Sunday School | Different Bible Translations - Biblical Theology of the Doctrine of Sin

Introduction

What's up buddy, good to see ya. Alright, we're gonna, so we're gonna forgive a little bit of a stutter step here. So I think, is it true that the last time I was here, we've had, I was gone last week and we had a Thanksgiving break, but I think the last time that I was here, we talked about William Tyndale. Does that sound right? I haven't anything. Okay, and then last week while I was gone, Sloop began the doctrine of sin, which is what he was assigned to do, and what he was, what I asked him to do, but I was just reminded moments ago that we skipped something that I promised to do, and so we're gonna kind of fit it in real quick, and that was we're gonna have a brief conversation about Bible translations. We had talked about William, you know, we were kind of finishing our doctrine of the word and we were talking about how it's translated and how we've gotten what we have. We talked about the story of William Tyndale, and then I was supposed to kind of lead a little bit of just a chance to talk about what translations you use and why, what the advantages of each and all those kind of things, and then do doctrine of sin, but I forgot, and so I had Sloop start on sin, and so I will continue the sin conversation, but let's just go back, so it's just kind of scrambled in order. Can you live with that? All right, so we'll give like, you know, a few minutes to this idea of translations. So, and then we'll be done with our section on the word.

Bible Translations and Variations

So I'm just curious, what do you use? What do you read your Bible in? How many of you are NIV? Okay, and how many of you are purists as the 84 NIV? Andy Fitzer? Okay, how many of you even knew, okay, does anybody read the 2011 NIV, or did you maybe not even know that was such a thing, okay, and the rest, how many of you are ESV? Okay, so we're about split between the new international version and English standard version, and then who is not NIV or ESV? New King James, all right. New American Standard. What did I else do here? The message. Let's go Caleb, all right, all right, that's good. Who is that? What's his name? Yeah, what's his first name? Eugene Peterson. Yes, that's right. Eugene Peterson. What a brilliant, godly man. Okay, the message, NIV, ESV, New King James, NAS, holding out. What else? Is that it? Who is English Bible? Are you serious? Is that what you read? Very often. Wow, that is very splinter, all right, you're like very unique in that, okay, that's great.

