Part 22
There are two approaches to the study of sin:
1. Exegetical: This is the study of the Scripture and setting down a conclusion of what sin is.
2. Speculative: This is the study of man, philosophy and experience and setting down a conclusion of what sin is based on the observations.
Within the speculative area of study we have some systems of thought of which you should be aware.
Humanism: Nothing is sin unless it is wrong for you. No sin — if it's okay for me, I will do it, but if it's wrong for you, don't do it. The idea current in our society, "If it feels good, do it" is a result of this philosophy.
Asceticism: This teaching believes that everything enjoyable is sin. If it feels good then experience tells us it will become a habit, thus sin, and thus enjoyable things are sinful. This led to the self abuse and self denial of some of the Roman Catholic groups in the pre-reformation days.
It may tend to affect Fundamentalist thinking in some of the do and don't lists that are formed. By following a list we will avoid all sin. This is not wrong, for God Himself has lists — the ten commandments for one — but it is really hard to list all the sins that are listed in the Bible. The problem comes when the list contains things which God does not prohibit. The
fundamentalists of the 1950's were very harsh will people that did not conform to their thought of conservative dress. God does not spell out the requirements of dress in the Word, except in some instances. Within all that God says about dress, there is a wide latitude of what is okay.
Now a practical application of this thought for students would run along this line of thinking. I like tests, so I will habitually like to take tests thus tests are sin and I should avoid them. Wrong.
Man Is Basically Good: We by experience see that man is basically good and since we are created in God's image then man must be good. Thus, sin is not a problem except for those that are, say, murderers and fornicators. Some of the Holiness movement set forth this thought, in that they can be perfect in this life — without sin — because the everyday wrongs that they find themselves in are only errors, not sin. The sin of this life is murder, adultery etc.
Question. Do you see a link between any of the speculative systems and what we have seen in the Church in recent years labeled, "Gray Areas?"
Is there not a very clear teaching in the Word about many things and then other areas where it is personal choice. We need to be very careful what we call a gray area. Many gray areas that I have heard about, are gray only because the person speaking has not consulted the whole council of God.
Chafer mentions that when we minimize the doctrine of sin we impoverish redemption. This is quite true and can be seen in some of the ologies of the liberal camp. The Theology of Hope makes redemption and the gospel, the topic of mere "hoping" that something will come to pass to help man's state. The thought of sin is down played by many of the theologies of our day.
Many of the things that God clearly displays as wrong in the Word are held by liberal people to be only different life styles, as in the field of homosexuality, or women's rights, or in the field of abortion.
I believe that as your view of sin lowers so lowers your view of salvation, of Christ's work in salvation, and of God's love in sending Christ.
I like how one of my students once related to this thought. "If we lower our view low enough we will have no need of redemption. This translates
to no need of God." One is left to wonder if this is what happened in Sweden. They entered the area of free love, etc. many years ago. They as a society allowed most anything that the individual wanted to do. Today they have no god. Many do not even know if god exists.
When we emphasis the virtue, or goodness of man, we basically put sin into the background, and call God's Word into question. We cannot hide the fact of sin — indeed, much of mankind displays the fact of sin on a daily, if not an hourly basis.
Some might suggest that sin is so awful and terrible that there is nothing anyone can do. Wrong. Christ did all that was needed and all we have to do is accept it.
God and all that He is, remains Holy no matter what man might say. He is pure, and true holiness. Evil on the other hand is unholiness — pure and simple. Evil is centered in the god of this world, the Devil. All moral values derive themselves from God and His Word. Immoral values derive themselves from evil, unholiness, and Satan.
Without The Word Of God We Would Not Know The True Holiness And The True Evil Of Our World.
GOD/GOOD SATAN/EVIL
GOD SATAN
HOLINESS EVILNESS
PERFECT HOLINESS COMPLETE EVIL
PERFECT LOVE SENT
COMPLETE HATE OPPOSES CHRIST
CHRIST
ULTIMATE TOTAL
ULTIMATE TOTAL
VICTORY
DEFEAT
God's Word teaches that man is totally depraved. Even Christians at times do not react well to God's estimation of man. Many Christians even see that there is good in lost man. These Christians are not looking to the Word for their estimation of man, but probably are looking to man's philosophy.
Sin is viewed in relation to God's standard. If God's standard is rejected then what becomes the standard? Let us consider this question for a few moments. There are systems of right and wrong that have and do exist. Let us consider them.
1. The customs of the culture. If the natives kill and eat human flesh and have common wives then it is okay.
2. What you can get away with must be okay. If it was wrong then God would stop me from doing it. This is the attitude of most criminals in the 90's. They can get away with it so it must be okay. Even if they are caught, the punishment is so light, if indeed there is one, that crime can't be very wrong.
3. What the judicial system allows must be okay. If some people get away with murder then it must be okay.
4. Ultimately Satan's standard will take over — complete evil. We have a couple of examples in recent history. Hitler, the Manson killings and the Jim Jones cult suicide.
These systems do not disprove sin. They only prove that man left without a standard will define his own standard and live by it. The standard that man selects is always considerably lower than the standard of God.
Chafer mentions three major demonstrations of the terribleness of sin. These are worth consideration at this point. Many believers today do not see sin as something terrible.
The Sin Of Satan: When Lucifer turned against God other angels also turned their back on their creator. They all are condemned to the Lake of Fire. That has application, oft times, when we sin, we take others with us, or at least cause others to be tempted. Matthew 25:41, 2 Peter 2:4, Revelation 20:10.
The Sin Of Adam And Eve: From this we have all human suffering and ultimate eternal torment for all who reject Christ. You should remember, however that you would have done the same thing Adam did, had you been there. Don't give Adam a bad rap.
The Fact That Christ Became Sin: 2 Corinthians 5:21 tells us,
"For he hath made him, who knew no sin, to be sin for us, that we
might be made the righteousness of God in him."
These examples of evil show the costliness of sin not only to man himself, but to God as well. He had to send His Son to the cross because of it all. Even if Adam and Eve had had no children after the fall, Christ would have been made sin to satisfy the problem.
Some wonder where did sin come from? Did God create sin — He created Satan? Did Satan create sin? Did Adam and Eve create sin?
