There is need for a fresh emphasis in dealing with the sin problem.

Whereas disobedience has been stressed as the prime cause of disease and death, the real cause is separation from the Source.

This does not mean that violation of law can be treated lightly, for all transgression will certainly bring its train of evil. In fact, the full effect of law-breaking is separation from the Source, not only because of God's total aversion to sin but because of what it is.

And what is sin?

There are many valid answers to this question. It is the transgression of the law, enmity against God, the reign of death, and so on. A definition seldom if ever considered is that it is a humanly devised solution to whatever problem is confronting the person. This becomes very obvious when the reasons for lying, killing, stealing, committing adultery, Sabbathbreaking, idol worship, etc., are considered.

Why does a man kill another?

The victim, with some possible exceptions, has become a problem to him. In some way, he either threatens, deprives, or frustrates the killer to the point where he determines to remove him completely. For the same reason, people tell lies and steal. They know no other way to solve their problems.

The truly important point is that each invention of a human solution rejects God as the Problem-solver. It is installing man in God's place, and, as such, is a definite movement away from God. This is why it is impossible for the sinner to maintain the constant connection with the Source that will replenish the losses caused by sin. His iniquity directly cuts off that connection, for sin in all its forms is a rejection of the divine in favor of the human. Thus, there can never be an immortal sinner.
Consequently, every person should fear that which will in any way break the connection between himself and the infinite Source. He should diligently seek every facility whereby the clearest and most powerful impressions of God's position as the Source, Plan-maker, Burden-bearer, and Problem-solver, are refreshed and strengthened. Only thus can God's children be preserved from the awful loss, wretchedness, and ultimate death which arise out of human self-sufficiency.

As the Source, God cannot be replaced, nor can He give this position and responsibility to another, for there is no creature in existence with the capacity to sustain the entire universe. Should the Almighty cease His work, every living creature would become nonexistent, for nature is not self-sustaining. So God does not hold to His position because of that ambitious pride which leads men to strive for and cling to kingship, but because of His infinite love for His children.

So, in other words, all sinning is the result of selfishness, right? Because we are born separated from God we naturally sin (by default), right?

FW 94
All that man can do without Christ is polluted with selfishness and sin; but that which is wrought through faith is acceptable to God. {FW 94.1}

4T 384, 385
Another book was opened, wherein were recorded the sins of those who profess the truth. Under the general heading of selfishness came every other sin. There were also headings over every column, and underneath these, opposite each name, were recorded, in their respective columns, the lesser sins. {4T 384.3}

Under covetousness came falsehood, theft, robbery, fraud, and avarice; under ambition came pride and extravagance; jealousy stood at the head of malice, envy, and hatred; and intemperance headed a long list of fearful crimes, such as lasciviousness, adultery, indulgence of animal passions, etc. {4T 385.1}

Nope, MM you complete missed the point by attempting to reword my statement. Please read it again slowly, dropping all assumptions and attempts at directing it your way. Just take it as it reads.

John B. Well...in a way yes, but more directly I am talking of our seperating ourselves in a brass-tacks, reality-style and daily way, not in the cosmic sense.

In plainer English:

When we make ourselves our own problem-solver and only "religiously" ask God to bless our own ways, we will always fail.

It's interesting that there are different ways of seeing the same thing. Phil is talking about sin as a human devised solution to a problem. I've not thought of it in that we, but I like it. It ties into the idea of sin in terms of separation from God, and also in terms of installing oneself in the place of God.

John relates it to the idea of putting one's justice in the place of God's.

Another way of thinking of it is in terms of wrong thinking. That is, as a man thinks in his heart, so he is. Unbelief -- not believing the truth about God, that He is kind, generous, gracious, logiving, forgiving, and above all good -- leads ut to seek to solve our problems ourselves rather than trusting Him and inviting Him into our lives, to help us and take care of us, trusting in His lovingkindness as our heavenly Father.

How does God solve the problem? However one thinks of sin or defines it, the solution is the same. He must make Himself familiar and visible to our eyes, revealing Himself to us as He truly is. This is just what He did for us in becoming flesh. Jesus Christ has revealed the Father to us, that we might be set right and kept right. This revelation is the ultimate solution to the sin problem, not just for us who have sinned, but for the whole onlooking universe.

Double Bingo, Tom Now we are on the same wave-length!

Yeah, I can see it that way too, John B., if we are talking about "he justified himself with his explanations", as a hypothetical example of the uasge of the word.

Let's take a clear look at David: he was a great man, and greatly loved by God, yet he fouled up every time he "justified himself". He failed flat on his face whenever he become his own problem-solver. He disconected from the Source, in whatever way one can, and looked elsewhere for solutions to many of his adult problems. As a teen, he was very much contrite and listened to God for orders.

I had a post where I discussed God's justice vs. man's justice. John uses this language a lot, and I found it very confusing at first. I had a friend who said something similar to what John had been saying, and things kind of clicked. I can't speak for John, but here's how I understand it.

Our justice is "eye for eye" and "tooth for tooth." It is based on retribution and what we think of when we think of human justice. God's justice is forgiveness, and it is based on mercy and compassion.

That's is in a nutshell. We would set things right by demanding a payment. God sets things right by mercy and compassion. We have trouble understanding that, in spite of the fact that He became one of us to show us.

We just had a sermon on this last week. I am still not sure what to think of it. It seemed that his deffiniton was valid (sin is seperation from God), but his application was a little off (we should not spend any time considering sin or judging because of sin).

Is there a better application?

Sin isn't really separation from God, is it? Isn't that rather a result of sin?

Sin is transgression of the law, which is exceedinly broad (the law, that is). When we insist upon our own will rather than God's will, or insist on putting our own interests above all else, that is sin in its essence as I understand things. This disobedience leads to separation from God, which is tantamount to death.

quote:

---

God is the fountain of life; and when one chooses the service of sin, he separates from God, and thus cuts himself off from life. He is "alienated from the life of God." Christ says, "All they that hate Me love death." Eph. 4:18; Prov. 8:36.(DA 764)

---

This quote is how I see things:
1)One sins.
2)This separates one from God.
3)Which results in death.