SIN NO MORE: THE SURPRISING PROMISE OF MERITED FORGIVENESS

The Context 

The Gospel of John opens with a prologue that teases at what John is going to reveal about the ministry of Jesus. That prologue hints at some big surprises, one of which is the declaration in verse 17, "For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ." This reveals a clear contrast between Moses and Christ--Moses was a law giver but Christ a grace giver. If you read the Gospel of John closely looking for commands by Jesus, you will notice that only a very few--maybe just three--sound like Moses giving law. But why those three if Jesus is no law giver at all as Martin Luther declared boldly in his commentary on Galatians 2:20? How could there be even one if Jesus is truly not a law giver? Two of those three bothered me for 30+ years as I sought vainly to understand what Jesus meant by His words. These two are Jesus' identical words to the man He had earlier healed by the pool of Siloam (John 5) and to the woman caught in adultery (John 8).

Those two people were marginalized by their society. The man had lain in his sickness unable to walk for 38 years. The woman had been caught in adultery. They likely hadn't participated much in religious life at the temple. They were clearly not part of the religious establishment which Jesus was in continuous conflict with as portrayed by John. Jesus often criticized that establishment for compromising the perfection of the law. Let's keep that in mind as we untangle the story about the man.

The Man at the Pool of Siloam

As Jesus passed by the Pool of Siloam, he saw the man lying there and asked if he desired to be healed. What an obvious question! Of course the man wanted to be healed. He wanted it so much that all he could do was to pour out to Jesus his frustration about what he saw to be the real problem. His great longing for healing had always been thwarted by a lack of help. No one had ever been available to help him into the pool when the time of healing had arrived. Another person had always gotten the healing before he could grab it. Did Jesus criticize him for his lack of joy at the healing of others? No. Jesus simply pointed him away from his traditional hope of healing in the pool and toward Jesus' own authority to heal. He commanded the man to get up, pick up his mat, and walk. The man was immediately healed and obeyed Jesus fully. The religious leaders saw the man and pointed him to their version of the law, telling him that to carry his mat on the Sabbath was against the law. He replied simply that the man who had healed him had told him both to walk and to carry his mat. 

But later in that day, Jesus found the man in the temple area, commanded him to pay attention to his physical healing, and gave the Moses-like command, "sin no more, lest something worse happen to you." Why did Jesus command that? In the Greek there is no wiggle room, as I could find no textual variant to explain it away. Since the phrase is in the imperative form and singular tense, it implies that Jesus really did command this one man to sin no more; it wasn't just a suggestion and it wasn't stated to the onlookers. What do we do with that? Check a commentary. Don't be surprised to read that the man's illness was caused by a specific sin, and that Jesus was informing the man that God was very serious about the man stopping that one sin. If the man didn't stop that one sin then God would bring a worse circumstance into his life to get him to take that sin seriously. If the standard of not sinning is perfection in thought, word, and deed, then how could Jesus have really tied the man's freedom from judgment to his perfection on one point of stopping sin? In my Mormon culture such commands are freely and frequently given with the purpose to get the hearer to try harder to do what is right and not sin. Perfection is never the expectation. Trying, not doing, is the standard. Does God really judge by the standard of trying as my religious culture teaches? Also, Jesus and James seem to give little room for performance with God to be isolated into individual topics. "He who keeps the whole law and stumbles in one point is guilty of all." -James 2:10

Discovering My Biases

Some commentators indicate that Jesus was telling the man that there was something far worse than his serious physical illness had ever been, and that that worse thing was to be cast out by God on judgment day. Certainly it is true that hell is worse than any physical suffering. And certainly it is true that the healed man should attend to that matter. If this view is true how does it connect to the text? It is rather easy to read general truth into any text. It is also easy to look back in time and criticize others for not seeing what we see, not realizing that we all are at least somewhat a product of our culture. Sometimes such criticism is valid, but I suggest that sometimes it prideful. In the last several years I have been realizing more and more how faulty and biased my own reading of the Bible has been as a result of not noticing significant aspects of context or my cultural bias. My mind is riddled with faulty thinking and I wish to remedy that situation as much as possible with honesty, rapidity, and help from all others. I am now in an intense process of discovery seeking to notice and untangle my own false biases. 

