Sin
I love being able to listen to good sermons while jogging or during long drives. Teachings from good Bible teachers are now so readily available and accessible! I’m so thankful for that! I’m an old-fashioned traditional girl who would be content to live a simple life, but I admit computers and iPod are some of the things I like about technology. 
It’s awesome to learn, study, and be encouraged by some of my favorite Bible teachers through the click of a mouse or iPod. I was listening to John Piper as he described the heinousness of sin and the ways in which we commit sin (please note sin is not limited to these, though).
Sin is…
The glory of God not honored.
The holiness of God not reverenced.
The greatness of God not admired.
The power of God not praised.
The truth of God not sought.
The wisdom of God not esteemed.
The beauty of Christ not treasured.
The goodness of God not savored.
The faithfulness of God not trusted.
The commandments of God not obeyed.
The justice of God not respected.
The wrath of God not feared.
The grace of God not cherished.
The presence of God not prized.
The Person of God not loved.
August 1st, 2007 at 9:30 pm | Permalink
*The presence of God is not prized*
That one struck home.
John Piper made a comment in one of his sermons on Romans 9 that haunts me to this day. He was extolling the glory of God and in mid-sentence he cried, “Turn the T.V. off!” (in the sense of it taking away from bible study). Even now I am convicted.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:37 pm | Permalink
Sometimes I think I must weird. I rather use my Mac and Itunes to download sermons and theological teachings than listening to music. I do love music too, but when I am exercising my Ipod is with me with programs like the White Horse Inn. The Ipod has become my friends. Many times I will even listen to a program more than once. Now that may be weird.
I am thankful to God that He has given me the hunger for His truth as express on good teaching downloaded on my Ipod.
Cheers
Your Brother
Timothes
http://www.skubalon.net
August 1st, 2007 at 10:43 pm | Permalink
Which Piper sermon are you referring to?
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:39 am | Permalink
I agree, Jessica. Wouldn’t it be great if we could get mp3s of the myriad reformers’ and Puritans’ sermons? To hear John Owen preach on the mortification of sin, or Calvin on the doctrines of God’s glorious grace. As much as I am attuned to the ‘old ways’, I, too, am thankful for computer Bible programs, godly preachers, iPods, mp3s, and SermonAudio.Com
August 3rd, 2007 at 7:35 pm | Permalink
Hi Jacob,
Nice to hear from you. Oh, I’m sorry, the title of the sermon just escaped me right now. But I’ll be sure to get back to you when I remember later.
Oh, can you please tell me the title of that sermon? I’d really like to hear it. Yeah, Piper is awesome when it comes to his sermons on the sovereignty of God and Romans 9.
Recently I’ve enjoyed the late Dr. James Montgomery Boice’s sermons a lot, too. Have you listened to him much?
Tim wrote:
Hehehe… I’m like you in that, Tim. I don’t use the iPod for music. Basically just sermons from James M. Boice, Michael Horton, R.C. Sproul, etc. By the way, as you may know, I just recently purchased the black 8GB iPod Nano. Woohoo! I’m so happy about that.
Josh wrote:
Yes, that would be great, Josh. Oh, to hear the voice of Charles Spurgeon…
Or the great oratory of George Whitefield when he preached to 20,000 people in open air. That would have been awesome! And yeah, I’m thankful for SermonAudio.com, too… can’t forget that. 
August 7th, 2007 at 11:05 am | Permalink
When we are reminded of our sin, we are forced to acknowledge the pristine righteousness of God. I LOVE him in His GLory!!!
This is what the Lord showed me upon salvation; that I am in desperate need of a Saviour. Dead in tresspasses and sins.
In my current meditation on the fear of the Lord, I am understanding how great it is to Fear(know) Him, and thereby know these attributes of the Father.. which causes us to hate what he hates.
Without a revelation from the Lord, the unregenerate will read these statements and naturally reject them. In other words, thank you Christ for revealing(yea, reproving us of!!) our depravity within us, and cleansing us from all unrighteousness!!
