9
The Reality Of Sin
(Eph. 2:1b)
. . . trespasses and sins . . .
We come now to the second chapter of this marvelous Epistle. As our detailed outline shows (see Chapter 1, “Introduction and Overview”, section XII), Ephesians 1 deals with the believer’s Riches in Christ while Ephesians 2 deals with the believer’s Reconciliation to God. Ponder a moment the connection between these two chapters:
· Chapter 1 ‑ Paul shows us what God has done for us
· Chapter 2 ‑ Paul gives details of how God did it
To illustrate, I pastor in Colorado, which in its early history drew many adventurers to search for the riches of gold, but that gold did not come easily. Many a story has been written, therefore, to describe how they did that. Likewise, Paul recounts the great wealth we have in Christ in Ephesians 1, but then tells us in Ephesians 2 exactly how God “dug” that great wealth.
As one reads the opening verses of chapter 2, it seems Paul is asking, “Do you fully realize what our salvation means?” We say this because Paul launches into some details of the salvation process. There are three progressive sections in chapter 2:
· Our Condition BEFORE Christ (vs. 1‑3)
· Our Position IN Christ (vs. 4‑10)
· Our Unification WITH Christ (vs. 11‑22)
Commentator William MacDonald writes this excellent overview of this chapter:
When Ephesians 2 opens, we are spiritual corpses in Death Valley. When it closes, we are not only seated in Christ in the heavenlies; we form a habitation of God through the Spirit. In between we have the mighty miracle that brought about this remarkable transformation.
We recall our study of election back in 1:4-6 (Chapter 3) and redemption Ephesians 1:7-12 (Chapter 4); in both studies we observed man’s total depravity. But Paul goes deeper into this subject in the opening verses of chapter 2 (vs. 1-3).
May I interject here, as I shared with my congregation the morning I preached the message on which this chapter is based, the Truth that follows is not very uplifting. After reading it, you will not be “floating on air” or “feeling good about yourself.” Paul’s message here is about the total depravity man, his absolute and total sinfulness. The Truth here is not hard to understand, for Paul’s language is quite clear; rather it is hard to accept. It is hard for each of us to face the stark reality of our sinfulness.
It is absolutely essential to understand that that one of the major reasons, if not THE major reason, for any wrong conception of salvation is an inadequate conception of sin. At the root of today’s diluting of the Gospel is actually a misunderstanding, or sometimes even a deliberate denial, of the Biblical view of sin. Man’s view of sin is far different from God’s. Worse is the fact that even many believers do not view sin as God does.
So, as Calvin observed, “To bring home more effectually to the Ephesians the general doctrine of Divine grace, he reminds them of their former condition.”1 To put it another way, before we can see the height and glory of God’s grace, we must first see the depth and depravity of man’s sin. What we need to see in this present chapter (and the next) are:
· The Reality of Sin
· The Results of Sin
Looking first at sin’s Reality, let us see the contrast between man’s view of sin and God’s view.
I. Man’s View of Sin
We see two aspects of man’s view of sin: the specific approaches that he uses to view the problem and also his general attitude toward sin.
Specific Approaches
There are several different approaches to the “sin question” as far as man is concerned.
First, some, of course, don’t really recognize a “sin problem” at all. This view says that man is pretty much okay the way he is. While he certainly isn’t perfect, he is evolving, and since he’s been around for so long and has been learning along the way, he’s in pretty good shape. But such a view is a little hard to swallow as you watch the eleven o’clock news.
Second, some who do recognize that there is a problem, view sin as an accident, mistake, or indiscretion. It’s not really a person’s fault when he does wrong, rather it’s because of his background and upbringing. But Romans 5:12 declares: “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” This verse, as well as the Genesis 3 account of the fall, clearly shows that sin was a result of deliberate disobedience. Sin is never accidental; we sin because we choose to sin.
Third, sin is merely an “amiable weakness.” This means that sin is merely a minor, unfortunate weakness but one which does not really hurt anyone. Man is a little “unhealthy,” perhaps even morally sick, but he’s not a hopeless case. But notice Jeremiah 17:9: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked.” Does that sound like an “amiable weakness” or simply an unhealthy condition? Man is, indeed, in a desperate condition. As we’ll see in the next chapter, he is actually spiritual dead.
Fourth, sin is merely “immaturity.” In this view sin is only a lack of personal growth that will improve as we develop as human beings. Is it not interesting that we do not see people growing out of this “immaturity?” I John 3:4 tells us that sin is “the transgression of the law,” not immaturity.
Fifth, Liberal Theology says sin is “selfishness” or a “low self‑esteem.” The Reverend Robert Schuller, for example, very clearly revealed his theology in his book, Self‑Esteem: The New Reformation, 2 in which he writes:
Reformation Theology failed to make clear that the core of sin is a lack of self‑esteem (p. 98).