We dare not suggest that God created, nor caused sin. This would not be consistent with His character or nature. We can say that God in his foreknowledge allowed, and still allows many things to happen. He allows the lost to sin, He allows the lost to condemn themselves to hell, and He allows Christians to sin. None of these items are A Surprise Party For God. He knew full well what would happen and laid plans from the foundation of the world to bring mankind to the end that He desires. Within that plan is a lot of room for man's free will to mess up his own life.
Some items that you must remember:
1. God is completely holy and perfect. Prior to the creation evil did not exist.
2. God created Angels — Was There Evil Immediately? No, but the possibility was allowed in the creation.
3. Lucifer sinned, and from that point on evil was present. Lucifer was to blame, not God.
It might be asked if prior to Satans sin, was there evil?
Chafer mentions, "Evil may refer to that which, though latent or not expressed, is ever conceivable as the opposite of that which is good." (Chafer, Lewis Sperry; "Systematic Theology"; Dallas, TX: Dallas Seminary Press, 1947, p 228)
There was no outward manifestation of evil before the fall of Satan, however after the creation of angels the latent possibility existed because God chose to allow it.
In Lucifer, was the possibility of evil, but the evil did not bear fruit till he resolved to rebel. Before the first sin, evil was latent. During the first sin, evil became active. After the first sin the evil was latent and ready for action.
Since we know that evil was allowed for, and that sin was a latent possibility before Satan's fall, is there a difference between evil and sin, or are they the same?
Evil is the latent opposition to good, while sin is the active action against God. EVIL is the "possible" that is against God — the character difference between God and others. SIN is the act, or outworking of evil against God.
Yes, there is a difference. Evil carries no penalty in and of itself, yet sin does carry a penalty with it.
Isaiah 45:7 has brought some interest to some people.
"I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil;
I, the Lord, do all these things."
From this some would attempt to build the thought that evil proceeds from God. Not so.
1. The New King James Version as well as the New American Standard Bible and the New International Version give the verse a completely different light. The NKJV translates the word calamity rather than evil.
2. The term "create" is "bara" and it is translated create at times. It at this point however, does not convey the thought of the text to translate it create. (create = Strong's 1254, "cut down" seems to be the thought of the word. It is translated create, as a yield of grain is created when the stocks
are cut down. Cutting down to make peace — opposite is calamity. Create light — darkness is opposite.)
Leupold mentions of this verse and the way the King James translates it, "... the Hebrew would allow for such a translation. But it is not the morally good and the morally evil that are being attributed to Yahweh, but things good and bad are said to lie totally in his power, as far as their physical aspects and consequences are concerned." (Leupold, H.C.; "Exposition Of Isaiah"; Vol. I & II; Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1968, p 122)
God allows and controls evil, but He did not create it.
It would seem that the thought of God being holy and good, would require that the opposite be automatically true and present. Evil is the natural result of the Holiness of God.
God allows sin. Since He did not create it and since He doesn't stop it, then it is required that He has allowed it.
Let us consider why God might have allowed evil to continue:
God Is Proving Man's Rebellion: Since Satan is at the focal point of Job's problems one must wonder if there isn't a divine defense going on. God proving to Satan that something is true. Possibly He desires to prove to the angelic host that man will fail and reject God in all situations of life — all dispensations have ended in judgment except Grace and we are told that it will also end in judgment. (The warring between the principalities and powers etc. may relate to this thought, Ephesians 6:12)
God Has A Purpose That We Are Not Told Of: God has a purpose that is completely foreign to us and we have no information on it. The world progresses as He has decreed it, in His perfection, holiness, and desire. By faith we trust in His perfection, justice and holiness. All is, and progresses as He planned it.
God Gave His Creatures A Free Will: Since free will exists, there must be a possibility of choices. Evil was needed to allow this choice. God is in business of seeking a people for Himself; those that by free choice, chose God over Satan and good over evil. Since the choice between good and evil necessitates evil's presence — God allows it to continue.
God Desired Man To Learn Of Him: To know the holiness of God, we must observe it in relation to its opposite, evil. Thus evil must be allowed as a part of our teaching situation.
God Desired To Demonstrate His Hatred For Evil: This is one of Chafer's suggested reasons for God allowing evil. God will in judgment demonstrate His hate for evil. There is some truth to this point, however He could have done that centuries ago — there is no need for evil to continue.
God Desired To Demonstrate His Grace: The angels had not seen His grace in action. Sin and evil brought the need of Christ and His work, thus a demonstration of God's grace was given.
Chafer suggests that evil is allowed for the instruction of angels. Angels are viewing the situation and are learning from what they observe. There is a problem in this line of thinking. This makes man a pawn in an angelic school of higher learning, and we see God allowing man to suffer for the education of other beings. I don't believe that this is a reason for God allowing evil, but rather it is a side effect, or benefit to man's bent toward evil.
1. Chafer makes a statement that bears repeating. "God Is Himself The Standard Of Holiness And His Character Is That Which Determines The Sinfulness Of Sin." (Systematic Theology, p 228) You might contemplate that sometime and just jot down your reactions to it. You may find that you are in the process of gathering sermon material and ideas.
2. We need in our lives to learn to know God's view of sin. My wife hates bugs. When one violates her airspace there is little that controls her, or the volume of her voice. Take something that you hate, then try to imagine how a Perfectly Holy God must react to sin.
3. We need to learn to know the effect of sin on man. It is not just a little sin now and then, it is a life style, it is a part of the lost man's being. Sin's effect is complete and destructive. We tend to see sin as a little error that we need not be overly concerned with. Confess it and it's gone. True, it is gone, yet its effect may remain.
4. We need to learn to know sin so that we can avoid it. Joseph, when Potaphor's wife grabbed his cloak knew sin, and he knew how to avoid it. He Ran. He Didn't Stand Around Discussing With Himself If This Was Sin Or Not. He Already Knew, So He Ran.
5. We need to be realistic in our view of Holy — Gray Area — Sin. We like to label some things as gray areas. We don't know if it is wrong or right. If we follow this color coding, holiness would be pure white, and sin would be black. What we view as gray today is usually gray because we don't want to view it as black. They call that denial in the mind sciences. God's Word often is interpreted gray when it is really black. If we were to gain God's view of sin, we would see it as black more often than gray.
To illustrate our difficulty in perception, think of the graying of immorality. When it comes to proper relations between men and women it is hard to see God's view, in light of one's own fleshly views. Immorality at one time was pure, unadulterated black, but in our society today, even Christians have grayed the matter.
6. A good study for your future would be to look over Ezekiel 28:11-17 and Isaiah 14:12-17 and list the traits of Satan. You can learn much from knowing your adversary.
