but hides the wrath and misery that will inevitably result. This is, of course, exactly what he did with Adam and Eve: he displayed the benefit of eating that fruit, but hid all the cost. "There is an opening of the mind to contemplation and joy, and there is an opening of the eyes of the body to shame and confusion. He promises them the former, but intends the latter, and so cheats them."

He paints sin with the colors of virtue. Satan knows that if he were to present sin accurately, you would run away from it rather than be attracted to it. Therefore, he conceals sin behind the camouflage of virtue so you can more easily be overcome by it and take more immediate pleasure in committing it. When he does this, pride comes in the form of neatness, covetousness in the form of thrift, and drunkenness in the form of a good time. Whatever temptation you are prone to he will likewise dress up as a virtue.

He convinces you this is only a little sin. Satan tries to convince you the temptation you face, the sin you are drawn to, is just a small and a harmless one. He wants you to believe this is a sin you may commit without any great danger to your soul.    Continue at Tim Challies

The Socially Acceptable Sin

Most Christians today like to say that all sins are “equal” in the eyes of God, that there is no scale of less or worse sins, that a white lie or a homicide alike would have been enough to require Christ to die on the cross. We say this in theory, but in practice, we know that a white lie won’t get you kicked off the church leadership team. And a homicide likely will.

In practice, there are some sins that are socially acceptable, even in the Church. There’s one sin in particular that has pervaded our society and churches so silently we hardly give it a second thought, and that is the constant hunt for more over what is enough. Or, in an uglier terminology, what is known as gluttony.

When I think about gluttony, I think about my desire to shove a dozen donuts into my mouth and wash them down with chocolate milk. Or perhaps it’s my tendency to mindlessly feed chips to a stomach that’s no longer hungry. Many of us can look at the sin of gluttony and think, “That’s not really my struggle.” Or, we think, “What’s the big deal?” After all, most congregations have compulsive over-eaters among them, and they’re not considered “less spiritual” or “backslidden” for it.   Continue at Relevant Magazine

Same-Sex Marriage as a Civil Right — Are Wrongs Rights?

We should have seen it coming. Back in 1989 two young activists pushing for the normalization of homosexuality coauthored a book intended to serve as a political strategy manual and public relations guide for their movement. In After the Ball: How America Will Conquer its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s, authors Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen argued that efforts to normalize homosexuality and homosexual relationships would fail unless their movement shifted its argument to a demand for civil rights, rather than for moral acceptance. Kirk and Madsen argued that homosexual activists and their allies should avoid talking about sex and sexuality. Instead, “the imagery of sex per se should be downplayed, and the issue of gay rights reduced, as far as possible, to an abstract social question.”

 

Beyond Kirk and Madsen and their public relations strategy, an even more effective legal strategy was developed along the same lines. Legal theorists and litigators began to argue that homosexuals were a class of citizens denied basic civil liberties, and that the courts should declare them to be a protected class, using civil rights precedents to force a moral and legal revolution.   Continue at Al Mohler

Brain Malfunction versus Mental Illness

In the ongoing, and important, discussion of the nature of mental illness it seems to me that it would be incredibly helpful if we would be more deliberate in our distinction between “mental illness,” as a very large societal umbrella covering multitudes of non-organically-related behaviors (moral issues), and “mental illness” as an organic, physiological disorder backed up by legitimate scientific research (medical issues). For the latter category, it seems that we would be much better off if we used a term like “brain malfunction.” I submit this recommendation to the discussion for a number of reasons, which I hope to elaborate on more fully later in the week, as well as provide another page of helpful resources on the topic.

One reason we need a term other than “illness” is that this word often automatically generates in our minds unqualified confidence that a problem is indeed proven, lock-tight, as medical. Even some secular psychiatrists rightly oppose the DSM IV’s, and soon-to-be V’s, propagation of untold numbers of behavioral problems as “illnesses” for which persons can be treated by professionals who may then be compensated by insurance companies. The word “illness” too easily produces a victim-mindset in persons who might no longer be held responsible and, therefore, require medication. Since this is how our society has been trained to think we must strive to apply a biblical worldview to all of life and work extra hard to make clear distinctions of definition, lest we unintentionally contribute to the world’s tragic hijack of hope.   Continue at Paul Tautges