CHAPTER XXI THE ESSENTIAL AND DISTINCTIVE CHARACTERISTIC OF SIN FROM the point of view now attained it is possible to give a clear and exact definition of sinful character in its true significance, and under it to comprehend what is true in various definitions of sin which have been subjects of controversy. I. SIN THE SUPREME CHOICE OF SELF. Sin is the choice of self as the supreme object of trust and service. 1. This is sinful character in its primary and essential significance. It is this which distinctively characterizes an act or character as sinful. It is the sinful character which manifests itself or finds expression in every sinful act. Because it is the choice of self as the supreme object of trust and service, it must present itself in two forms: self-trusting and self-serving. Each of these, again, will present itself in two forms: the former as self-sufficiency and self-glorifying, the latter as selfwill and self-seeking. The supreme choice of self acts in these four forms in every sinful character. But in different persons they appear in different degrees and proportions. The sinful character as thus defined may be called selfishness. But selfishness as often understood is restricted to self-seeking, that is, getting, possessing, and using for one's self. When used to denote the sinful character in its primary and essential meaning, it must be understood as comprehending all the four forms in which the supreme choice acts. To avoid this misapprehension it is often called egoism. I shall use both names in the more comprehensive meaning as synonymous. The seminal principle or root of all sin is the choice of self as the supreme object of trust and service. Out of this all sinful character and action grow and by it they are pervaded, vitalized, and charactered. So the seminal principle or root of all holiness, is the choice of God as supreme and of our neighbor as ourselves as the object of trust and service. Out of this all holy character and action grow, and by it they are pervaded, vitalized, and charactered. In the actual development of the sinful character, self-trusting is deeper and more radical than self-serving. Out of the selftrusting the self-serving seems to grow. And in self-trusting, the self-sufficiency, the spirit of proud, arrogant, and defiant selfassertion and independence, precedes the self-righteousness or self-glorifying, which presupposes it and issues from it. Therefore selfishness in the form of self-sufficiency is the primitive seed or root of all sin. From it all sinful character and action grow, and by it they are vitalized and charactered as sin. Here again the origin and growth of sin correspond as its contrary with the origin and growth of holiness. Both because man is a creature and because he is a sinner and so dependent on God, his right character can begin only in trust in God. God is his spiritual environment. "In him we live and move and have our being." Man in his normal state is in harmony and union with God, receiving continuously from him the spiritual influences by which he lives and grows and works in the spiritual life, as a plant depends on its environment and continuously receives from it the quickening and nourishment by which it lives and grows. The new life of a sinner in his conversion must begin in his putting his trust in God in the recognition of his dependence, sinfulness, and need. In this act of trust he chooses God as the supreme object of trust; and in the same act he renounces himself as the supreme object of trust. This trust or faith in God is the beginning of his right character, and from it all his acts of obedience and service flow. This is evident both from scripture and from philosophy. So in sin man chooses himself as the supreme object of trust, and therein repudiates God and refuses to trust him. In so doing he repudiates his dependence on God both as a creature and as a sinner, and all the weakness and wants incident thereto, and sets himself up in self-sufficiency as independent of God. Thus as trust in God is the only beginning of a right character in a finite person, so choosing one's self as the supreme object of trust, setting up for one's self in self-sufficiency and therein renouncing God as the object of trust is the beginning of all sin. "For then we fell when we 'gan first t'essay By stealth of our own selves something to been And from that prank right jolly wits ourselves did deem."1 This self-sufficiency issues in self-righteousness and self-glorification. When the self-sufficient man reflects on himself he ascribes to himself the credit of all his doings. He is like Nebuchadnezzar when he said: "Is not this great Babylon which I have built for the royal dwelling-place by the might of my power and for the glory of my majesty?" He is like the Pharisee in self-righteousness, enumerating his punctilious observances, thanking God that he is not as other men are, and thinking that of himself without trusting in God he has kept the law and won heaven by his own merit. 2 As in trusting God the faith works in loving service to God and man, so in trusting self the self-sufficiency and self-righteousness work in the service of self. This self-serving manifests itself first as self-will. The sinner sets up his own will as law and refuses obedience to God. Arrogantly and defiantly he asks with Pharaoh: "Who is Jehovah, that I should hearken to his voice?" and with the wicked mighty ones in Job: "What is the Almighty that we should serve him? And what profit should we have if we pray unto him?" The self-serving manifests itself also as selfseeking. In the sphere of getting, possessing, and using the sinner gets, possesses, and uses merely for himself. Here are all sins of the type of covetousness; the selfish desire always for more; the desire to get, possess, and use, which is always insatiable because the acquisitions are but fuel to the desire, only making it burn more fiercely. 