top of page
rfholm578

Words: does Anyone know What SIN is Anymore?


Gen 11:1 Now the whole earth had one language and the same words.

 

Apparently, one language was a problem. Arguably, it was a problem of God’s own creation. Even before God created a helper for Adam, God mandated that the first One (Adam) create words and name the animals. And, if one gets to name the words, it follows one gets to define them and determine their usage.  But with words comes power and when that power is cut away from God, the words themselves often became tainted, fraudulent, oppressive, and demonic. Thus, the tower of Babel (Gen 11) with God stepping in to do some reforming. The result?  New and confusing words and the people scatter.

 

Carol Off, a Canadian journalist, former host of As it Happens on CBC radio recently published a book titled A Loss for words: Conversation in an Age of Rage.[1] The book takes a deep dive into the current political climate through specific words that have been weaponized, manipulated and gutted of any original meaning. It is Babel all over again in as much as she uncovers the lie behind that memorable nursery rhyme. “Sticks and Stones may break your bones, but words will never hurt you.” 


To the contrary misaligned words are far more powerful and long-lasting than sticks or stones. For her part Carol Off highlights the words Freedom, Democracy, Truth, Woke, Choice and Taxes. If you are truly interested in navigating the current political climate in North America and to some extent the globe her book is a must read or in my case listen as I bought the audio version.

 

Inspired by her insights and approach I thought it would be interesting instead to do my own dive into biblical words that are prone to misuse and weaponization. Sticks and stones may break your bones, but these words are sometimes licenced to kill. My tentative list includes purity, truth, sacrifice, worship, repentance and church.

 

But I begin with SIN.

 

Oxford English Reference Dictionary

1a. the breaking of divine or moral law, esp. by a conscious act

2. an offence against good taste

 

Harpers Bible Dictionary

1.  That which is in opposition to God’s benevolent purposes for his creation

 

Anchor Bible Diictionary

It takes 19 pages to define sin. In the Old Testament alone there are more than 50 words for sin in biblical Hebrew. They cover cultic, ethical and moral spheres. They include everything from being deficient (disabled), missing a specified goal, (Judges 20:16) offences against God, willful violation of a norm and moral guilt.


I start with sin in part because it seems lately on my facebook feed, I have noticed a proliferation of banners/slogans that say things like, “if it was sin 100 years ago, it’s still sin today. You can’t change the Gospel because it offends this generation.” And they get far more likes than any commentary I generate. 😉

 

But who are they pointing fingers at? I am curious because outside of religious circles the word “sin” has been for some time largely meaningless. In the non-Christian world sin is nothing more than a guilty pleasure as in eating too much. Or it is sometimes a petty nuisance as in “Oh, that’s a sin.” No, if the word is being used today, it is a warning in -house. I remember well the petty legalisms of the 60s and 70s. Depending where one lived or went to church, on the forbidden sin list were places of entertainment, (cinemas) facial jewelry, sports, tattoos, hairstyles, clothing, mixed swimming, petting (not animals in a zoo) and the list went on. As Christians within the broader evangelical tradition, we were identified by the things we did not do. As the saying went, to be Christian was to “not smoke, drink or go with girls who do.” There were enough things on the sin list to keep church altars busy as each week we were given the opportunity to repent of our wicked ways and get resaved.  It would be some time before I realized that this sin shaming was more a weapon of social control and security. It distinguished who was in and who was out. Unfortunately, in those days there was almost nothing said in our circles about sexism, classism, racism or environmental sins of consumption. Sin was almost always a personal not social act.

 

But today, much of the forbidden fruits of my past are gone. So why the sudden interest in sin shaming aimed at church people? Do we want to go back to the 60s and 70s?

 

To be sure today this interest and investment in prohibitive sin has everything to do with the current tension between the church and a fear of a growing acceptance or at least indifference to the LGBTQ+ community. It is a shot across the bow as many church folk worry that should the door be open to the LGBTQ+ community our churches will soon fill with Jesus loving LGBTQ+ people. At this point one can only fantasize about this possibility.. Today the evangelical church is identified more with who it lets in and who is kept out.

 

In their recent book Blessed are the Undone: Testimonies of the Quiet Deconstruction of Faith in Canada, authors Angela Reitsma Bick and Peter Schuurman Angela chronicle the stories of believers who have been undone by the church and have left. The authors note 70 years ago 67 percent of Canadians attended church and that number today is 11 percent and continues to shrink at an alarming rate. So, the authors surveyed a wide range of disillusioned, and disappointed former church attendees and asked what was the impetuous for their leaving. The answers varied but more than 50% of those surveyed stated one of the principle reasons for leaving was “how Christians have treated LGBTQ+ people.[3] The other catalyst was how “American evangelicals helped elect Donald Trump as U.S. President…a man known for his narcissism, greed, racism, sexism, shady business deals, lies, slander and bullying – what Christianity Today magazine later called ‘a stacked deck of gross immorality and ethical incompetence’ that will crash down on the reputation of evangelical religion.”[4] A damning and sobering indictment to be sure.