August 8th, 2007 at 6:55 am | Permalink
In difference to Dr. Piper, sin is not confined to what we commit, sin is what we are. You do not have to do anything to violate the say, 10 Commandments. Take the last one, the 10th on covetousness, there you do not have to act out covetousness. You could simply be looking at your neighbor’s goods and liking it and wishing it was yours.
L P Cruz
August 8th, 2007 at 12:16 pm | Permalink
L P Cruz said:
Respectfully, sin is “any lack of conformity to, or transgression of the Law of God.” This is not confined to physical acts, and I don’t believe Piper limited his definition to such. This also encompasses thought. Even in your aforementioned scenario their is commital of sin, nonetheless. It was commited in thought.
August 8th, 2007 at 5:18 pm | Permalink
any lack of conformity to, or transgression of the Law of God.
And that is what we, are 24 hours a day. That is the point I am making, there is no time I am not displeasing God (you and me included), that is why Jesus came, he who loved God perfectly for me 24 hours a day. That is why we have the Good News. He won and pleased the Father for me. The question is also this, if someone teaches the Law in all aspects as if it is do-able even after being a Christian, he has seized teaching the function of the Law.
There are things in the Law that I may be fulfilling but the aspects I am not, I am condemned by it in whole – in toto! So Christ remains our everything even after being a Christian.
LPC
August 8th, 2007 at 6:07 pm | Permalink
LPC said:
As per Tim Keller:
– We never graduate from Gospel to something ‘more advance’. It’s not the ABCs of Christianity. It’s the A-Z. The gospel drives everything we do. It’s the solution to every problem.
On Josh and LPC’s comment. Seemed like both stated the same thing, different ways.
We sin in our heart. I could do good thing, and thought that the motive in my heart was good. But deep in my heart maybe dark (the real motive), which I might not even realize. But God looked at our heart.
August 8th, 2007 at 7:00 pm | Permalink
Abel,
Absolutely agree with your quote of Tim Keller.
I do not love God even after I got saved and to teach that I can is in fact confusing. I am not acceptable to God after I am a Christian, my acceptability to God is because Jesus covered for me.
To say that -you do not price God highly and now, be a good boy, try harder next time- is to rob the Christian of the joy of his salvation, it makes you focus on you. And what shall you find? nothing! – in me dwells no good thing – Rom 7:18.
Jesus becomes lovely because Jesus and His Cross is the source of my forgiveness of sins. We love Jesus because he first (and IS ALWAYS FIRST in loving US) loved us.
He is rich in mercy on those who come to him who are failing and even at that – failing as a Christian even!
That is why he always says – go in peace (I have answered for you).
Pax
LPC
August 8th, 2007 at 7:04 pm | Permalink
LP Cruz,
You said, “In difference to Piper…” which, by implication, seems to make the reader think that you intepreted Piper as saying that sin was confined to things we actively (in a physical sense) commit. I don’t think he limits it in such a sense. Thus, I’m at a loss to figure out your “difference(s)” with Dr. Piper. Maybe you could clarify for this dense brother.
August 8th, 2007 at 7:36 pm | Permalink
There may be some misunderstanding as to what John Piper teaches. Let me just clarify that John Piper never, ever said that sin’s definition is somehow limited to the above list. Anyone who is remotely familiar with John Piper (or his books and sermons) would know this. I took it for granted that my readers (mostly my friends) had already known this about Piper, so I didn’t feel the need to state it when I posted my entry. But let me just should clarify it now.
I totally agree with what Josh eloquently wrote earlier. (Thanks so much, Josh!
) He essentially responded with what I would have, except he beat me to it:
L P Cruz wrote:
Yes, I agree. Since no one has said otherwise, I assume you wrote it as an aside for sharing. But thanks anyway for reminding about the Lord’s free grace, mercy, and goodness in saving wretched sinners.
August 8th, 2007 at 7:48 pm | Permalink
Bro Josh,
I must admit, I am going by with the sermons I have heard of his and the books I have read authored by him – like Desiring God and Future Grace. I used to be a fan of his.