7. Some verses that relate, and that may be a blessing to you. Psalm 103:12; Isaiah 38:17; Jeremiah 50:20; Micah 7:19; Colossians 2:13; Hebrews 10:17; 1 John 11:7.
I would like to include a chart that I received from one of my theology professors, Mark Harvey Stranske. I think that if you consider it and study it, you will increase your appreciation for holiness, and your hate for sin.
THE CONSEQUENCES OF SIN
CONSEQUENCE
LOSS INVOLVED RESULTANT
OF SIN
STATE
Defilement Holiness* Impurity
Disorderliness Spiritual discernment
Abnormal
desires**
Paralysis Power Weakness.
Bondage Freedom Slavery
Misery Peace Sorrow
Guilt Righteousness Children of wrath
Death Life Separation and
alienation
* 2 Corinthians 7:1 **1 Corinthians 2:13-14
PERSONAL SIN
Personal Sin — or should I say your sin? I don't sin — Right? Wrong. We all, regrettably, sin.
We want to study the sin of man as he as a person relates to what he is doing — not your, or my personal sin — even though we are studying just that.
We need to understand that sin always has an effect. That effect may become visible to others, or may just become a part of our inner life. Let us consider the personal sin's of some people and consider the effects of that sin.
a. Adam Death, sin nature etc.
b. Cain Abel died
c. Acan Israel defeated
d. Hitler Nations disturbed — many died
e. A pastor Reflects on the church — may hurt the family
f. Parishioner May reflect on the church — may affect the family
What is meant by "personal sin"? Sin committed by a person. Simple isn't it.
When we confess our personal sin, is that all that is in view? Personal sin quite often is the fruit of a larger root of trouble. If you find you are confessing more and more, you should probably think deeper and find out why you are sinning more and more. Obviously you aren't as close to the Lord as you should be. Why?
THE ORIGIN OF SIN
There are some theories of the origin of sin that we need to mention.
Theory of necessity: This theory would suggest that because of man's being created "inferior," he by necessity of that inferiority, will sin. God
has no authority over the situation. He only created man and the inferior being sinned.
Hodge quotes Leibnitz, "these are the two points to be established. First, sin is unavoidable; and secondly, that it is not due to the agency of God. It is unavoidable, because it arises out of the necessary limitation of the creature. The creature cannot be absolutely perfect." (Hodge, Charles; Gross, Edward N. Ed.; "Systematic Theology"; Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988, p 134-135)
Theory Of The Manichaean Philosophy Of Duality: A man by the name of Mani was born around AD 215. He believed in two deities — one good guy and one bad guy. He divided everything into this dualism.
GOOD DEITY BAD DEITY
LIGHT DARK
SOUL BODY
GOOD EVIL
There is definitely no foundation for this theory in the Scriptures.
Theory That God Is The Author Of Sin: Since He is a holy God, this line of thinking is undesirable, and illogical.
Theory Of Sin Arising From Misuse Of Moral Freedom: The sin of Adam arose out of his free choice. He was free to do as he pleased and he abused that freedom. Likewise Satan abused his freedom to choose.
In short, man was given free choice in his living. He chose to abuse that freedom and thus sinned. God did not author it, nor did He create it — He only allowed it.
Do Christians ever misuse their moral freedoms? Obviously. We all sin. We all misuse what God has allowed us. We Are Free To Lie, Or Tell The Truth. We Are Free To Cheat, Or Not To Cheat. We Are Free To Speed, Or Not To Speed. We Are Free To Commit Adultery, Or Not Commit Adultery.
Why do we as Christians misuse our moral freedoms at times? Did the devil make me do it? Do we do it because we want to?
Some might suggest that we can't, not sin, due to the old nature. We will consider the old nature in further studies, but let is suffice at this point to say that God has provided all that is needed for us Not To Sin. We do not have to sin, we do it because we choose to. We do it because we mentally make a choice to disobey.
Andy Rooney on one of his commentaries gave a perfect report on this in 1987. He related how the criminal isn't at fault — that the environment is the cause of all the troubles. He spent quite a length of time passing the buck — no one is responsible for anything in our society today. He ended with — some won't like what I've said today but that's all right — it's not my fault — the devil made me do it. (A ruff quote.)
When we sin, at times we are in times of great pressure. It may be very hard to say no, but that is just what God asks that we do. Say No To The Temptation.
When in television repair work I made a change in circuitry on a television set at the customers request. I had missed one wire that I could not see — The mistake ruined the picture tube. I told the boss of my goof. He said call the customer and tell him that we were hung up on parts and that it would be a few days. That way we could get a new picture tube and put it in and not tell the customer what had happened. I had just cost my boss $150 and he asked me to lie to a customer. Believe Me I Was Tempted To Tell That Little Small Itse Bitse Teeny Weeny Almost Not A Lie, Lie.
I with much fear ask the boss if it might not be better to tell the customer the truth — that I had goofed and that we wanted to make it right. He agreed, so I called the customer. The customer was very appreciative of our honesty.
God is not the author of sin, nor is He the creator of sin. He allowed sin to come along, and He now allows sin to continue. He will, however see to it that sin stops, and that evil is finally and eternally contained in the lake of fire.
Chafer goes on to suggest three distinct beginnings of sin. I will list them for your further thought. Eternal anticipation in the foreknowledge of God.
Its concrete enactment in heaven by an unfallen angel. Its concrete enactment on earth by an unfallen human being.
He also goes on to state that God foreknew sin and that by the creation of angels and men He allowed the possibility of it to come into existence. This is a valid concept, based on Revelation 13:8. The verse mentions,
"And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."
To plan from the foundation of the world for redemption, God had to have had foreknowledge of the need for redemption, thus He had to have foreknown evil and sin.
Does sin hurt God? Certainly. It is a disregard for His rights to rule and expect obedience. It is the breaking of His law, which is an afront to Him. It also caused damage to His property, the creation.
If Satan sinned first, and set his own fate, what was Satan's purpose in tempting Adam and Eve? Along with the fact that he was rejecting God and His authority over him, he was attempting to begin to set up his "world system." He could not do this until Adam and Eve fell, for he desired to control the world, and God told Adam that he would have dominion over it.