 

A little background.

 

In the Jewish tradition there are reportedly 613 laws recorded in the Old Testament. 365 negative laws representing every day of the years and 248 positive commandments corresponding to the number of organs, and limbs in the human body (Babylonian Talmud, Makkot 23b) all of which come with an accompanying biblical chapter and verse. Contemporary Rabbi Joseph Telushkin in his volume Biblical Literacy: the Most Important People, Events, and Ideas of the Hebrew Bible, lists all 613 laws in the order that they appear in the Older Testament. It is quite a read. Among the obligations are #80 the obligation to help another person including one’s enemy to unload a burden from his or her animal (Exodus 23:5) The obligation to show respect for the sanctuary is #254 (Lev 19:30) “You shall…venerate my sanctuary.” Rabbi Telelushkin explains in Jewish tradition such respect was shown by not going into the area of the Temple with one’s dirty sandals, dirty feet or change purse, or using it as a shortcut when going somewhere else. With #85 the mandate to rest on the Sabbath and to allow both people and animals who work for you to do so as well (Exodus 23:12) I wonder did this include hens laying eggs on the sabbath. Among the prohibitions were #253 the prohibition against tattooing oneself (Lev 19:28) You shall not incise any marks on yourselves.” And then there was the popular prohibition against hitting one’s parents #48 (Exodus 21:15) The penalty in this case was death. Telushkin offers that Jewish tradition understood this commandment as having been violated only if one struck a parent hard enough to draw blood. Phew.

 

What is my point? The point is the Bible is filled with laws that were culturally dependent, in flux and continually in need of reinterpretation and adjustment. Rabbi Telushkin himself admits of the 613 laws (and he is not counting the New Testament), fewer than 300 can still be practiced.[5]       

 

And so, we return to homosexuality. Could that be relative to culture? Is there room in the church for LGBTQ+ people who love God with all their heart and their neighbour as themself.[6] In my neck of the woods the answer was “no” from one prominent denomination that excised four of their congregations in Manitoba and Northwestern Ontario for being LGBTQ+ affirming. I don’t know all the circumstances behind these decisions, but I doubt if LGBTQ+ people were banging down their church doors to get in, but who knows if more churches start affirming maybe that might happen. If the church doors open maybe the LGBTQ+ will come in. Again, I can only fantasize.

 

While it is impossible in a short blog to do an intensive study of the relevant few texts singling out homosexuality, I will include a brief commentary on Leviticus 18, and 19 which declares in simple terms that male homosexuality is an תועב   abomination. Here I am indebted to biblical Jewish scholars Richard Elliot Friedman and Shawna Dolansky in their book The Bible Now.[7] In a chapter on homosexuality, they point out that the use of the word abomination תועב   is generally not used for forbidden actions that are absolute. “Something that is an abomination in one generation or time period may not be offensive in another – in which case the law may change as people’s perceptions change.”[8] They give several examples. When Joseph tells his brothers when they are before the Pharaoh they must lie about their occupation because to the Egyptians a shepherd is an offensive ( תועב)   thing, it is clear that shepherds are not a תועב   to Israelites. They note this relative use of the word is consistent throughout the Older Testament. In fact, they note the opposite can be true as well. An act or thing that is not a תועב   can become one depending on time and circumstances. They admit while,

 

calling male homosexual acts an abomination תועב   is precisely what makes the biblical text seem so absolutely anti-homosexual and without the possibility of change…it is precisely the fact of abomination that opens the possibility of the law’s change. So, whatever position one takes on this matter, Left or Right, conservative or liberal, one should acknowledge that the law really does forbid homosexual sex – between males but not females. And one should recognize that the biblical prohibition is not one that is eternal and unchanging. The prohibition in the Bible applies only so long as male homosexual acts are perceived to be offensive.[9]

 

Will this be all convincing to those who feel homosexuality has reached the bottom of the sin barrel. Probably not in itself. And since such naysayers have already read enough commentaries rejecting any form of homosexuality, I will encourage reading any of the following books by writers who are within the broader evangelical community.[10] But I digress.