Here's a couple of thoughts on this. The truth is, any one of these things, they're all gonna be great. Every one of these things has been, the message might not be a translation, it's more of a transliteration, or it's more of a, what do you call it, a paraphrase, right? But still, it's based on translations, and it's actually remarkably insightful. Any one of these things is a thousand times better than whatever you or I could possibly scrape out of reading a Greek or Hebrew Bible, right? So whatever it is, and I don't actually know anything but the New English Bible, so maybe you have to tell us why you like that. But whatever it is that you're reading, you guys, you're overwhelmingly gonna get something fantastic and wonderful and excellent, and done by brilliant people that know a thousand things that I can't even begin to approach knowing. If I had to be a Bible translator, God help us all. Like I am not a language God, so I'm just so grateful for all of these things. But there are differences among them, and there's different reasons that there might be advantageous in different situations. But the truth is, probably the Bible that you read is more driven by your generation than by anything else, right? When I was in college, everybody older than me read the NAS, but everybody my age read the NIV, and then 20 years later the ESV comes out, and so all the new generation starts reading the ESV, and so there really is something, and we just keep someday you cutting edge ESVers are gonna be replaced by whatever comes out in 2050, and you're gonna be the old cod, you're sticking to the ESV, right? And that's fine, not whatever, live your life, okay? Generally speaking, within these translations, anyone of them are gonna be fine. New King James is a great translation, and I think it's much to be preferred over the King James. Does anybody read just pure, straight, 1611 King James Bible? No, okay, well that's good, not because it's a bad translation, but simply because it requires translation, because it was written 400 years ago, right? And none of you have ever used the phrase "filthy-luker" in your lives, okay? But that's the way King James describes greed, okay? And I think it was written when Shakespeare was alive, it is just a different thing. It's lovely, it's wonderful, but there can be in certain segments of Christianity, like in a very fundamentalist Baptist church, this kind of perspective that like Jesus used the King James Bible, and if it was good enough for him, it's good enough for me, you know, it will never change anything apart from King James as like some aberration. That's just so, so silly, just ludicrous, right? But it's wonderful, and there are some poetic phrases in the King James Bible. I prefer Luke 2 in the voice of Linus in the words of King James, okay? So that's fine, but the new King James is kind of the translation that King James. It maintains some of the rhythms, but it puts it in the language that is the language that you speak, right? And that very function is the reason that I read, typically I read the NIV, I'll read lots of different things, but I like the NIV because my humble opinion, it speaks the way people speak, right? It's the language of normal people, I'll give you, here's an example of this. If you have your Bible, whatever version you're using, go to 1st Thess 2.8, and let me just give you my riff on why I like the NIV. God's word is opaque to most people, it's hard to read. I do believe in a doctrine called the perspicuity of Scripture, which is the idea that it's clear, it's understandable, but there are difficulties here. Here's 1st Thess 2.8 in the 1984 new international version. It says, "We loved you so much that we were delighted to share with you, not only the gospel of God, but our lives as well, because you had become so dear to us." Every word in that sentence is a word that I have used, right? Everything in that is just the way that normal people talk. I can imagine, perhaps, Mark Skolrude saying to Susie, "I love you so much." Have you ever said that to her? You should, right, right, never. Here's how the ESV renders that. It says, "So, being affectionately desirous of you," have you ever said that to her? "Being affectionately desirous of you, we were ready to share with you, not only the gospel of God, but also our own selves, because you had become very dear to us." So I find the ESV to be unnecessarily unnatural, right? Nobody ever says, "I am affectionately desirous of you, unless they're on the make in some weird particular way," okay? This is not the way normal people talk. So, I think NIV wins in the categories of how do human beings talk? What's accessible? What's understandable? I like that better. But I just have to admit that when it comes to the quality and the accuracy of the translation, if there's ever a dispute between the NIV and the ESV, 99 times out of 100, the ESV is correct. Okay? So, ESV is better for academic work, ESV is better if you really want to get the particular meaning of the word, and that's a reasonable thing for a person of value, right? That's perfectly fine. But if you're just reading on your own, you're having a quiet time and you just want to know what it means, I think the NIV is going to be a little bit better for you, okay? That's your two, by far, your two biggest, you know, possibilities right now. New English Bible. Dan, what do you love about that? Where does that line up in this? It's an older version. It's, I call it the literary Bible. It is British and just has that particular flavor to it. I have found it useful. I will say, I don't read just that. I read lots of different ones, depending on what it is. Sure, sure. But that is one of my go-to. Yes, okay. So that makes sense. Do you know is it more? So NIV is more dynamic equivalent, meaning the NIV is more, a more accurate translation at a phrase by phrase level, whereas the ESV is more accurate at a word for word level. Where does that fall? It's more in the spirit of NIV, okay? And then even if you don't read the message or you don't read, what are the other kind of groovy Bibles that are like that? New living, new living translation. If you've never read that, you might just take a year. If you happen to read through the Bible in a year, take a year and say I'm just going to spend this year in the message or in a new living translation, it would not be a bad idea. It will help you see things that you've just kind of like blah, blah, blah. Whenever I read something