Chafer mentions three major proofs of the awful sinfulness of Personal sin. More to the point these show the awful penalty for that sinfulness.
a. Angelic Proof: Jude six mentions the fallen angels and their wait for final judgment. This judgment speaks to the sin of their past. Revelation 12:9 mentions that the fallen angelic host was cast out with the Devil due to their sin.
b. Human Proof: Romans 5:12 depicts Adams sin being passed on to all of mankind. His one personal sin had far reaching ramifications for everyone. Romans 5:19 is the good news — Christ will set things right. "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous."
c. Divine Proof: God's estimation is that sin is terrible. It caused man's fall, and caused the death of His Son. Romans 5:15,19 mention that by one we are dead and that one being Adam, and by one we are made alive and that one being Christ. The result of Adam's one sin was the total depravity of all of mankind. The reason for that one sin was to be independent of God, or to act independently. His sin was an act of the will, as is every single one of our own sins. We consider and chose to do those things that we ought not do.
By allowing the Spirit to control our lives we need not consider these wrong things for we will be considering God's "right" things.
We talk of the sin nature, that nature of man that moves him toward evil. It is always evil, whether it is active or not. It is always sinful. It is by nature sinful.
Any personal sin affects God in two ways. It is a sin against Him personally, and it is a sin against His commands. It is bad enough that we disobey what He says, but to cause offense to Him personally is much worse.
When I was a teenager, I received a traffic ticket or two. Breaking the law was breaking my father's wishes, for he was the County Treasurer, and he had to keep a good image before the community. When I broke the speed limit, I knew I was going against what he wanted. When I was caught, I still wasn't too concerned about the fact that I had broken his wishes. When he found out about what I had done — That Was Very Hurtful To Me, For I Knew That I Had Hurt Him Deeply.
May we consider our own personal sin? Breaking that little tenny weenny speed limit doesn't bother you, Except That It Bothers Your Heavenly Father.
Sin always has a price. That price costs us, and it costs God. The price of salvation and forgiveness was very great for God. It was the price of sending His Son to the cross. The price had to be met, because if God had overlooked sin, He would have been disregarding His own holy character.
Sin must be dealt with. He Could Not Overlook It Or Sweep It Under The Carpet.
Sin will be judged according to His holy character. No matter how small, no matter how innocent, no matter how insignificant the sin, it will be set beside His Holy Character for comparison, and if it does not compare, And Not One Will, it will be judged.
Judgment in reference to the lost: They will receive a variety of punishment, yet it is all torment, and separation for eternity from God based on their life.
Judgment in reference to the saved: They will receive, or not receive reward, based on their life and works. Sin will not be an issue for the redeemed, for Christ has cared for all of our sins. There is the possibility that we will be held accountable for those sins that we have not confessed. In the person that has not been walking with the Lord, there would be a large backlog of sin that would need to be considered. Just how this is cared for we aren't told.
1. God uses the term, "I will" in relation to his promises to man in the Scripture. It should be of significance to us to consider the statements of Lucifer when he decided to take a dive into sin. (Isaiah 14:12ff)
"I will ascend into heaven." "I will exalt my throne above the stars of God" "I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation" "I will ascend above the heights of the clouds" "I will be like the most high"
Are there any areas of your own life in which the "I will's" are coming from your direction rather than God's? I trust that the only "I will"s" that are in your life are those you read in God's promises to you, and your response to them.
2. Do you see the minimizing of sin in our own day? How? Do you hear things like: We all sin. We all have our problems. If you feel it is okay then you can do it. Well if he does it now and then, it must be okay.
The ease of 1 John 1:9 tends to minimize our view of sin. The context of this verse is five chapters of Holy living. When you tumble into one sin
then 1 John 1:9 is an easy step back to the Lord. In a society that does not consider Holy Living as a high priority, we need to get serious before looking to the promise of 1 John 1:9
With our lowered view of sin it is not surprising that we see Christian business men living by the ethics of the world in their businesses.
We need God's view of sin. When we sin we are an afront to God. We Become Totally Unlike Him. How does that relate to our being conformed to the image of Christ? In essence when we sin we are shaking our fist in His face and telling Him to get lost.
It is only grace that moves Him to continue to put up with our ungodly cycle of, sin — 1 John 1:9 — sin — 1 John 1:9 — sin — 1 John 1:9 — sin.
3. I trust that you will consider your own lifestyle of Holiness Vs. Sin, and go before the Lord to see if there are any changes that you need to make.
4. Consider the terms that the Word uses for sin, and see if you don't obtain a better picture of what it really is. Trespass, transgression, evil, defeat, ignorance, lawlessness, disobedience, ungodliness, unrighteousness.
5. I read something once concerning sin, and I would like to adapt the thought for our conclusion. Concerning sin:
We call it an accident — He calls it an abomination.
We call it a blunder — He calls it blindness.
We call it a chance — He calls it a choice.
We call it a defect — He calls it a disease.
We call it an error — He calls it enmity.
We call it fascination — He calls it fatality.
We call it luxury — He calls it leprosy.
We call it liberty — He calls it lawlessness.
We call it a trifle — He calls it tragedy.
We call it a mistake — He calls it madness.
We call it a weakness — He calls it willfulness.
SIN IS SIN NO MATTER WHAT WE CALL IT. WE MUST GO BY
HIS DEFINITION, NOT OUR'S, OR THE WORLD'S.
THE NATURE OF SIN
AND FORGIVENESS
My father was a very hard worker. He never drank more than one or two drinks in a day, and that very infrequently. He smoked once or twice a month. He did good things for people every chance he was given. He belonged to a service club that did nice things for people. Was he a Christian? You don't know do you.
A friend I knew many years ago drank heavily frequently. He led the church choir. He was a very big business man. He prayed in prayer meeting. He didn't mind lying in his business. He wasn't above shady business practices. Was he a Christian? You don't know do you.
So, just how can we possibly judge a person to determine whether they are a believer or not? Some suggestions of the past.
1. The Law: The law was given for us to follow and if we don't then we are not believers.
The law is a set of regulations. This has nothing to do with a persons spiritual state, eternally speaking. The obedience to the law, may or may not give hint to the person's real spiritual state. A lost person can attempt to keep the law, just as well as the saved person.
2. Works: Works may or may not give indication of a persons state eternally. A truly born again person should automatically desire to walk according to all that he knows. On the other hand a lost person can do many things that appear to be good works yet be lost.
Then there is the question of the born again person that does not know any of the Word, who is living in adultery and drunkenness. The outward appearance would indicate that he is not a believer, yet inwardly he is.