If Jesus knew exactly what He was talking about--and I suggest that He always knew exactly what He was talking about, was never confused, always chose His words carefully, and that the Spirit and apostles communicated them all clearly--then Jesus was communicating something for the man to understand. What in the context helps us discover Jesus' intended meaning? Probably all readers would agree that this is a true story of Jesus speaking to a real man. That man certainly neither spoke English nor was Chinese in culture. We all would agree with this, and so why do I mention such trivialities? Until recently I unwittingly had been reading this story, and likely many others, in a way that gave insufficient value to context and was in some fashion blaming God for not communicating clearly. The difference is that now I realize that my lack of clarity is all my fault and so am scouring context for clues to get past my confusion. In this story my lack of context is revealed by something that bothered me for years. I wondered that since it is undeniable that the man had already sinned in his life before meeting Jesus, and if he obeyed Jesus and never sinned again, he would still have to deal with his past sins. Jesus' words seemed to me to imply that the man's past sins would be overlooked if he stopped sinning. I had zero confidence the man could do what Jesus commanded, but if he had been able to succeed, how could his past sins be overlooked? Do you see my confusion? Do you see what I missed?

The Promise Embedded in The Context

My problem is sometimes a lack of seeing a single point clearly, but more commonly I would guess that now my problem is primarily that I have unwittingly connected the dots in an artificial way, different from the author's intent, and thus am hindered in my understanding. I need to erase my connections and look for the connections that the context makes. Here are some simple points (dots) of context. Notice your own connections. Jesus healed the sick man in Jerusalem. It seems safe to assume that the man was Jewish. This healing took place before the crucifixion and therefore this Jewish man was under the Old Covenant and not under the New Covenant. This means that the man was not living under the covenant of grace but rather under the covenant of law with its promises of blessing based on obedience to law and cursing based on disobedience to the law. How do you think the man was doing in his obedience so far in life? I suggest that one of my big errors was to read the words of Jesus as if they applied equally in all time and were not rooted in the context of Israel under law and in anticipation of the death of the Messiah that would soon free Israel from law by giving Israel a new covenant of grace at Pentecost. This all was still in the future at the time of this healing. Jesus hadn't died yet, and in the Gospel of John Jesus doesn't speak of His death until chapter six (See Matthew 16:21, Mark 8:31, Luke 9:22). If Jesus hadn't yet mentioned his coming death, what was He expecting the man to trust as he sought to stop sinning?

A significant point in my lack of understanding context related to Jesus as the Good Shepherd. A shepherd's job is to watch over the sheep and lead them to fresh pastures. But what is that image meant to tell us about Jesus? Jesus was sent by God to be the Good Shepherd. He said that He was sent exclusively to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 15:24). He came to the lost sheep of Israel who were grazing in the field of the Old Covenant. They were well contented with that pasture and its religious system of obedience to law and religious duties as the way to be right with God. The temple worship was elaborate and was the center of that confidence. He came to His own to win their trust. His desire was that once He had won their trust, He would lead them from the old pasture to a fresh pasture of the New Covenant--leading them from law to grace. When He arrived the crowds thronged to Him as He healed their sick and cast out demons, and as He taught about the goodness of the law in its true honor in perfection. The leaders refused from the beginning to believe in Him, and murderous thoughts took root in their hearts. But the crowds grew and grew. And He even persuaded many of the leaders to join the crowd of His followers, at least secretly. Then one day He surprised everyone and began to speak about both His death at the hands of the leaders and of that death somehow being a source of life for those who followed Him. The beloved teacher suddenly lost His hearing. Peter rebuked Him. The crowds left Him. People still flocked to Him for healing and compassion, but they fell away from believing Him because his new message of His death for sinners was distasteful. Likely they wondered: "Why would He talk like that as the temple was the right way to deal with sin?" Jesus sought to break their confidence in their religious system of righteousness based on law keeping, but they resisted with all their might. So Jesus went alone to the new pasture--though He wasn't really alone for the Father was with Him (John 16:32), leading His lamb to the place of sacrifice.

