In previous posts, I had summarized the more mature views of these former “emergents,” as well as offered some assessments. Now, I will return to more assessments, starting with issues posed by their views of sin.
For them, inherited, original sin is a mistaken doctrine due to a few things, such as: 1) it presupposes that we have a body and a soul, which they have rejected for a physicalist view of humans; and 2) it presupposes that we are separated from God, but they have rejected that for a more panentheistic view of God. We already are “in” God (in relationship with Him), as is the rest of creation. If we are not dead to God due to sin, then our need is not for God to forgive us and for the Spirit to give us a new birth, in order to come alive to God. Instead, we need to work on our relationship with God, which primarily occurs through living out the way of Jesus with one another and creation.
If creation is physical, then sin must be redefined too. On traditional Christian orthodoxy, sin is a matter primarily of the heart that affects our whole being – not just body, but our heart, mind, and every aspect of us. For instance, Scripture says that the heart is more deceitful than all else (Jer 17:9). Moreover, Jesus tells us “the things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders” (Matt 15:18-19, NASB). Therefore, not only do thoughts and lustful attitudes come from the heart, so also do behaviors and actions.
Yet, sin cannot be a soulish thing on their views, so it seems it must be behavioral, i.e., involving physical actions. Yet, if thoughts, attitudes, beliefs, and our purposings are just physical, then, as I have argued previously, they do not have any intentionality (which is the ofness or aboutness of our thoughts, desires, beliefs, purposings, etc., things commonly called mental states). The same must hold for evil thoughts, etc. Yet, how can there be sin if there are no real thoughts, attitudes, beliefs, and so on? So, by putting sin into a physicalist framework, it seems they undermine the nature of sin and evil.
Yet, we also must notice that if their panentheistic view is true, then sin is in God too. That is, it is present in Him. Therefore, God is not separated from sin, but He has evil in His being. That strongly indicates that their God is not truly holy, and if so, then their God is not purely good. Unfortunately, that result seems to leave us with a God who could do all sorts of monstrous things.
However, perhaps they might reply that when Jesus lived on earth, He was not separated from being amongst sin or sinners. He hang out with sinners all the time and came to save them (1 Tim 1:15). While true, His “hanging out” with people and dealing with their sin did not entail he Himself would have sin be in His being. Hebrews 7:26 explains that as our High Priest, Jesus is separated from sinners, but this must mean that He Himself is not defiled by sin, not that He couldn’t hang out with sinners.
In my next blog, we will start to explore reasons why their God ends up not being truly good.