Within fundamentalism, as in other areas of Christianity no doubt, there is quite a bit of confusion over fighting sin. The thinking goes like this: if we erect a big enough fence, or hedge people in with enough rules, we will prevent them from falling into sin. Sadly, this tactic most often fails, to one degree or another.
The Former Fundys Blog recently posted some thoughts in this regard. In a post entitled What’s Wrong with Fundamentalist Pastors?, the problem of pastors running headlong into adultery is brought up. I thought the main point of the post, however, applied to more than just the fall of big name pastors. Here is an excerpt from that post that may be a help to some of my readers.
Fundamentalism has claimed to have the answers to stopping sin, by their superior standards that will keep one from sinning. Don’t go to the theater, and you won’t struggle with impure thoughts or with using foul language. Women have to dress a certain way, in order to protect men from lusting after them. Men and women can’t touch unless they are married(to one another), so they won’t fall into sexual sin. If one is a faithful soulwinner who reads/studies the Bible on a regular basis, they won’t fall into sin. I have heard “remedy” after “remedy” for stopping the presence of sin in one’s life, for keeping one away from sin by placing barriers in place to protect one from sin.
But these remedies do little to protect the very pastors who put these rules in place from sinning….
Fundamentalism misses the essence of what the Christian life is about. One is not moral because they follow rules. One is not moral because they go to church every Sunday. One is not a good Christian because they follow those rules. One is not a Christian because they follow those rules. Rule-keeping does not make a good Christian. And it does not make a good person. It is pure moralism, instead of Gospel.
The answer is in teaching the Gospel, instead of rule-keeping. Too many Fundamentalists fail to teach repentance from sins as part of the salvation process, thus watering down the Gospel to something that is more palatable to sinners. They make their Christianity easy for those who love their sin, but want fire insurance. The answer is also in desiring Christ, and desiring to live for the glory of God. So much of Fundamentalism is about keeping rules, and following a list of do’s and don’ts. But that’s not what the Christian life is about. Sure there are things that a Christian can’t do, like have sex outside the confines of marriage, or get drunk or high, or lie to others. And sure there are things that Christians need to do, like read the Bible, pray, go to church. But that is not the essence of the Christian life. Following Christ is more than not doing or doing those things. I would strongly recommend that Fundamentalists look to books written by non-Fundy authors that deal with things like sin, or living for God, because Fundamentalists don’t have the answer. Books like “Overcoming Sin and Temptation” by John Owen(the Puritan), or “Desiring God” by John Piper.
In short, such men are able to sin so gravely because they don’t understand the nature of sin, the Gospel, or the essence of the Christian life…
My response to all of this is first to point out that the post is primarily addressing the IFBx wing of fundamentalism. Not all fundamentalists that I’ve known are this bad. However, in seed form, this idea concerning sanctification is prevalent throughout fundamentalism.
The problem, as I see it, amounts to a widespread confusion over the nature of sin. It doesn’t attract us externally, the desire for sin comes from within us. We need the internal change of the Holy Spirit in our lives. Too often, Christians fail to remember that the Gospel is for them — for believers. And sadly, preaching is too often about moralism rather than the gospel.
A few of my previous posts may be of interest to those looking to dig more deeply into this topic:
Like this:
Like Loading...
I’ve been reading through a nice little edition of The Apostolic Fathers recently put out by Moody Press. Today, I came across a section in The Shepherd of Hermas that sounds a bit like what John Piper might say. I’m not endorsing everything in The Shepherd of Hermas, there are plenty of reasons why it shouldn’t be considered to be canonical (or part of the NT), but this little bit caught my attention. Let me know what you make of it or what you think of this quote.