Merited Forgiveness

After clearing my head a little in the Good Shepherd image and the related parable of the soils, I was vainly pondering one day the story of the man at the pool, when a question came to mind. Could these images help resolve the meaning of the command to sin no more? I turned to meditation on Jesus seeking to break the Jews' self-righteous pride so as to lead them from the law to grace, and wondered if a connection might be found in the Old Testament to Jesus' words. It wasn't long before the confusing words of Ezekiel 18 came to mind, as they were similar and familiar. That passage had not made sense to me because I thought it basically declared that any unrighteous person who stops sinning would be forgiven for all past sins. Again, this puzzled me. How can a person's past sins be forgiven just because that person stops sinning? Suddenly I realized that it said that an unrighteous Israelite who stopped sinning had the promise of complete forgiveness. This wasn't a promise to everyone, but rather only to Israelites under law. Suddenly it made sense. For six centuries the Israelites had pretended that they were lawkeepers and so when Ezekiel gave this new promise, the Israelites complained and declared that God's way was not right. I suggest that they were thinking like my Mormon culture which rejects the idea of perfect obedience and says that trying is what God should find acceptable. Read the chapter closely. 

Why did Ezekiel give this promise? In Deuteronomy 5:22-29 is the record of the Israelites at Mount Sinai begging Moses to go to up to God and bring down a list of God's demands. They told Moses to give God their promise that they would hear and do all He required. They wanted this arrangement of law so as to not be destroyed by God's judgment. They sought to flee into merited favor to protect themselves from God's judgment. Bad move. Read the history of Israel before Mount Sinai and notice that it seems that Israel had a relationship with God free from law, where their repeated complaints against God and Moses never resulted in criticism, anger, or judgment from God. Only after they begged for law did judgment fall when they complained or disobeyed. Check it out. I was skeptical when I first heard this and checked it out to disprove it, but couldn't. The Old Testament is the record of 1) Israel pretending that they were keeping the law and 2) God sending the prophets to tell them that they weren't. They hated the prophets' message and killed them. They did admit their ancestors were lawbreakers but wouldn't admit their own lawbreaking. Pride blinded them. God had compassion on them and wanted them to realize that only perfect love is good and that they should honor that standard. Ezekiel's promise clarified Moses' words in Deuteronomy 8:1-3 that life could come by law--clarifying that perfect obedience was the key. This revealed that Israel hated perfect love.

The Surprise

For many centuries the leaders of Israel--the false shepherds--had adulterated the law teaching it in various manageable forms. Jesus was born under law and grew up to be the all-time master teacher of the Mosaic Law. He came not to deny the law but to establish the full honor of it as a reflection of God's character. He did this not only by dying the death all sinners deserve, but also by speaking about it in an honorable way--in its wholeness and perfection. The law was designed to drive every Israelite to a vision of ruin and helplessness before God, exemplified in Isaiah's experience in Isaiah 6.  The leaders of Israel--the false shepherds--had stolen God's honor from the people. They became optimistic about their lawkeeping rather than pessimistic with a sense of spiritual ruin. It was Jesus' delight to restore God's honor, to let the perfection of the law do its work in the heart, that He might welcome them into the celebration of God's delight in goodness, truth, righteousness, and perfect love. God called Ezekiel the son of man 91 times and restrained Ezekiel from speaking anything but His words to the people. But the true Son of Man needed no restraint as His heart was full of the pleasure of the Father. He overflowed with compassion toward the lost sheep of Israel with healing and feeding. 