Every time I read that, the first thing that comes to mind is that I’m sure the reformers would appreciate being set straight on what sin is. In fact, Mr. Schuller’s entire book is an attack on the Theology of the reformers, who were, as he puts it,
. . . rampantly reckless in assaulting the dignity of the person (first paragraph of fly‑leaf).
In other words, if we say “man is depraved,” we are guilty of attacking man’s dignity. He then goes on to write:
What we need is a Theology of salvation that begins and ends with a recognition of every person’s hunger for glory (pp. 26‑27).
Indeed, man wants glory, but we certainly do not need a Theology that feeds man’s arrogance and depravity. Schuller continues by telling us that sin is:
Any human condition or act that robs God of glory by stripping one of His children of their right to divine dignity. Sin is that deep lack of trust that separates me from God and leaves me with a sense of shame and unworthiness (p. 14, emphasis added).
We must ask here, where does the Word of God say that man has a “right to divine dignity?” Man has no rights; he deserves an eternity in Hell. But Mr. Schuller also tells us what Hell is:
It is the loss of pride that naturally follows separation from God—the ultimate and unfailing source of our soul’s sense of self‑respect. “My God, my God, why has thou forsaken me?” was Christ’s encounter with hell. In that “hellish” death our Lord experienced the ultimate horror—humiliation, shame, and loss of pride as a human being. A person is in hell when he has lost his self‑esteem (pp.14‑15).
So hell is not a literal place of fire and torment; rather, it is a personal feeling in the here and now that is produced by our own low self‑image. What then is salvation according to Schuller?
It means to be permanently lifted from sin (psychological self‑abuse . . . ) and shame to self‑esteem . . . (p. 99).
But the most shocking words to come from “Reverend” Schuller, and modern theology in general, appeared in one of today’s “Christian” publications:
I don’t think anything has been done in the name of Christ and under the banner of Christianity that has proven more destructive to human personality and, hence, counterproductive to the evangelism enterprise than the often crude, uncouth, and unchristian strategy of attempting to make people aware of their lost and sinful condition. 3
Apostasy such as that is almost unbelievable. In spite of his worldwide acceptance, Robert Schuler, like many others, does not preach the Gospel. I’m neither attacking him personally nor judging him, rather I am discerning Truth from error when I say that if he actually believes what he writes, he simply cannot be a true Christian Believer because his teaching is not the Gospel revealed in Scripture. Salvation is not a rising above a hellish experience in your own mind by improving your self-esteem; salvation is a deliverance of the sin that has condemned us to an eternity is the literal flames of Hell, “where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched” (Mk. 9:44, 46, 48).
What Schuller says is certainly not what we saw in Ephesians 1, nor is it what we will see in Ephesians 2. Man will go to any lengths to deny how depraved and guilty man is. How true is that second stanza of the hymn, “Beneath The Cross Of Jesus:”
Upon the cross of Jesus mine eye at times can see
The very dying form of One Who suffered there for me;
And from my smitten heart with tears two wonders I confess,
The wonders of His glorious love, and my own worthlessness.
“Oh, but that strips us of the dignity of the person,” someone might say. Indeed it does. As we’ll see, this is man’s position—no worth, no dignity, and, in fact, no life at all.
General Attitude
In addition to the above approaches to sin, there is also a general sense of flippancy about sin today. This attitude is clearly seen in a poll taken by People Magazine. 4 That magazine took what it called a “sin poll,” which gave a scale of 1‑10 to judge various “sins.” A “1” represented no feeling of regret; a “5” showed some guilt; a “10” (which no sin received) represented heinous sin. Here are just a few examples.
“Premarital sex” rated only 3.70 while “parking in a handicapped zone” rated 5.53 and “cutting into lines” rated 4.91. “Living together without marriage” (3.74) is just a little more serious than “not voting” (3.25). Perhaps the most telling example, however, is that while “murder” rated highest at 9.84 (why not 10?) “abortion” rated only 5.78! The world today sees no similarity between the two!
All this, indeed, reveals just how flippant man is about his sin and guilt. Worse is the fact that in modern preaching today, even among most evangelicals, sin is not dealt with at all. The subjects of today’s “preaching” are God’s love, man’s felt needs, how God will help you with your problems, and so on. Preaching about sin is, no pun intended, the greatest sin of all. If you talk about sin, you’ll make people uncomfortable and cause division. You must rather entertain them and build them up. But that is not the Gospel.
II. God’s View of Sin
There are two words in Ephesians 2:1 that require careful study, for in these two words we find God’s view of sin.
First, the Apostle Paul calls sin trespasses. The Greek here is paraptōma (para, “along side of” and ptōma, “a fall or downfall”). The word, therefore, pictures a deviation to one side or the other. It was used at times by the ancient Greeks to describe an error, a mistake in judgment or a blunder. But this idea is never even implied in the New Testament. 5 Rather the New Testament usage strongly emphasizes a deliberate act with its serious consequences. In fact, the key to understanding this is to realize that trespasses speaks of a willful deviation from God’s requirement.