3. Life: If a person lives a good life then surely we can say that he is saved. Not necessarily. A lost person that has a good high moral value can lead a very "good" life.
We cannot know from the outward what is true.
There are things like, following the teachings of Scripture, works, and good living that will be indicators of a heavenly eternal destination, but not always. Normally Over A Long Period Of Time This Wills Prove Out.
On the other hand good Christians at times take a wrong turn and end up in drastic sin. That does not mean that they are not born again. When we were in the northwest, a pastor fell into sexual problems with one of the church women. A one time slip into sin. Even with this sin his salvation is sure, and he will continue with the Lord. Continuing in the ministry was out of the question, but he is eternally secure. He was forgiven as soon as he sought forgiveness.
The conscience is one method that may be an indicator of a person's salvation. This is an inward indicator that only the person can know. A person that hurts in his inner being when he does wrong is probably a believer. A lost person will sin but normally not have the inner hurt. They may have guilt etc. but they will not be pained knowing they have wronged God.
The question of sinless perfection has been argued for many years. There are those that suggest that this is to be the state of the believer. They oft times redefine sin slightly, so that the small — normal — insignificant sins aren't really sin, but only mistakes. Sin is relegated to the bigger items of killing, adultery, rape, etc.
Sinless perfection? For a time. Maybe even a long time. However, they cannot be sinless to the point of perfection. We cannot from a point in our lives cease to sin. We always seem to find a good rationalization every now and then to fall into trouble.
Having said this, we need to understand that holiness is the standard set before us. We should be very close to being sinless. In Luke where he mentions the parents of John the Baptist we see in Chapter one verse six that, "...they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord, blameless." Not Sinlessly Perfect. But they were living a very clean and pure life.
First John is quite plain that the believer is not one that is into sin on a regular basis. His thought is that the believer is basically without sin, but if he does fall now and then, 1 John 1:9 is there for his use.
1 John 1:10 is plain that we cannot be without sin. "If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us." thus, sinless perfection is not a possibility.
One final passage to show how sinless we should be is 2 Peter.
"According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that [pertain] unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:" (2 Peter 1:3)
Notice that He has given us ".....all things that pertain unto life and godliness....." In salvation or eternal life, he has provided all things that are required. In godliness he has provided all things that are required. We have everything that we need to say no to sin on a continual basis. That Puts The Monkey On Our Own Back, Not The Devil Or The Old Nature. We Sin Because We Make A Conscious Decision To Do So.
Another question that you can think about is this. If man and creation were here, but God did not exist, would there be sin? No, for we have sinned, or missed the mark of God. If there is no God then there is no mark to aim for — no standard set to which we must measure ourselves.
Let us move now, from sin and sinlessness to forgiveness. Indeed, the existence of forgiveness, requires that the possibility of sin exist. If there were no sin, there would be no need for forgiveness.
WHAT IS DIVINE FORGIVENESS?
Vine mentions, "to bestow a favour unconditionally,"
Forgive is a translation of two words both of which have the idea of sending away. It may be similar to when a faculty member of a school dismisses class. He is sending the students out, or away. Release is also a word that carries the idea.
"As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us." Psalm 10312
We need to remember that God does not forgive because He is a big softy. He is Holy and His judgment is sure and proper. He can only forgive when the proper situation is arrived at. Christ's work on the cross allows God to forgive all sin based on the offering of the perfect sacrifice.
In the Old Testament times the animal sacrifice was a covering, looking forward to the perfect sacrifice which would take away the sin. The saint of that age was not righteous in their standing before God. God just could not see their sin, due to the sacrifice covering their sin. They could not be regenerated, nor any of those things that are related to salvation in this age. How could they? The perfect sacrifice had not been offered yet.
The saint, when dead was carried to a holding area for saints called sheol. The lost dead were in the same area, yet in a different compartment. Luke sixteen describes sheol nicely.
When Christ had offered Himself, then the Old Testament saints could be in the Lord's presence, so they were taken with Christ to the heavenly scene of God.
We might add at this point that the sin of the Old Testament saint was much more understandable, because they had not been given "all things that pertain unto life and godliness. . . ." They did not have the new nature, they did not have the Holy Spirit within, so how could they live up to the righteous standard that we will be held to? They could not. That is why David could be the apple of God's eye, even though he had sinned so deeply. That is why the patriarchs were considered godly men, even though some of them lived in adultery with their multiple wives.
Today we look back to the perfect sacrifice of the Lord. The sacrifice of Jesus was large enough for every single sin of all of mankind both past, present, and future. It is sufficient for any amount and any depth that might come to man.
That is the divine side. Man's side is to sin as little as possible.
Thus, divine forgiveness is that act of God whereby He eliminates our wrongdoing, via the death of Christ. He wipes the slate clean and the sins are completely gone. Not covered, as in the Old Testament, but gone — as the chorus ending goes, G-O-N-EGONE.
WHAT THEN IS HUMAN FORGIVENESS?
Is it forgive and forget? A relative of mine, in the early 60's, pulled a tax trick on me that cost us $300. The incident came up via his mother a few years ago that I didn't like him and that as a Christian I should have forgiven him. I had — in the early 60's. I hadn't remembered the incident for many years, until she brought it up. I had forgiven, yet memory is there for life. If you remember, and remember and remember to the point of dwelling, I would question the forgiveness. If you don't think about it, and consider it, and mull it over, then the forgiveness is probably complete.
Forgive and forget? No. We can forgive but not forget. We will remember as long as we have life. Our memory banks aren't as easily wiped clean as a computers.
When we forgive, there needs to be a change of heart from wrong feelings to right feelings. The memory tends to erase the bad part of the situation over a few years leaving only a recollection of the situation. When the person remembers with all those hateful feelings, then there has been no forgiveness.
Forgiving requires that we not have bad, or vengeful feelings toward the other party or parties. If there are bad feelings then there probably is no proper forgiveness. I have wondered if there is any true, real forgiveness in the Jewish community over the German holocaust. I realize that forgiveness would be terribly difficult in that situation, however it is the trait of the godly person. In an interview of the son of a man that had been convicted of being a German war criminal the son related the scene in the court room when his father was sentenced to death. He stated that the entire crowd gave a standing ovation, and was singing and chanting in joy. One young Jewish man came up to the son and pointed his finger at the son, saying, "And you should be the one to kill him."