 

My go to definition of sin is that of scholar Susan L. Nelson,

 

Sin is the human response to a creation that feels, both in its possibility and in its limitation less than secure. It reflects an understandable human desire for safe passage, for a way to feel secure in a world that threatens security.
Sin is the human refusal to accept and live within the anxiety-building parameters of the human condition and the practice of securing ourselves in ways that are idolatrous and have grave implications for ourselves, others, and our world.[11]

 

Sin in this case is both personal and corporate. It is what lies behind, sexism, classism, racism, murder, greed, consumption, pride, and narcissism as we seek our own ways to save ourselves, our race, our tastes, and our way of living. Ironically, we keep the stranger and if necessary, God out. The stranger is feared because she has not been created in my image and is a possible threat. We want control of our boundaries, And we keep God out because we are not sure we can trust God.  “Did God really say You shall not eat from any tree in the garden?” (Gen 3:1) We sin, says Nelson when we refuse the vulnerability of our human condition.

 

In this context, sin is the Pharisee praying in the Temple, “God I thank you that I am not like other people: thieves, rogues, adulterers, or even like this tax collector, homosexual/ adulterer/ remarried person - fill in the blank. Remember, in this parable only one leaves the temple justified and it is not the Pharisee.[12] Sin here is the failure to do right toward another human being, particularly the stranger.

 

The question is do we trust God to care for the church, to care for ourselves, to care for the other, to care for our well-being. I started this foray into sin inspired by Carol Off’s analysis of six words one of which was “woke.” She chronicles how the origin of the word woke was intended to raise the awareness of historic and systemic sins that have wittingly and unwittingly been promulgated by political and religious forces. She then explains how in recent times the word has been hijacked to be anti-woke by the same systemic forces in efforts to protect their little kingdoms.

 

If Jesus knew the word, I suspect it was a woke moment when he declared,

 

Blessed are the poor in Spirit

Blessed are those who mourn

Blessed are the meek

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness

Blessed are the merciful

Blessed are the pure in heart

Blessed are the peacemakers (Matthew 5:3-.9)

 

34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[c38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[d40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” (Matthew 22:36-40)

 

That sounds woke to me.

 


 

[1] Carol Off, A Loss for Words: Conversation in the Age of Rage (Random House Canada, 2024)

[3] Angela Reitsma Bick, Peter Schuurman, Blessed are the undone: Testimonies of the Quiet Deconstruction of faith in Canada(New Leaf Network Press 2024):142

[4] Ibid.,149.

[5] Rabbi Joseph Telushkin, Biblical Literacy: The Most Important People, Events and Ideas of the Hebrew Bible (William Morrow and company: New York, 1997): 513-592. Remember these laws are all derivative of the Older Testament, but Latter Rabbis also have this wonderful passage in rabbinical literature. Moses gave Israel 613 commandments. David reduced them to 11. Micah reduced the commandments to three: Do Justice. Love mercy. Walk humbly with your God (Micah 6:8) Isaiah reduced them to two: Keep justice. Do righteousness (Isa.56:1) Habakkuk reduced them to one: The just shall live by faith (Hab.2:4)

[6] 34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[c38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[d40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” It is painful to even ask this question.

[7] Richard Elliott Friedman, Shawna Dolansky, The Bible Now: Homosexuality, Abortion, Women, Death Penalty, Earth (Oxford University Press, 2011). They conclude their chapter by reminding all that these passages are difficult and complicated. Their purpose is to reveal that this is not a matter for amateurs…You cannot just open a Bible – especially in translation – and find an obvious answer…This applies whether you believe the Bible is a revealed text from God or you believe that it is a human composition. P.39.

[8] 36.

[9] 38.

[10] Sylvia C. Keesmaat, Brian Walsh, Romans disarmed, Resisting Empire/Demanding Justice (Baker Publishing: 2019) 321-350, Richard Hayes, https://www.npr.org/2024/09/15/nx-s1-4922708/his-work-was-used-to-exclude-lgbtq-people-from-church-he-argues-the-opposite , Thomas Jay Oord, Tripp Fuller, God After Deconstruction (SacraSage Press, 2024):121-133. Tony Campolo https://www.premierchristianity.com/home/tony-campolo-why-gay-christians-should-be-fully-accepted-into-the-church/3423.article New Testament Scholar Luke Timothy Johnson https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/homosexuality-church-0 David Gushee, https://www.davidpgushee.com/ten-reasons-i-changed-my-mind/ Of course this is only a small sample and others can find many sources that would argue that homosexuality is always sinful under any circumstance. My point here is simply to raise awareness that the issue is more nuanced than many in the church have been led to believe.

[11] Susan L. Nelson, Healing the Broken Heart: Sin, Alienation and the Gift of Grace (Chalice Press, 1997):37.

[12] Luke 18: 9-14

150 views0 comments

Comments


bottom of page