Romans 5:15‑20 uses the word “offence” (paraptōma) several times to describe clearly Adam’s sin as a willful deviation from God’s command:
. . . through the offence of one many be dead . . . by one man’s offence death reigned by one . . . by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation . . . Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.
Note also Galatians 6:1: “Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault (paraptōma, willful deviation), ye who are spiritual restore such an one in the spirit of meekness, considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.” Christians are to help one another set right our deliberate deviations from God’s requirements.
There is a similar word used in the Hebrew; the noun form is ma’al (used 29 times), and the verb form is mā’al (used 35 times). 6 The word speaks of a conscious act of treachery. A vivid example appears in Joshua 7:1, where it is used of Achan’s sin: “Did not Achan, the son of Zerah, commit [verb form] a trespass [noun form] in the accursed thing, and wrath fell on the congregation of Israel?”
Again, we see here a deliberate act along with its consequences. The same is true with Saul (I Chron. 10:13) and many times with the nation of Israel. There are many other illustrations of this word (Lev. 6:2; 26:40; Num. 5:6; II Chron. 12:2; Ezek. 14: 13; 20:27; 39:23, 26; etc.)
What then is the application of all this? Simply that we are all willful sinners. We, just as Adam, Achan, Saul, and Israel, deliberately disobey God’s commands. We do not just make mistakes; we do not just commit indiscretions; we do not just “trip up;” we are willful sinners. We don’t sin because “the Devil made us do it,” not because it’s our spouse’s fault, not because we had a bad childhood; we sin because we choose to sin, we deviate from the commands of God. As John Calvin put it:
All of us tend to evil, and we are not only inclined to it, but we are, as it were, boiling hot with it. We run to it with frantic impetuosity because the Devil possesses all who are not reformed by God’s Holy Spirit. 7
How important it is that Christians understand this Truth. Often we say our lack of faithfulness and many other weaknesses are “a lack of maturity.” That is true, but most importantly these things are sin, trespasses, deliberate disobedience.
Second, as if trespasses were not enough, Paul uses the term sins. The Greek here is hamartia, from the verb hamartanō (“to miss the mark”). The verb was used in ancient Greek of a spearman missing the target at which he aimed and threw his spear. It then came to be used in the ethical sense of not measuring up to a standard or falling short of a purpose or standard. The pivotal verse on this principle is Romans 3:23: “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” What is sin? Missing the mark. What then is the mark for which we shoot? The glory of God; that is, the mark we shoot for is to be worthy of glory, but we miss it every time. William Barclay offers these fitting words:
We commonly have a wrong idea of sin. We would readily agree that the robber, murderer, the razor-slasher, the drunkard, the gangster are sinners, but, since most of us are respectable citizens, in our heart of hearts we think that sin has not very much to do with us. We would probably rather resent being called hell-deserving sinners. But hamartia brings us face to face with what sin is, the failure to be what we ought to be and could be.
Robert Schuller says, “We need a salvation that begins and ends with a recognition of every person’s hunger for glory.” But God says that not only can’t man attain glory, he doesn’t even deserve glory. It is absolutely impossible for man to get to God in himself, for he forever misses the mark of God’s glory. Moreover, because of this man deserves only death: “For the wages of sin is death (Rom. 6:23a). Why? Because man has deliberately disobeyed God and fallen short of His glory. Man deserves whatever God chooses to place upon him.
May we ponder something else: A common misconception of sin is that it is something we do, when actually sin is something we do not do. And what is this thing we don’t do? We do not measure up to God’s standard of holiness. God is holy, perfect, absolutely pure; our sin is not measuring up to that standard. All the “sins” we do are the result of what we don’t do. Oh, how far we fall short of the glory of God!
Man’s view of sin is indeed distorted, and rightly so; his sinfulness distorts his view of his sinfulness and guilt. But God’s view is clear—man has willfully deviated from God’s law and has fallen far short of God’s standard of holiness. We shall build upon these principles as we study verses 2‑3.
1 Commentaries.
2 Robert H. Schuller, Self‑Esteem: The New Reformation (Waco, Texas: Word Books, 1982). It is appalling, indeed, that Word Books, a supposedly “Christian” publisher, would even print the apostasy contained in this book.
3 Christianity Today, October 5, 1984, p. 12.
4 This material taken from the May 23, 1986 issue of National Review, editor William F. Buckley, Jr., p. 50‑51.
5 For further study see Brown, Vol. III, pp. 585‑586 and Trench, pp. 245-247.
6 For further study see Archer, Vol. I, pp. 519‑520 and Unger,, pp. 437-439.
7 John Calvin, Sermon’s on Ephesians (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth Trust, 1973), p. 37.
Back to Ephesians Back to Home Page