But His real passion was to win the hearts of the people back to the Father, back to perfect love as a true reflection of God, as perfect love as the only good way to see and live life. And so He spoke to the healed man the promise of Ezekiel that to be righteous before God and not accountable for past sins, an Israelite must stop all sins.

What did Jesus expect the man's response to be? If the man took Jesus at His word, he would have had to change his mind, to resist the cultural pressure to manageable standards of law, and embrace that only perfect obedience would please God. Such a thought would have brought him to his knees seeing himself as a spiritual beggar--spiritually ruined--and would have prepared him for Isaiah's experience. I suggest that Jesus spoke with a smile His words--the command of the law--to the healed man, "Go and sin no more lest something worse happen to you." I commonly say similar things with a smile to Mormons. When they catch that I really mean that God requires flawless perfection, they stop smiling and cry out something like, "If you really have to be perfect then you might as well give up." I then smile big and tell them that that is the point--that the door into a right relationship with God is perfect love--either you do it all or Jesus does it all for you and you rest in His finished work.

This is the message that I suggest Jesus meant for the healed Israelite man to get--the surprise of spiritual ruin through the mindset that only perfect obedience counts with God and that God Himself will provide a lamb. Glad welcome with God results from such a realization. 

There is application in this beautiful story, but we need to read it as if we are looking in a window into a world before Jesus' first mention of His coming death--into the world of Israel under law.

THE POWER OF UNMERITED FAVOR TO CHANGE A MIND

A few years ago a young Christian man used to stop in Oasis often on his lunch break. One day he came in angry and announced that there was no hope for a certain named person. I asked him what made him say that, and he told me the story. He said that he and the other man played together on a Christian softball team and they had gotten into an argument. The other man had picked up a baseball bat and threatened him with it. From that point the conversations reflected the following. See if you can relate.

Me: What he did to you was really sinful.
Brother: No need to tell me.
Me: Is he a Christian?
Brother: Yeah.
Me: Has God forgiven him for all his sins?
Brother: Of course.
Me: Is God counting his sins?
Brother: No
Me: Then why are you mad?
Brother: I am counting.

At this point the conversation changed and the brother relaxed realizing that his problem was that he had forgotten how God viewed the other Christian. Also he admitted that he had been angry in the argument. We rejoice together in what Christ had done for us all and he said that he would call the brother that night and admit his wrong even if the other brother didn't. The next day he came back and said that when he called the brother, the brother was in tears confessing his own sins. The rest of the story is that these two men became fast friends. Grace is powerful.

Unmerited favor takes what seems a hopeless relationship and fills it with hope of the gospel, not of personal performance. But it is not automatic. It requires remembering the freedom Christ has given in His work on the cross and understanding what that all means. Do you have any troubled relationships with Christians? Talk to God about it and tell Him how bad the other person's behavior is. Don't minimize it--maximize it. Tell Him that the person deserves hell for that sin. Thank Him for the cross freeing that person from what he deserves: from all condemnation, guilt, shame, and score keeping. Maybe even thank Him for smiling down on that other person who troubles you so much. Try it and see what happens. You might find you actually like that person. Miracles do happen.

WHY DID JESUS SPEAK OF CONDITIONAL FORGIVENESS?

“For if you forgive others their sins, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 

But if you do not forgive others, your Father will not forgive you your sins." 

-Jesus, Matthew 6:14,15

Have you always perfectly forgiven, that is, never held even a tiny bit of a grudge? If not then what is your hope of getting forgiveness from God? A few verses earlier Jesus had commanded His hearers to be perfect as God is perfect. How is it going? I suggest that if you have any confidence of being forgiven by God then you must have a wonderful secret. Whether you realize it or not, you are persuaded that this verse doesn't apply to you, because unless Jesus was joking or exaggerating, none of us has any hope of being forgiven. Let's be honest about this.

So what did Jesus mean then? New questions often bring new insights. Try these.