Joy over a man, a being created in the image of God, is not right. In this case it would seem that the hate of one generation had passed to the next. The young Jew, it would seem, was suffering because of the former generations hate and lack of forgiveness.
Christ forgave his murderers before He even died.
We know that there is divine forgiveness for the sin of man. The old phrase, "How bad is it." comes to mind when I consider sin. Yes, man sins, but just how bad is it. Let us consider the sinfulness of man.
THE SINFULNESS OF MAN
Since Christ died for the entire world, and since His death cared for all sin then we might deduce that sin is universal in man. This thought is specifically taught in scripture as well. "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one;" (Romans 3:10). This is a quote from Psalm 14:1-3,
"The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. The Lord looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one."
(This same thought is seen in Psalm 53:1-3.)
Romans 3:9 mentions that, ". . .they are all under sin;" Galatians 3:22 tells us, "But the scripture hath concluded all under sin," Eccl. 7:20 seems to be fairly plain on the subject as well, "For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not."
I think that from these texts we might deduce that universally speaking, man is a sinful being.
TERMS RELATING TO SIN
Transgression: The basic meaning of the terms used is to go over, or go above, or go aside, according to Vine (Vine, W. E.; "An Expository Dictionary Of New Testament Words"; Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Co). We might say it is being outside God's boundaries. The idea seems to be a deliberate act of stepping out of bounds. One of our kids was quite stubborn when very small. We once told her not to hit at her mother. She looked mom square in the eye and hit her again. That was a deliberate stepping out of bounds.
It seems to have the idea of overstepping the boundaries. You're violating my airspace might be part of the idea.
When I am trying to do something with the computer and it won't do what I want it to do, I at times give up and turn it off. I deliberately step out of its bounds.
Iniquity: Vine uses "lawlessness" and "wickedness" to define iniquity. Unger suggests "without law". Something completely wrong. When the power goes off while I am on the computer there is total catastrophe. Things Are Completely Wrong....
Error: (What my computer says if I do things wrong.) That which ignores, or goes away from God. Vine indicates that this is not a direct leaving of the path, but possibly more like driving down the road, loosing your attentiveness, and wandering off onto the shoulder.
I mentioned that Error is what my computer tells me at times. At times, I am typing away and decide to do something and just poke a wrong key, creating all kinds of problems. I wonder off into trouble. At times when at the computer, I go to sleep while typing into the Word Processor. When I wake up, I find garbage on the screen. I keep typing, though completely unconscious. I wonder out of the boundaries.
Sin: Missing the mark. This Greek term is used in classical Greek of a spear missing the target. The target is set — the law, or God's command, and we don't live up to them. We have missed the mark. It may be by choice, or by not watching what we are doing, or by omission.
When I find that there is something that I need to do on the computer and I don't know how, I go to the computer book that has all the answers. I read the book and think that I understand what it says to do. I then go to the computer and do something the opposite of what the book told me to do. Not wise. I miss the mark set.
Wickedness: This seems to be a state rather than an action. A sinner is wicked. That state may well be an active state, a continuing state. The term is also translated "bad". Because I turn my back on the computer book I am in a state of not being able to do the task I desire to do.
Evil: Something wrong, or against God. Again this is not an action. It describes the character of a person if he is sinning. It is also the source of sin.
I am going to shift the illustration from myself to the computer. When it goes into what is called a lockup, or crash, it is completely useless. You can poke keys, you can get frustrated, you can try all sorts of things, but nothing will help. Evil is very similar. The only way to get out of a lock up is to shut down the power and start over. Evil is complete. The only remedy is to start over and that is what God does with us. He gives the lost a new nature.
Unbelief: One idea of the term is that of not believing what God states. Another idea is the thought of disobedience. Certainly unbelief will bring a person to disobedience. The gentiles have opportunity with God because of the "unbelief" of the Jewish people.
Remember when I go to the book and read the instructions, and go back to the computer. If I don't believe the book and its instructions I will do my own thing and ignore the instructions.
All computer books tell you to save your material often, just in case of power failures, power troubles, kids hitting the wrong switch etc., yet many computer operators do not save often. Why? Because they don't believe that anything will ever happen to them. When the administration building was being remodeled at the school where I taught, one of the workmen flipped a breaker to see what lights would go out. Yes, it was my office, and I hadn't backed up my information for several hours. Unbelief can cost.
Disobedience: Disobedience is the willingness to be led in ways of truth. It has the idea that if we don't believe, then we will not do as truth dictates, and as a result, become disobedient. This is the state of not following those instructions in the computer book.
Lawlessness: Being without the law. This assumes that you have the law available to you, and you have not taken it — you have decided not to follow it.
Lawless would be the situation in which I refused to read the manual on the computer, and was trying to get it to do something. I would be lawless and the computer would be completely unresponsive.
The illustrations are really inadequate, yet they serve to help us understand the uselessness of a person involved in sin. The computer is a device which demands that you do according to Its Rules And Not Your Rules. God has His rules, and if we fail to follow them then there is little He can do except follow the standards that He has set.
Is sin always an outward act? No. We can sin in our minds. Christ mentioned this, "But I say unto you that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." Matthew 5:28
Sin can also be an omission of an act that God asked us to do. This situation would not require others to know of our sin.
Sin is not always within. It can be against God, another person or yourself.
Against God: God tells us that we are not to covet. When we covet we sin against God. We sin against God anytime we decide to go against Him.
Against Another Person: When God leads us to give to a missionary, or witness to a lost person, and we refrain, we sin against God as well as that person. That person is hurt by your omission.
Against Yourself: God tells us not to abuse our bodies. A Christian places himself into a place where he is in danger. If the person is hurt then he has sinned against himself. Example: Someone offers to let you try drugs. You "try" it and you are hooked. The physical, mental, financial and eternal damage is against you. (Eternal in that you are sidetracked — out of God's will and not interested in things that will bring you eternal reward.)
The believer should consider his activities in relation to this. Just how much danger should we place ourselves in when we are enjoying recreation. Should we put our physical being in danger? I suspect that the believer that places himself in danger and is injured to the point of being handicapped, will suffer loss in the eternal reward that they could have had.
I heard two crack users on the news that mentioned that soon after starting on crack there were no outside interests. Crack was their total life. Family
was out. Drinking was out. Friend's were out. Both even mentioned that they weren't even interested in sex. Sin can cost us everything.
