The more I've thought about this definition of sin, the more I've come to like it. At first it seemed overly simplistic, or at least incomplete. It seemed to exclude a lot of things that I considered to be sin.
First, let's look at what is obviously included in this definition. In the section that this "quote" appears (as I remember it, anyway), Forde is talking about salvation as God's gift to us, and our tendency to refuse that gift and insist on doing it ourselves, or at least helping. This insistence on making salvation depend on something that we do* rather than what God has done is the essence of sin according to this definition. This seems strange when you really consider it, because the manifestations of this insistence (see footnote) are often exactly what we would list if we were asked to describe "holiness." It seems that sin is indistinguishable from holiness, at least from the outside.
But what about the inside? Can we at least make the distinction that these "good works" are sin when done with an ulterior motive, and holiness when done with pure motives? Well, what exactly would a pure motive be? Take tithing as an example. Obviously we would consider doing it for glory or influence to be an impure motive. What about doing it for the reward in heaven? Doesn't seem much different than doing it for a reward on earth. How about doing it to better the church which we attend? Well, that's also fairly self-centered, who's to say that my church is more deserving than another church? What about doing it to please God? That depends, what am I hoping to get out of it? If I'm hoping to gain favor or something, then I am really trying to manipulate God, which isn't much different than performing a ritual to coerce the spirits to my purposes. What about just doing it because I am told? Well, again, what do I hope to gain from my obedience? How about the satisfaction of knowing I did something good? Once again, I'm doing it ultimately for my own benefit. Even assuming we could agree on a pure motive, do you honestly believe that you could ever be completely free of any other motivation? My point in saying all this is that we almost never do anything altruistically. In fact, it may be that the only time we do anything with 100% pure motive is when we don't even know we're doing it. Perhaps the only time we ever actually do anything good is when we do it mindlessly, or better yet, when God does it through us while we aren't looking. Perhaps good works themselves are a gift from God.
So this definition covers all of our good works and classifies them as sin... what about our bad works? At first, I didn't think this definition included those things such as lying, adultery, and murder, but now I think that it may. The gift of eternal life isn't all that we receive from God, there is also scripture. Even though the law may be of little use when it comes to getting into heaven, and in fact may be worse than worthless, it still has plenty of use when it comes to the here and now. Scripture has been given to us, and failure to give heed to scripture is in fact a failure to receive a gift from God.
Still though, I think the most important part of this definition, especially for those of us who consider ourselves to be religious, is that part which deals with our "good" works. So, maybe instead of focusing so much on not doing bad things and trying to do more good things, we should be trying to receive all that God is giving us.
What do you think? What are you refusing to receive from God?
*such as: living a moral life, "making Jesus the Lord of my life" (as if he isn't already), being circumcised, making my "decision for Jesus" (as though there is just one decision to be made), voting Republican, asking Jesus into my heart, doing volunteer work, having "a personal relationship" with Jesus, charity, fasting, tithing, not watching rated R movies, joining a monastery, looking the "right" way, trying my darnedest, etc.