1. Did Jesus speak these words before or after He died on the cross?
2. Did Jesus speak these words under the Old Covenant of law or the New Covenant of grace?
3. Who was Jesus' audience: Christians who have a relationship with God based on UNMERITED favor, or Jews who had a relationship with God based on law keeping and MERITED favor?
4. Did Jesus' audience see that they were helpless condemned sinners, or did they have confidence that their hard work at law keeping would gain them forgiveness and welcome with God?
5. Did Jesus preach perfect obedience to break the stubborn pride of His Jewish audience, to reveal that they were law breakers not law keepers, to reveal their need of unmerited favor, and to prepare them to take the gift of righteousness that would be revealed at Pentecost, or did He preach perfection to stir His Jewish audience to try harder and be more self-righteous?
6. Does thinking perfection (perfect love, perfect law, perfect obedience) remove all confidence in human obedience--of oneself and all others?

It is very easy to get distracted from the glory of unmerited favor.

The Surprise of reading the Bible Contextually

Did the first five questions surprise you? Last week I had a conversion with two very thoughtful women in their 30's who came in Oasis Books. I assumed that they were Mormons as nearly all non-Hispanics here are. They browsed the CS Lewis books and one made comment to the other about how easy reading Lewis was. Then for some reason one commented to her sister that if one didn't forgive fully then one would not be forgiven. I stepped into the conversation at this point and asked question number one above. The women pondered and replied with confidence that Jesus had spoken these words before the cross. Their answer piqued their own curiosity. I then asked if Jesus had spoken those words under law or under grace. They declared immediately that He had spoken them under law. Their interest grew. I asked about Jesus' audience. This matter was not as clear to them, but with a little discussion they realized that they already knew that the Jews were law focused and the leaders of Israel taught do your best and not perfect love. I suggested that perfect love was the key to life and gave my short explanation of it. They said that they had been discussing much the motivation of love and asked for more clarification and permission to record the conversation. They eventually left ecstatic about new thoughts on perfect love, including its all-encompassing application and transformative power, and a free book on grace. You can read here my short wedding sermon on perfect love in marriage.

How do you as a Christian read the words of Jesus? Do you see them as written directly to you and thus directly applicable to you? Or do you see them as spoken directly to Israel--a people under the Old Covenant of merit-based acceptance--who were not honest that the law required perfect love? If you see them in the latter way, then they have only indirect application to you. It should bring you great joy to read about perfection knowing that you are totally free from its requirements through the sin-bearing love of Christ at the cross. It should move you to thankfulness that you are free to forgive because you are already perfectly forgiven (Eph. 4:32; Col, 3:13), with no more pressure of obligation or threats for failure. It should move you to gladness toward the saints who hurt you, even while they are hurting you, since you know that they also are free from all pressure and condemnation of performance. Wow! The law is beautiful and good, but only Christ could honor it. We saints are alive in His righteousness not our own, are dead to the law, and have the motivation of perfect love. Think perfect love and you might be surprised at how much you really like your spouse and children at their worst, and the people who mistreat you while they are doing it.

The Blessing of Living in Mormon Culture

I have a huge advantage over many Christians as I live in a culture 1) with very few Christians and that is very religious, 2) that uses Christian words but with different meanings, and 3) that is merit-based-favor focused like Israel of Jesus' day. Both emphasize 1) a God of love, 2) joy in God giving a system of merit-based favor to the people or world, 3) a process of repentance (stopping sin) to overcome failure, 4) laziness as the real enemy of God, and 5) optimism in pleasing God by doing one's best. Both openly hate righteousness as a gift through the death of Christ.

