WHATEVER BECAME OF "sin?"

“What is wrong with us? Children are rude to their parents, giant corporations are poisoning the environment, husbands beat their wives, teenager rip off CDs, our elected leaders lie to us. Are all of these people sick? Are they all criminals? And what about the rest of us, who watch and do nothing? Are we all guilty? Now in the major outline for an ethical system for todays world, the author pleads powerfully with us for a return to responsibility for our own actions and for a renewed recognition of sin. Because there is sin and we must face up to it.”

The above quote is actually an overview from the book published back in January of 1973 by the renowned Kansas psychiatrist, Karl Menninger, MD.    Dr. Menninger titled his book, “Whatever Became of Sin?”   Like many books, it was popular in a few circles and then placed on a faraway shelf with no real regard for its actual message.   Let’s put it this way: it failed to move the needle where any measure of social ethics was concerned back in 1970’s America.  

Perhaps historians concerned with our social structure of that period will note that we were then in “the Watergate era” where the politics of “dirty tricks” were taking ahold and “the generation gap” was dividing Americans into positions of doubt and distrust.   And if you, like me, actually lived through those years of the 1970’s affording Dr. Menninger a context for his question about “sin,” then you will probably look back on that period as “the good old days.”   

That’s right.  America back in 1973 was a picture of relative civility. 

I wonder what the good psychiatrist would ask about if he were still alive today?

I wonder if he would not be inclined to write a 2026 edition of that same book and title, “Whatever Became of Sin?”

The Judea-Christian scriptures contain many references to what we translate into English as “sin.”  The Hebrew word, “ha’ta” and the Greek word, “hamartia,” or their alliterations, appear often throughout the Old and New Testaments of the Bible, both meaning in their original languages to act in opposition to the will of God.  What should interest New Testament Christians is that throughout the 4 Gospels, the words for “sin” were used by Jesus primarily when speaking to the religious leaders of his day about their own opposition to the will of God.    To be quite precise, of the 16 times Jesus spoke of sin, he was speaking either to or about his religious leaders 13 times.  

Today, if we hear the word “sin” referenced by Christians, it is usually to quote Jesus speaking to the 3 people who were accused of sin by the religious leaders, admonishing them to “go and sin no more,” or words to that effect.  Such selectivity where these contemporary Christians are concerned is partnered with the accusations of sexual sins(???) Jesus made no reference to at all: namely homosexuality and abortion.    Which is not to say Jesus was not concerned with sexual sin.   He was.  The sin of “lust” or desire for someone else’s sexual partner.    Jesus supported sexual monogamy.   And life, for the Jewish people in general, began at first breath and ended at last breath.   Abortion wasn’t on the radar for any “ha’ta” or “hamartia” at all.   And homosexual monogamy or marriage was never mentioned at all.

Today’s avoidance of the “s” word in some Christian settings may be a backlash against overkill in other Christian settings, but I suggest we take the word back off the proverbial shelf and at least take a look at its place in clarifying why evil is so prominent in today’s world.  And let Jesus be our guide and role model.

The biblical definition for sin as having to do with failure to fulfill God’s commands or will for our lives should in itself justify some conversation.  Jesus was big on the idea of fulfilling God’s commands or will.   He came to fulfill, not to abolish.   And his preaching involved clarifying the commands in the most practical of terms.   “So in everything do to others what you have them to do you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets” (MT 7:12).    “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all you soul and with all your mind.   This is the first and greatest commandment.   And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself.   All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments" (MT 22:37-40.  By implication, if sin is acting in opposition to God’s will, then Jesus suggests rather strongly we had better not mess up the “golden rule” or the “greatest commandments.”   

Do you read the scriptures differently?   Am I failing to grasp the text?   And in the 16 references Jesus makes to “sin” (the Greek word “hamartia” in the Gospels) are there any inconsistencies on his part where acting in opposition to God’s will is concerned?

As I look more carefully into the Bible for evidence of God’s will, I find more references to loving others and not being afraid than any other patterned commands or directives.   Do love.   Do not fear.    It’s a pattern.   Hard to miss.    So in my book, “Love’s Resurrection: its power to roll away fear’s heaviest stone,”  I included an entire chapter on Sin and explored why sin separates us from God’s will.   Fear is an emotion that drives us to demand control over whatever or whomever it is we assume might otherwise hurt us.   We fear our perceived enemies so seek control over them, for instance.   Fear, in turn, robs us of our ability to love.  Love never drives us to demand anything.   Rather it draws us to desire influence with others.  

There may be no better example of a contest between sin and salvation, or between fear and love, than in the biblical conflict between the Jewish religious leaders and Jesus.    They were out to control him and he was out to influence them.   When he spoke of their sin, he took NO control over them but gave only his best attempt at loving influence.    Fear resorts to lies in an effort to assume control while love sticks to the truth, be it accepted or rejected.   

The cross of Jesus Christ is a symbol of sin’s victory in taking control.  The empty tomb, however, is a symbol of salvation’s victory in giving influence.   Control is temporary power.   Influence is permanent (eternal) power.   

Today our world is evidencing a great deal of sin, or fearful control.  Many are deceived by fear’s lies and are placing their faith in its temporary power but their doubt in love’s permanent power.    Love tells the truth and restores freedom with everlasting influence.   Whatever becomes of sin?  It burns itself out like a heat-giving fire while love is resurrected into a light-giving freedom.   "Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8:32).

There’s every likelihood that you would see sin, and even the salvation that follows, differently than I do.   No worries if that’s the case.    But can we perhaps agree that, with all of the evil and injustice and violence in today’s world, it might be time for us to again have the talk?    About sin?   About what it meant to Jesus vs. what it has otherwise meant to the church that has claimed his name over the centuries.   I’m thinking Karl Menninger would prescribe such a treatment even and especially today.