Ryle on Sin

I ran across this from J. C. Ryle in his book Holiness. I thought it relevant:

"A Scriptural view of sin is one of the best antidotes to that vague, dim, misty, hazy kind of theology which is so painfully current in the present age. It is vain to shut our eyes to the fact that there is a vast quantity of so-called Christianity now days which you cannot declare positively unsound, but which, nevertheless, is not full measure, good weight and sixteen ounce to the pound. It is a Christianity in which there is undeniably 'something about Christ and something about grace and something about faith and something about repentance and something about holiness', but it is not the real 'thing as it is' in the Bible. Things are out of place and out of proportion. As old Latimer would have said, it is a kind of 'mingle-mangle', and does no good. It neither exercises influence on the daily conduct, nor comforts in life, nor gives peace in death; and those who hold it often awake too late to find that they have nothing solid under their feet. Now I believe the likeliest way to cure and mend this defective kind of religion is to bring forward more prominently the old scriptural truth about the sinfulnes of sin. People will never set their faces decidedly towards heaven and live like pilgrims, until they really feel that they are in danger of hell." (Ryle, loc. 488)

I do not really have much to add to this from Ryle. It is fairly self-explanatory. But, can you relate to this sort of dry "pseudo-Christian" Christianity prevalent in our day? It has something of Christianity, but it is not quite real Christianity. It has a "form of godliness" but further observation shows that it has no "power". This is exactly what I was trying to convey in my weekend post! Our churches have by and large devolved into this positive thinking motivationalism with Bible verses and religious words sprinkled throughout. And while doctrinally you might not be able to find anything "heretical" present; you might not be able to find anything alive there either.

The test for true religion is what Ryle says above. Is your Christianity robust enough to influence the daily conduct in your life? To comfort your life? To give peace in death? Or is your Christianity exclusively a feel good message of tolerance and good morals that falls drastically short of any salvation power? Sadly this is far too often the case.

It is no surprise to me that the church is losing relevance today. In order for Christianity to be relevant, in order for the gospel to be believed and clung to, there has to be bad news. There has to be something that mankind desperately needs saving from. But since we have bought into the world's morality that sin is not "that big a deal", and the world's anthropology that man is basically good, and the world's theology that God (if he exists) is similar to us and is therefore a God of love--why would anyone need saving anyways? If you take away the foundational principle of sin the whole Christian religion begins to topple over. Without sin, there is no wrath. Without wrath, there is no need for a Savior. Without a Savior there is no need for Christianity. See what I am saying? I am good. God is good. What is the problem?

But imagine for a moment that the world's standards are not the same as God's standards. Imagine that there is such a thing as sin, sin that is so bad that it is fully worthy of the eternal wrath of God in hell. What if what we prefer to be true is actually not true? What if we find out that we are not actually good people; but sinners in the hands of an angry God?

If this is actually the case we would have to do exactly what Ryle prescribes above: "bring forward more prominently the old scriptural truth about the sinfulnes of sin." We would have to eradicate the worldly paradigm that something is only wrong if it "hurts someone else", and embrace a Biblical view of the depravity of all sin. Of the depravity of our sin. It is here and only here that we can then see the beauty of a Savior. It is here and only here that Christianity is relevant.