Jessica provided no reference in her post so I interpreted those definitions or descriptions of sins by what I got from Dr. Piper in the past. He tends to be philosophical and a bit of a mystic.
For example in Desiring God – he is right, I do not desire God and I find no pleasure in God.
I am guilty, I do not desire God, but he is guilty too, he does not desire God either. But the solution is not to desire God better next time or try harder next time. For if he does and do, he has no need of Jesus’ forgiveness daily.
Because I am a 24 X 7 sinner in thought, word and deed, I need Jesus’ and His Cross daily 24 X 7 too. He covers my planks.
The HS continues to convict us of our sins, and continues to prod us to run to Jesus, ie faith.
My difference then with Dr. Piper is this – if I want me to Desire God, then let the Law give me no excuse, also let it show I am not doing it, it is never done in my life and I am condemned by it. But do not let it be said that there is hope for me in that if I just Desire God better next time, it will do the job. Then, let it be shown that Jesus did what was required of me and for Christ sake and work, I am forgiven set free, allowed to roam.
Show my great sin and how it has greatly been forgiven for Christ’s sake.
The effect of that is to be indebted to Jesus (which is what God wants anyway).
I’d say Dr. Piper makes blur Law from Gospel.
LPC
August 8th, 2007 at 10:59 pm | Permalink
LP, you wrote:
Well, to be honest–and I think Jessica will vouch for this statement (concerning me)–I’ve never been too drawn to Piper myself. Dr. Piper couldn’t care any less if I was, either. I don’t really have issues with him, I just don’t particularly like his writing style. Some of his sermons, on the other hand, are great. However, that’s all irrelevant.
She may not have cited the source, but I’m fairly confident that the “Sin is…” and following phrases she attached thereunto are from Piper’s mouth. Thus, in this particular post,that’s the given context. Can you point out the error in some of those? Your post automatically comes in on the defensive (“In difference to Piper”). So I’m still trying to figure out your dissent from the context of Jessica’s blog post.
Ok, you’re really straying from the thrust of Jessica’s post, though, by commenting on something that’s not even present therein. However, for my own indulgence: Are you saying that a Christian never desires God? Forgive my ineptitude.
And you think Piper would disagree with this?
And Piper would depart from this sentiment?
(my emphasis added)
Do you think Piper would really believe that stirring ourselves up would “do the job?” If so, I think you misunderstand him. I’ve read neither “Desiring God” nor “Future Grace”–Nor, will I. However, I do believe Piper has written a treatise on justification called “Counted Righteousness in Christ.” This would no doubt deal with the doctrine of justification. I’m sure that Piper’s orthodox in that regard.
I don’t believe that Piper would run from the truth of God’s Law, noting that it leaves men without excuse.
I’m still bereft of understanding the why of your comment, considering the context of Jessica’s post.
Do you think Piper doesn’t feel constantly indebted to Christ? But you may also take note that, as Christians, we are to believe God’s promises. And if God has promised to all who trust and believe in Christ (i.e. all those who have been given to Him before the foundation of the world) that His wrath and justice against our sin (read: our “debt”) has been satisfied, then we should believe it and live like we believe it. Right?
August 8th, 2007 at 11:42 pm | Permalink
Josh,
So I’m still trying to figure out your dissent from the context of Jessica’s blog post.
It is hard since you have not read for yourself the context of what I have said, that is the reading of his books and some sermons.
What is the context of Jessica’s post but that itself without proper context? It is a list of what sin is. So neither you nor I are in a position to defend or critique on that level, but as I said, it was in the context of what I read in other works of his.
Perhaps my difference may be more appreciated or proven un-reasonable if you compare my comments when you do pick up Desiring God or Future Grace. In the light of my comments here, you may then decide if I have been unreasonable in dissenting, but you are asking me a question and I am directing you for the clarification of my answer to those works.
Jessica was the one who posted may be she can list which sermon we can both listen to and go from there then I can make myself clearer.