Mormons really like the words of Jesus, but interpret them as if Jesus were exaggerating and not really expecting people to obey them perfectly. They see the New Covenant as an easier Old Covenant rather that a relationship of unmerited favor--total freedom from the pressure of performance. They are deeply trained to think that there are only two ways to think about God: be lazy and sin a lot, or strive to do one's best at loving everyone and keeping the commandments. It is a joy to help them discover that we all know intuitively the truth of perfect love. It is a real pleasure to introduce them to the understanding that God is truly generous, His favor is fully unmerited, and that He wants us to be in a relationship where we are free to love purely from His great love for us, with no mixing of obligations and threats. They talk much about personal righteousness, and so hearing about the gift of righteousness is a huge shock to them. But as they realize that perfection is required and that they thus are spiritual beggars, the gift of righteousness becomes a surprise beyond their wildest dreams.

Practice reading the words of Jesus in their Old Testament context and you will be ready for your next conversation with a Mormon. 
    

MOTIVATION OF GRACE: THE TESTIMONY OF TWO NON-CHRISTIANS

Some years ago while in conversation with students on campus, a student from India said that back home he had a Mercedes sports car which he loved to drive fast. I asked him if he was concerned that the police might stop him. He said that they did stop him. I asked what he did. He smiled and told me that he simply showed them his I.D. and then his father’s photo, and because his father was the chief of police, they smiled and always waved him on. This man had immunity from speeding tickets because of who his father was. He seemed to be saying that he took full advantage of it. How sad.

Not long after, I met Issa, a Muslim attorney from the Middle East. His wife was working on a Ph.D. here and he spent his days caring for their son and so has little pressure. His home country is ruled by a king who has real authority. One day I asked Issa what would happen if his king’s son raced his Mercedes through the capital city—would the police give him a ticket. He laughed at me, saying that he was the king’s son and so was above the law and could do what he wanted. I suggested that he could run over old ladies in crosswalks. He said that was true. He also said that everyone in the country wished to have this special relationship with the king so they would not have to be under the law. He said that it was his impossible dream. I then asked how it would affect him if his king paid the fantastic and unheard of price to adopt him into the royal family, giving him that privilege. He smiled and said that he would be so thankful that he would always drive carefully watching out for the safety of others. He then added that he would never ever do anything wrong again out of thankfulness for what the king had done for him. I suggested that there would be a time where he might do something wrong. He said that would be impossible. I kept pushing and finally mentioned that if he forgot the price the king had paid, he could do something wrong. Issa smiled and agreed.

Two men above the law. The first had no motivation of grace since he naturally was a son above the law. And so without the threat of punishment, he was careless about the law, being motivated by his own whims. The second man also had no obligation to law—and an even greater certainty of freedom. But he knew that his awareness of the king’s love for him and the fantastic price paid to buy his adoption, was the obvious and sufficient motivation to always do good and not do evil. The gift was so great that he didn't consider that he could ever not be thinking about it. Remembrance of the king’s grace would move him to always do good.

My Muslim attorney friend knows the heart of true Christianity. When I told him such and had him read Isaiah 53 and Hebrews 2 in a bilingual Bible, he smiled and asked if I could get for him such a Bible. He gladly took the one we were reading together. Sadly it seems all too common for us Christians to fall into the thinking of the man from India--that no threat of consequences means little or no motivation to do what is good.

FORGIVENESS WITH GOD IS BY FREEDOM FROM LAW

Three Ways to View Forgiveness of Sin: Which Way is Yours?

1. The first way is Nietzsche's way—denial of the existence of the moral world. He declared the strong person to be the one who can inflict great pain, hear the cries of the victims, and not be moved. Hitler loved Nietzsche's ideas and preached them to his generals seeking to persuade them to mercilessly annihilate the Russians, knowingly in violation of the war crimes treaties. A few self-identified atheists have told me that the moral world is unreal and forgiveness is only an emotional reaction. Two of them have had the courage to say that rape is never wrong because it is non-existent. One atheist has been repeatedly unwilling answer the question about rape's wrongness.