A good Biblical illustration of all three of these in one case of sin is David's sin with Bathsheba. It was a sin against God as David mentions in Psalm 51:4, "Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight...." He sinned against another in that he had Uriah, the husband of Bathsheba, killed, and he sinned against himself. He caused himself great trouble and pain — his child died.
When I was in the navy, I had opportunity at one point to be division head in the Electronics department. I was told that the captain was going ashore and that they needed a radio in his boat. I called the shop and told one of the men that I wanted him to go put a radio into the captain's boat. I assumed he would do it. An hour later I received a call wanting to know why there wasn't a radio in the boat. I called the young man and asked him why he hadn't done the job. His answer was very simple, "I didn't want to." His I didn't want to was not unlike Adam and Eve's I WILL EAT attitude.
The moral of this story might relate to the parenting side of your nature. God disciplines His erring believers and we as believers should discipline the children in our families.
When sin is discussed, quite often the question of the unpardonable sin arises? (Matthew 12:31-32) The unpardonable sin has been described in many ways. Many believers over the centuries have worried about committing the sin. This fear arises from not knowing what it is.
The unpardonable sin is the sin of rejecting Christ. In the context it was attributing the miracles to the power of the Devil, but behind that charge was the fact that the Jews were rejecting Christ and His deity. Anyone that rejects Christ is close to the unpardonable sin. There may be multiple opportunities, yet when the person finally and completely rejects Christ his eternal punishment is assured.
In relation to salvation/forgiveness/etc. eternal security comes into the picture. Those that believe that they can loose their salvation each time they sin, believe that when they are forgiven they are again saved.
A couple of questions: Is salvation the same as forgiveness? Does forgiveness automatically bring salvation?
Salvation is a series of thirty or so things that happen instantly. When we sin and seek forgiveness only one thing happens. God forgives us of that sin. We are not rebaptized into the body, we are not rejustified, we are not re-regenerated, we are not readopted, and we are not re-reborn, etc.
Once God has brought the person into His family, there is nothing that changes that relationship. Personal sin from that point on is forgiven, but salvation is not an issue. We must remember that salvation deals with several items. There is the sin nature, there is the past personal sin, and there is the eternal death. These were cared for in salvation. Forgiveness, there after, relates to personal sin only.
In relation to the Old Testament law, and the people under it, how did they gain forgiveness? They took sacrifices and their blood "Covered" The Sin so that the Lord could forgive the person. This also allowed for fellowship with God. That sin remained covered until the cross when the judgment of those sins was placed upon Christ. This is why Abraham's bosom, or the good side of Sheol was there. To contain the righteous until Christ could usher them into God's presence through His blood offered in the heavenly tabernacle.
1. As we go into new churches, we need to understand that dead and problematic churches are the way they are, most likely because of sin in the membership. If the membership is living in sin, there is no way that God can be working in and through them.
2. As we are going into churches, we need to understand those nasty things people say and gossip about are stemming from sin.
3. Take time to read Isaiah 1:1-9. This is God's view of a sinful people. The better I understand sin from God's perspective the more gracious he automatically seems to become.
We cannot understand God's view of sin, for we are not infinite, but we need to strive to see it as clearly as we can.
4. Because we have men like David Brainard that were so terribly introspective about themselves, we often say because of their overemphasis on self examination, we will not do any of it. He seemed to thrive on looking for his worst parts, and his sin. We tend to go the other way and not look at all, to our inward beings.
In a devotional by Spurgeon we read, "It will be humbling and profitable for us to pause awhile and see this sad sight. The iniquities of our public worship, its hypocrisy, formality, lukewarmness, irreverence, wandering of heart and forgetfulness of God, what a full measure have we there. Our work for the Lord, its emulation, selfishness, carelessness, slackness, unbelief, what a mass of defilement is there. Our private devotions, their laxity, coldness, neglect, sleepiness, and vanity, what a mountain of dead earth is there." (Spurgeon, Charles H.; "Morning And Evening"; Mclean, Virginia: Macdonald Publishing Co., p 16 — Jan 8)
We need to ask God to teach us how vile sin is.
Martin Luther said, "The recognition of sin is the beginning of salvation." True we are saved, but do we really know the real joy of our salvation?
Because we today diminish sin so much can we really know the truth of what we were saved from?
FROM DIARY OF DAVID BRAINARD.
"At times I grew remiss and sluggish, without any great convictions of sin, for a considerable time together; but after such a season convictions sometimes seized me more violently. One night I remember in particular, when I was walking solitarily abroad, I had opened to me such a view of my sin that I feared the ground would cleave assunder under my feet, and become my grave; and send my soul quick into hell, before I could get home. Thought I was forced to go to bed, lest my distress should be discovered by others, which I much feared; yet I scarcely durst sleep at all, for I thought it would be a great wonder if I should be out of hell in the morning. And though my distress was sometimes thus great, yet I greatly dreaded the loss of convictions, and returning back to a state of carnal security, and to my former insensibility of
impending wrath; which made me exceedingly exact in my behaviour, lest I should stifle the motions of God's Holy Spirit. When at any time I took a view of my convictions, and thought the degree of them to be considerable, I was wont to trust in them; but this confidence, and the hope of soon making some notable advances toward deliverance, would ease my mind, and I soon became more senseless and remiss. Again, when I discerned my convictions to grow languid, and thought them about to leave me, this immediately alarmed and distressed me. Sometimes I expected to take a large step, and get very far toward conversion, by some particular opportunity or means I had in view."
That man knew what sin was, he knew how to view sin, he knew what God thought of sin, we should have such a reality about the sin in our lives.
5. We have mentioned that sin is really only a surface action due to the real problem, or root cause down below. I personally believe that at times we deal with the surface and forget about the root.
Can you think of any examples of this in the church today? Divorce and remarriage is the outward sin activity.
We are finding ways to work with divorcees.
We are finding ways to help the divorcees.
We are finding ways to put them to work in the church.
BUT
Are we dealing with the root? The root is that we aren't teaching a proper concept of marriage. The root is that we aren't teaching a proper concept of divorce. The root is that we aren't teaching a proper concept of remarriage. When we deal with the roots, we will eliminate most of the outward manifestations of it.
Outward sin in the church MUST be dealt with. We have churches where adultery is going unpunished. We have people hopping from church to church so that they can tickle their ears. We have people leaving their
spirituality at the church door when they leave, and assuming it again Sunday morning when they return.