If you like I am about to offer a tweaking of one of his sermons, but it will not be in this comments it will be in my blog. It would be wrong to do that here.
LPC
August 9th, 2007 at 12:22 am | Permalink
LP said:
Well, this is her blog. Also, she doesn’t say “this list is the all encompassing definition of sin.”
My whole point is to discern exactly what your response had to do with Jessica’s blog post and why you posted it. Just because she mentioned Piper by name? A good opportunity to comment about Piper? Just curious…
August 9th, 2007 at 1:28 am | Permalink
Josh,
I commented because of my past impressions of Dr. Piper and to give a subtle nuance of Dr. Piper’s positions. He says many good things but his propensity to the mystical such as that of Jonathan Edwards can get confusing and can sometimes show up as a form of new “law” of spirituality.
Indeed, his book on justification is spot on, I flicked through it and it is quite good if only he stuck with it as a theology of ministry, but the other works tend to separate a theological concept say – take for example — Grace, detached or blurred in relation to Christ and his Cross.
Now admittedly I am no longer Reformed but Lutheran, however, many Reformed friends of mine in the internet share the same hesitation now that I have with Dr. Piper’s expositions.
I have been away from his teachings and perhaps he has made more precise his teachings based on some contrary inputs from the public so that is something you have to take on board. I do not apologize that I do have some bias but make you aware of it.
LPC
August 9th, 2007 at 9:03 am | Permalink
LPC,
I used to be fans of Piper. But once I heard Tim Keller’s sermon, I never look back. Both of them received a lot of influence from Jonathan Edward but the results were very different.
(for Keller: Jonathan Edward and C.S. Lewis influenced him most)
IMHO. Piper has tendency to make things unnecessary complicated (abstract) and prolong the time to reach the conclusion/solution (the Gospel).
No wonder, people see as if he didn’t embrace the Gospel.
In contrast to Tim Keller who always end each sermons with how the Gospel be the solution to the problem. (he’s a genius on that)
I see that Piper might grow such tendency (as if he embrace law) due to his experience with Christian who misused the TULIP as a pass for keep sinning.
Again, compared to Keller when he explain Roman 8:38-39.
(38 For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.)
That would include also our own attempts to separate ourselves, or else Roman 3:38-39 could be nullified.
btw. While Piper hold most of the reformed theology. I would not consider him a figure of reformed. For example, he didn’t believe in child baptism.
~Abel
August 9th, 2007 at 10:01 pm | Permalink
Josh wrote:
That is precisely the same thing I was wondering about. It appears recent comments have digressed from the original intention of my post because some have read into the text in order to discuss other things they claim they read from Piper. I simply originally wanted to write about how the Lord is teaching me of the ways in which I’d like to honor Him better in my life. The context of the post has nothing to do with focusing on self and obedience apart from God’s mercy and grace.
Josh wrote:
Yes, indeed it has digressed. And nowhere did I write in my post anything related to the things suggested by L. P. Cruz. If anyone wishes to critique some of Piper’s other sermons which they’ve heard in the past, that is, of course, fine… I have no problem with that, but it seems this entry’s comment section may not be the proper context for that. As I said, I simply wanted to write and remind myself of the ways in which I could honor Christ better in my life (e.g. reverencing God’s holiness, seeking God’s truth, honoring God’s glory). I hope no one would read into (or beyond) what I’ve written.
This somehow reminds me of what Phil Johnson (the editor of John MacArthur’s major works) once wrote on his blog. He used to have a personal blog before switching to a team blog. Why? Because he found a lot of comments posted by readers into his blog by those who have harbored frustrations and disagreements against his pastor John MacArthur, and he didn’t have the time to entertain all of them. They posted comments (which are non-related to his blog posts) to vent some of their frustrations and disagreements against Pastor MacArthur’s teachings and sermons they’ve heard in the past.
At any rate, I wish to express my thanks for reading this and my blog. If anyone wishes to address their disagreements on Piper’s past sermons off the topic of this blog, please feel welcome to write to Dr. Piper at: mail@desiringgod.org
Thanks for reading. God bless.