2. The second way is to see sin as individual moral failures and therefore evaluate and deal with them one by one. What does this look like? Each time a person sins against you, you decide to forgive or not forgive the person for that failure. Sometimes you do, sometimes you don't. Sometimes you hold grudges, sometimes you don't. It is common to wait to forgive until the offender requests it. It is also common to think that the offender needs to have some sorrow or repentance for forgiveness to not be taken advantage of. In this way of thinking, God sees, evaluates, counts, and deals with your sins one by one. Since Jesus died for all your sins, all your sins are individually laid on Jesus and therefore you are forgiven for each and every one that he carries for you. Sometimes one can think that those in heaven are those whose individual sins have been laid on Jesus and those in hell are those whose individual sins were not carried by Jesus. Sometimes this thinking can lead to doubts related to sins where one has not asked forgiveness out of neglect or pride.

3. The third way is to see sin as dishonor of God's goodness, of His perfect moral law. "God is well-pleased for righteousness' sake to exalt His law and make it glorious." -Isaiah 42:21 Thinking this way focuses understanding of sin and forgiveness on God's glory in His goodness, and perfect law as the only standard of judgment. Relations with God and other people here are thought of in terms of honoring perfect law: goodness, perfect love, and obedience as all or nothing. Since every person is born with the desire to exalt self over perfect law, and the heart is the source of all actions, then the law has already been dishonored at birth by every human alive. 

In the Bible and the human conscience it is written that goodness can only be honored by complete freedom from unmet moral obligations. This is accomplished either by perfect obedience to law or by total freedom from obligation to law. There is no other option because, as James declares, "He who keeps the whole law and offends in one point only is guilty of all." In this view, evaluation of the moral failures of self and others is done in light of how to honor perfect law. Thus one finds that only one human action honors perfect law, and that is the appeal to the righteousness of Christ in His substitutionary death for sinners. When one is mistreated one sees Christ as the only hope for the violator, who is either 1) totally freed from all shame and condemnation in being identified with Christ in His death for helpless sinners, or 2) fully subject to God's righteous reaction against sin. Thinking this way frees one from the need to decide about forgiveness because one realizes that only God can forgive and that has already been settled at the cross. 

Moral failure is seen as caused by forgetfulness of, or disregard for, the meaning of the cross. Christ's death is not seen as payment for individual sins but rather as the establishment of the honor of the law. All men are law-breakers and Christ the divine law-keeper died the death that all men deserve. Death has been conquered and life in goodness above law offered freely to all. The mind is now free to focus sharply on the distinction between motivation from thankfulness for love received versus obligation and potential consequences or rewards. 

Since perfection is always the standard, progressive obedience has no meaning. In this way of thinking, sins are not forgiven but rather the person is forgiven, which means that the person is viewed through identity: either as under the authority of law or under the authority of grace. God has already taken care of the honor of the law, and thus all saints are free to focus on boldly declaring that honor without having to keep score for self and others. Confession is now freely and primarily about perfect law established by Christ rather than about individual failures by humans. Confession of individual moral failures is now free from the pressure of imperfect manageable standards and can be done joyfully and honestly in view of the finished work of Christ.

As you may suspect, I have chosen #3. Can it really be this good? Let's celebrate and invite everyone to the cross.

WHY LOVE OTHER PEOPLE?

"He who is forgiven much loves much." --Jesus of Nazareth

Those of us who think that this is true have no excuse for our lack of love for other people, but we do have a reason for it. Are we paying attention? According to Jesus, I have no one to blame but myself for not loving the most obnoxious person around. Active awareness of the greatness of God's forgiveness for me would move me to overwhelm that obnoxious person with love. Apparently Jesus knows something we don't want or like to think about--that our Irritation, frustration, and lack of gladness toward others is caused by our lack of vision of the immensity of God's forgiveness toward us and even toward that other person. Let's get over ourselves and learn to laugh at our failures and those of other people. At our best moments we all are weak. Forgetfulness of the cross is the Christian's great enemy. For the non-Christian ignorance of the cross is the enemy.