The problems, must be met, if the church is ever again to be the light of the Gospel to this nation. We MUST be the salt of the earth, or we will be discarded.
I trust that the realization of the terribleness of sin might begin to come to the reader. I trust that God will assist the reader in finding His perception of sin, rather than the perception of the world, or the humanist. Sin Is Missing The Mark Of God, not something that we decide in our own minds.
Some references that might help in your further study: Hebrews 3:13; Hebrews 11:25; Hebrews 12:4.
THE SIN NATURE
The sin nature is that part of us that came from Adam. It is also called: Adamic nature, Inborn sin, Original sin, and Old man.
Calvin held that God created Adam perfectly and that his nature was perfect. Adam sinned, becoming another nature which was a corruption of his original nature. Thus he would have held that we only have one nature pre-salvation. I do not know if he held to one or two after salvation. To be consistent with what has been said, it would seem that even after salvation, the nature of man would be singular — a new nature.
As the normal two nature thinking goes the Bible deals with the cause of our outward sin, and that cause being our inward nature, or Adamic nature. In short, if we as believers have sin, it is because we have a new and an old nature that war. When we don't war properly the old wins out and we sin. On the other hand is we war correctly, the new nature will win out and we will not sin.
Now, to some that makes God a God that gives us a new nature that is barely able to cope with our old nature, and that He may not be the powerful God that He claims to be. On the other hand, if he has given us a new nature that is consistent with Himself, and has changed our very being into something new, then we have the power to say no to sin. That is a God that I can deal with.
There are systems of religion that function to control and eradicate the outward sin, but never deal with the inner problem. Any system of works usually is dealing with the outward sin, and not the inner problem.
To a point some past fundamentalists did this, in that they mean mouth the outward on a regular basis, but never concentrate on the inward. This is changing and is not very common anymore.
The liberal movements also deal with the way you live your life and seldom deal with the inner man. A friend of mine witnessed to a Methodist pastor one time and mentioned being born again. The minister stated,
"Don't try to talk to me about that deep stuff. I don't understand that stuff."
Let us consider some questions concerning the natures.
Can the Adamic nature be eradicated? Chafer mentions that it cannot be. Others believe that it can be put down on a daily, moment by moment basis. Others believe that the believer has only one nature and that, being the new nature, from God. We will consider some of these thoughts.
There are some in our day that feel that we need to kill the old nature daily — that it is a daily duty of a believer to see to it that God put's down the insurrection that comes up every single day. I was once told of a president at a Canadian Bible Institute that felt this way, and one day in chapel the speaker had just stepped to the pulpit and the president yelled as loud as he could — "Kill Him Lord." In short put that old nature to rest so he can preach properly. At times this thought has been affectionately termed "slain in the spirit."
Because we are totally depraved and because all believers tend toward evil naturally, Chafer seems to draw the conclusion that the old nature cannot be eradicated.
Let's consider the idea that the nature of man was injured in the fall and that his nature is similar to Adam's post-fall.
This position would hold that Adam's understanding and conscience were perfect prior to sin, yet after sin they are injured. I am sure the Calvinist would say that the injury was total and that man was left with no understanding, and that his conscience is useless. They would also feel that man's will was turned Completely away from God and toward sin. The result of the three changes is that man is totally void of any proper thoughts toward God.
The question is this. Can you buy all three of these? The understanding of man seems to have been affected, we could agree. The Scriptures tell us that the lost cannot understand the things of the Lord. Indeed, the conscience and will are damaged in lost man as well. So, yes, we can go along with this definition of man post-fall. Some might question the Completeness of this injury. They might suggest that our understanding is
injured, but not so badly that we can't respond to the natural and inward revelation of God to man.
It seems that if man is responsible to God for the revelation given, then there must be some amount of understanding left. This does not detract from the thought of total depravity. Man is always, in his lost state, completely without help, and completely bent on wrong.
This should not surprise anyone, for we have already mentioned that man is totally depraved. Not partially depraved but totally depraved. All parts of man were affected by the fall.
For Your Review, Read The Following On Total Depravity: Genesis 8:21, Psalm 14:2-3, Psalm 51:5, Isaiah 42:7, Jeremiah 17:9, John 3:6, Romans 1:28-29, Romans 5:12, Galatians 5:17-21, Ephesians 2:3, and 1 Timothy 4:2.
Is man lost by nature? We will see some verses that would indicate that man is not lost eternally because of his nature. In Adam we were a race that were lost by nature, however Christ corrected that problem, and we will see that the lost are now lost because of their rejection of Christ's work on their behalf. He nailed all sin to the cross, and made us as if Adam had never sinned. We are as Adam was before the fall in our post-salvation state.
Remember 2 Peter 1:3-4? It mentioned that he gave us all things pertaining to life and godliness. ALL things are available for salvation. The sin nature of all of mankind was cared for at the cross.
This may sound strange, however if you take most of the thinking current today about the work of the cross to its logical end, you will have to agree with the statement.
Is man lost because he has sinned? No. He is lost because he has rejected Christ, not because I stole that penny tootsie roll from the dime store in 1948.
What did Christ die on the cross for? The sins of the world. What sin is involved in this death for the sins of the world? John 1:29, "The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." Notice the singular "sin." Both
the New American Standard Bible and the New International Version follow this translation. Even the Living Bible uses the singular sin.
Just what "sin" means is up for the person to decide. I would agree with Chafer that this is speaking of sin personal, sin nature and any other type of sin you want to include. Let me quote Chafer, "The sin of the world is taken away in the sense that by Christ's threefold accomplishment in His death every hindrance is removed which restrained God from the saving of even the chief of sinners." (Chafer, Lewis Sperry; "Systematic Theology"; Dallas, TX: Dallas Seminary Press, 1947, Vol V, p 191.)
His threefold work involved Redemption, Reconciliation, and Propitiation. Jot that down for now and we will explain those terms fully in coming sessions. Let it suffice the mind at this point, to say that Christ died for all of the sin in the world, indeed, all types of the sin of the world.
Take Chafer's quote to its logical end and you find that the person that goes to hell does so because he rejected Christ, or in the case of those that have never heard of Christ — rejected the revelation that they had. Thus, we can take one step further and say that Christ's work on the cross makes the believer as Adam was before he sinned.
Christ died for the sin nature as well as for personal sin. He removed all barriers between The Father and the sinner. The sinner has only to accept that work on the cross as payment for all that is owed. Salvation is free in all areas for the receiving.