Friday, April 15, 2016

Sin is the Transgression of the Law! (?)

Sin is the Transgression of the Law


The Pharisees and religious leaders had a dilemma to solve. On the one hand, they had a miracle to contend with that arguably could only have been performed by and through God, where a man born blind was made to see. On the other hand, they had an interpretation of Scripture that told them that the One performing the miracle was a sinner, having broken the law, and that God does not "hear" sinners, performing miracles through them. Sin was, to them, transgressing that law, and they had all the evidence they needed to establish the fact that He had indeed broken the law.

A number of rationalizations were used in an attempt to resolve the problem.

He performed miracles, such as casting out demons, by the power of the devil.

The miracle was somehow faked.

The solution they settled on just happened to satisfy their own prejudices and hatred for the man in question, not unlike the Medieval practice of tossing one suspected of being a witch into a body of water. Witches floated, and others did not. If you were not a witch, you sank and drowned, but at least the people knew you were not a witch! Comforting thought...

They therefore condemned the man to death, figuring that if He truly was of God, God would rescue Him. In the back of their minds though, they KNEW He was not of God, and that God had let the prophets of old be put to death by the people of those times without God's intervention. But they did not dwell on that. They had a hatred of Him, and hatred blinds a man from certain realities he does not want to deal with. Hatred corrupts the mind and thinking process.

So the miracles were rejected in favor of the law, specifically the belief that sin resulted from breaking the law, despite the evidence used by Jesus to show that this was not necessarily so, citing the examples of pulling an animal out of a pit on the Sabbath, and how the priests "profaned" the Sabbath by working at the temple on Sabbaths, and how David and those with him ate the showbread that was specifically unlawful for David and company to do so.

But these religious leaders did not want to give Jesus His just exemption for working on the Sabbath. They were the administrators of the Law, and their hatred and prejudices prevented them from wielding the Law in a just manner, being consistent with the Law.

Often, the worst violators of law are the administrators of law, for who else is going to judge them according to the law?

Fast forward roughly 2000 years. Some churches have developed and adopted a legal code derived from that old covenant law. They in turn used law as a means of ruling and controlling those within their churches, wielding it in similar fashion as those religious leaders did in Jesus' time.

As a result, sin is defined as transgressing their law, derived from the old covenant law, specifically in some cases the 10 Commandments, making it easier to enforce it, pointing out that it originated with God, ergo it is "God's Law."

The ironic turn of events is that now, Jesus is embraced with the claim He actually kept that law that He was put to death for breaking. Yet both the religious leaders of Jesus time, and the religious leaders afterwards embrace the belief that sin results from transgressing the Law.

Both groups of religious leaders reject Jesus' appeal to His Sabbath exemption.

Both groups resort to what I like to call, "flipping the legal coin" in determining their verdict.

The religious leaders of Jesus' time declared Him guilty, having rejected His legal claim of exemption.

The religious leaders of today declare Him innocent of breaking the law, despite His own admission for having broken the law, thereby rendering His claim to exemption irrelevant and immaterial.

Both groups have a vested interest in maintaining the belief that sin results when one breaks or transgresses their law.

If you embrace the understanding that Jesus conveyed regarding "righteous judgment" then the power base derived through the administration of "law" slips out through the fingers of those in a position of power. The individual becomes empowered to now determine what is appropriate for himself, and what is not. His conscience as led and influenced by the Holy Spirit becomes his Law.

Can't have that now, can we...

The understanding that sin originates in the mind, and thus condemns the person then and there does not serve the administrators of law whose power and control is derived through controlling the actions of others.

Sin must be the transgression of the law.


Bill Hohmann


************
It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )
Acts 17:11
************

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Look.

Whenever the stockmarket numbers in China turn RED, I cheer. Turning green I weep. In China the color red is associated with luck and the leading party. (and one does not want to associate the Red flag and party color with depreciation, hurt and financial misfortune.)
In the USA the meaning of the colors is exactly opposite.

Colors at home
The red light at the traffic light has no intrinsic meaning at all.
We do stop however
The green color also has no intrinsic meaning in itself.
We do drive however.

The meaning of the colors is in the "contract" or "covenant" that we entered to do these actions of "stop" and "drive" whenever we see the light turn red or green. The color has no intrinsic meaning.

Now. For the advanced people.
In Germany people do not cross when lights are red. Even if no traffic can be seen in miles. In neighboring countries people think you are stupid when you do not cross the road if no traffic is coming even if the light is red. Who is right? Who are the sinners? Are the crossers in breach of a "social contract/covenant/the law" or are they THINKING with free moral agency as God commanded? I set before you "life and death". NOW CHOOSE.

Now Jesus in the case of the blind man seems to me somewhat of the Taxi driver driving a Laboring woman, in clear and present danger, to hospital on a road with no traffic. But the traffic light are all RED. (sabbath as interpreted by man)

Now what do you do. Drive or Stop?
I set before you life or death, says the God of the old covenant!


Now the other day. I heard a great maestro teaching Chinese children violin in a masterclass.
It sounded really and profoundly terrible, even to the untrained ear.
What happened was that they played ALL the notes EXACTLY RIGHT from the paper.

The maestro commended them on their studies of the NOTES/( the boundaries of musical law).
However he went into great length explaining to them that the real MUSIC is produced or occurs BETWEEN the notes. The music is not the notes. The notes just signal the divide between the one and the other. This maestro was teaching understanding of music. Not the understanding of the notes.

nck







Bill said...

Law is not an end in itself.

Jodie said...

Amen nck. Very well said.