Getting More from Our Discipleship Than Sin Management (Part 1): Dangers to Impede Discipleship

Are we conquerors of sin or managers of sin? For many churches, it is the time of year when Bible studies, life groups, and discipleship are once again restarting. The same is true for our church, and this question flooded the first meeting of our men's group recently. Though it's probably too deep of a question for our feeble minds at 5:30 am, it was a valid question and one preceded by years of experience of pseudo discipleship connections. This morning was my first meeting with this group of men, yet it became clear that among us was a bond over our experience and dissatisfaction with current 'methodologies' of discipleship that seem to chain them to sin rather than helping them overthrow its rule in their lives. There is a fear and a perception amongst some that the focus of discipleship is not about conquering sin but managing it. However, because of the hope we have in Christ, the work of the Holy Spirit, and God's provision of the body of Christ, discipleship is more than managing sin; it is an opportunity to overcome it.

Perhaps it would be helpful to you if I clarified what I mean by sin management discipleship. When I describe a home Bible study, individual discipleship, or group gathering as a sin management group, I am referring to those studies and times with other believers in which there is no counsel that leads toward the possibility of victory over sin. Instead, the battle with sin is loosely referred to and only in general terms, without specifics in which the response generated is something that essentially says, "It's OK. We're all sinners; just try better next time." Others may say it differently, but I'm sure you can identify this type of response. Maybe you have even given it yourself. The motivation behind such a response is often meant to be helpful and encouraging with a genuine interest for a fellow believer. Unfortunately, it can have the opposite effect, leaving one hopelessly struggling in sin that they feel chained to with little understanding about how to conquer it.

It appears (at least to me) that this attitude has developed from the infiltration of worldly ideologies that have been allowed to seep into the church unchecked. Consequently, when you evaluate the studies and discipleship within the church and discern the presence of several of the following elements, you’ve likely uncovered a sin management program. These elements include aspects we can label as antinomianism, formalism, escapism, and pragmatism.

Antinomianism

Antinomianism has become commonplace in churches today. Antinomianism essentially says, “Christ’s work on the cross covered my sin therefore, I’m not bound to God’s law.” There is some truth within that statement. Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection covered our sins, a truth that caused us to rejoice. Neither are we bound to the law in the same way we once were before Christ in that God sees us not as we are contrary to the law, but as we are through our confession of Christ and His sufficiency.

Few churches or believers, though, will claim to be antinomian, and few would use the exact wording, "I'm not bound by God's law," especially in our circles. However, what you will find common is a lack of conviction about sin because it is covered, and that lack of conviction usually means a lack of confession about sin as well. Instead of saying, "God's law does not bind me," they may say, "God's grace covers me." Again, not untrue. However, if it leads us to make light of God's grace, then perhaps we have taken that too far.

Escapism:

Closely related to antinomianism above, but to a lesser degree, is what I call escapism. Escapism is where we make excuses for our sins. Sometimes, that excuse is, "Well, God's grace covered it, so I don’t need to worry about it.” More often than not, though, you'll hear something like,"We're all still battling our flesh" or "None of us are perfect." Again, these are not untrue statements, and I think because of that, we sometimes fail to realize that we rely on this so often that it has become a means of excusing our sin. Yet, it subverts the Holy Spirit's work to convict us of sin and convince us to turn from it.

Instead of leading people out of sin, it leads them to be content in it, again leaving little hope for overcoming it. It can leave a person saying with Paul, “For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I want is what I keep on doing” (Romans 7:19) but without hope of deliverance from that sin. The solution to this is not an ongoing excusal of sin but instead, a delight in the law and the Lord Jesus Christ, so much so that we delight more in them than we do in the sin, causing us to turn away from it and towards Him(cf. Romans 7:20-25).

Formalism:

A third characteristic is a reliance on form over function. This reliance, I call formalism, occurs when we are more concerned about the outward appearance than the inward heart and expresses itself in superficiality. In part, society seems to thrive on superficiality these days. People may describe some of their closest connections as coming from behind a computer screen, and what passes as a conversation amongst friends in a coffee shop is often light banter. Content with discussions about the weather or sports, a turn inward to discuss the soul (and especially its relationship to God) is an instant conversation stopper.

As long as people appear OK on the outside, then they must be OK. In this, we don't have to dive into the deeper end of the pool to talk about the status of their emotions, the state of their current relationships, or the current standing of their heart which might reveal some real concerns. I suspect part of the contentment with formalism is a personal conviction about our personal walk, and if we ask others to indicate where they are, we might have to reveal where we are. Superficiality alleviates that risk. Once again, though, it leaves people existing in a constant state of sin, and the longer they stay there (or we stay there), the harder life becomes and the more difficult it is to overcome it (cf. Galatians 5, especially verses 16-26).

Pragmatism:

In the last nine months, I have become convinced that one of the greatest threats to our church is the ideology of pragmatism. Now pragmatism was first introduced to society in an August 1898 lecture by William James, and it has been around for quite some time (1). It did not start gaining a hold until the mid-20^th century and it was after that when it became a real influencer in the church. Through pragmatism's influence, the church became freed to adopt its preferred methodologies because they achieved a desirable results.

There is a relationship between pragmatism and formalism. Because stability appears outwardly, it justifies the means, leading toward a pragmatic approach to discipleship. Pragmatism looks towards methods, how-to lists, and 'best' tips for its discipleship, leaning on the notion that because it seems to produce results outwardly, incorporation into our regular processes is acceptable. However, this does not guarantee heart transformation; instead, it fosters a discipleship of sin management rather than sin conquering.

The influence of antinomianism, escapism, formalism, and pragmatism is prevalent in the world and by the church’s fascination with the culture, that influence is seeping into our churches. Unfortunately, each ofthese undermines God’s perfect, revealed will in His word, which is a discipleship that leads towards conquering sin through the conviction and help of the Holy Spirit rather than one that leads merely to sin management. In light of this then, what is the response of the church? That’s an answer for next week’s article.

(1) Michael Bacon, Pragmatism: An Introduction, (Malden,MA: Polity Press, 2012), 1.

‍