2. The evidence that this is the true conception of sin is next to be considered. First, it is necessarily implied in the truth already ascertained, that the object of the right supreme choice is God as supreme and our neighbor as ourselves in their reciprocal relations in the unity 2 Dan. iv. 30. 1 Sir Henry More, "Psychozoia." of the moral system. If indeed the object of the right supreme choice were something to be acquired and possessed, then the object of the sinful choice would be some inferior or unworthy object in the same sphere. But this it cannot be, because the object of the choice must be a person or persons to be trusted and served. In the sphere of personality, the object of the supreme choice, which is the seminal principle, the seed and root of all sin, can be only the self, chosen as the supreme object of trust and service to the exclusion of God and our neighbor. For, as we have seen, love to God and love to our neighbor as ourselves are of the same kind and one cannot exist without the other. Therefore, the wrong supreme choice cannot be love to God alone, for that necessarily implies love to our neighbor as ourselves; and it cannot be love to man alone, for that would imply love to God. It can be only the choice of self as the supreme object of trust and service to the exclusion of God and our neighbor. Therefore sin in its essence is supreme love to self, isolating self as the object of trust and service from all other men and from God. The law of universal love is fundamental in the constitution of a moral system. There is no other law, under which it is conceivable that a moral system could exist. That the law of love is the supreme and universal law is a first principle of reason, self-evident in rational intuition to every person who knows himself in his actual relations to the moral system. Such a person knows that he does not live for himself alone, but that his action affects for good or evil those who are about him. And he must know that he ought not to aim or intend to live for himself alone with no regard to the interests and rights of others. The clearness and fulness with which he sees this will correspond with the clearness and fulness of his knowledge of himself and the moral system. The choice of self as the supreme object of trust and service is in its essence the repudiation of the law of love and rebellion against its authority; it is in direct antagonism and contradiction to the constitution of the moral system, and in all its tendencies subversive of it; thus it is the seminal principle of all sin and the essential character of a sinner in all forms of sin. And I cannot think of any definition of sin which sets forth its essential character, unless it recognizes it, either explicitly or implicitly, as supreme selfishness or egoism. It is often supposed that the direct con trary of love is hatred. But this is comparatively a rare exercise of the human soul and is exercised against comparatively few persons. The real contrary of love is not hate, but selfishness. Secondly, this definition of sin in its essential character accords with the biblical representations. Sin in its origin is represented in the Bible as selfishness or egoism. This is true of its account of the beginning of sin in man. In the twelfth chapter of this treatise, containing an examination of the account of the creation and the beginning of human history in the opening chapters of Genesis, it was shown that, under the influence of the serpent, the common Semitic representation of the power of darkness and evil, the woman was tempted to sin. "Ye shall be as God," here the temptation was to self-sufficiency and self-glorifying in the renunciation of dependence on God and trust in him; "Knowing good and evil," you will no longer be in subjection to God to order what you may eat and what you may not, but will be sufficient of yourselves to order your action and to do as you please; "Ye shall not surely die," here the temptation is to self-will, in disobeying God's command as not a real law of rightful authority and binding obligation, obedience to which was necessary to well-being; the suggestion is, on the contrary, that by disobeying and defying him in self-will you will become wise and great, and may expect to become the equals of God; hidden in this suggestion is the intimation that God imposed the restriction through jealousy of man lest he should become his equal and a dangerous rival; thus the tempter belittles God and tries to insinuate into the minds of the first man and woman a heathenish conception of him. The temptation continues, "good for food, a delight to the eye, and to be desired,” — here the temptation is to self-seeking and self-indulgence, to seeking the chief good in getting, possessing, and using whatever satisfies appetite, delights the senses, or gratifies desires. Thus, according to this ancient narrative, the temptation to the first sin was addressed to selfishness or egoism in each of its essential forms: to self-trusting in self-sufficiency and self-glorifying, to self-serving in self-will and self-seeking. The sin was not that they aspired to be like God. The representation in Genesis is that they had been created in his likeness and admitted to close intimacy with him. Man is constituted |