outside of what is normal, it can be a little bit more startling and help me see things that I just kind of glaze over. So any of those things I think, that's your general range. I read typically NIV. This church is officially ESV, we have ESV's and the pews, they're all going to do great by you. Okay? Anybody have questions about that? Or guidance on? It's probably a good shirt, make sure you read the second edition because the actual people that put it out, the NLT realized there were some things that were just really flawed in the second edition, so try and see if it says second. Second edition of the NLT, the new living translation. And then here's what I would say when people ask me hey, I want to buy a Bible for my kid or I want to buy a Bible, what should I get? I would recommend one of two Bibles. They would be the Zondervan NIV study Bible, which has great cross-referencing, great notes. It has been the standard sense at least the 80s. I mean it is a phenomenal tool, brilliant work, or the Crossway ESV study Bible. Maybe a little bit, maybe 10% more academic than the Zondervan one. Those two, they are exceptionally well done, fantastic scholarship, and what a study Bible does is it just puts notes on the bottom of the page so it would be like a very, very, very mini commentary on the passage. It will have cross-referencing so you can see easily, like hey, where is this topic addressed elsewhere in the Scripture if you want to chain things around? So the Zondervan NIV study Bible, the Crossway ESV study Bible, those would both be, in my humble opinion, like the gold standard of the lavish gifts available for English speakers that want to read the Scriptures. You want to add something to that list, Adam? No, yeah, just a good question. And I walked in a few minutes late, this is where you started, but I'm curious how like newer translations are made legitimate, right, like when the message came to be like, is there like a group of people that said that's good, or like I know there's this other translation I haven't read it fully, but the Passion translation I've heard, like seen used in reference in some places that I've listened to and seen, I'm just curious, like is there a process, should we be wary of like a newer translation or, yeah, that's a good question. So Adam's saying like, you know, is there anybody, is there some board that gives approval to these translations to say this one is trustworthy and you can, you know, we can use it? Not to my knowledge, but anything like when Zondervan made the NIV, when Crossway made the ESV, they pulled together top-notch scholars and you can know, you can go in and see like who are these people that are doing it. So I would suggest like maybe as a kind of, to make your point, the New World Translation, the NWT is put out by the Jehovah's Witnesses and I don't recommend that because they've made clear translation choices that are erroneous. So for instance, you probably all know John 1-1, not in the beginning, John 1-1, how does it go? In the beginning, was the word and the new world translation of that says, do you know what it says? In the beginning, was the word and the word was with God and the word was do you know Rick? A God, exactly, right? And they're clearly trying to avoid the deity of Christ because they don't believe in the deity of Christ and they're just making stuff up, they're just inserting an article that's not actually present, right? So there are these splintering things, but I don't think there's some, I'm not aware of any board that would sit on top of the message and whatnot and do that. But I think that generally anything that's becoming out of any of these kind of modern mainline Christianity press is not going to have that kind of agenda driven error. And then as they hit the market, we have the opportunity to see, is it trustworthy? I mean, overwhelmingly there are trustworthy. There are lines in any translation that no translation can perfectly capture the original Greek and Hebrew and Aramaic, right? It's just not possible. There's not a one to one correspondence between languages. And there are sometimes theological decisions that the translators make. There are theological decisions that the NIV has made that I take great exception to. I just think they just blew it in a couple of key places. But they did a lot better job than I would have done. I mean in comprehensively greater job than I would have done. And so we live with, we live with the little errors where need be. Yeah, Brenda? Red Letter Bible. Jesus' words. Jesus' words in red. Yes, great. I think it's a helpful thing. The only problem with the red letter Bible is there's some ambiguities, right? So is John 3 16, did Jesus say that? Or did John comment on that? And so when you go to red letter, you are making an interpretive decision. I think Jesus was the speaker of these words. And sometimes it's very obvious. Very clearly he said it very clearly he didn't. But there are some passages where it's not clear if the author of the gospel was commenting or if it was continuing on a quote. So the red letters aren't original to the Greek, but we can almost always discern it. And I think that's a helpful tool. I don't mind that at all. Grateful for the folks who did that. Scott? I use a study model and I notice there's not that much difference. A few of these and those, but the study part almost verbatim when you guys teach. Is it faithful? It is. Where were you drawing? That's great. Point stuff. It's almost verbatim. That's excellent. And that's what we want to see, right? There's just the church is speaking with one voice about these clear things. O'Connell? Should we focus on the source document that is translated from the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Septuagint? Yeah. Better than the other? Or is it supposed to be them together? Yes. Okay. This is great. So O'Connell is saying, you know, should we care what the translation was translating from? What was the source document? And the way it works, I mean, honestly right now. Okay. So brief history. When the King James Bible was translated, the church had found, had preserved, had intact a certain body of documents, right? We do not have original Romans. We certainly don't have original Genesis. What we have is copies of these things. Those things are long since turn to dust. And there was a certain amount of resources available that we said, hey, here's all. I don't even know. I'm making this up. But like let's say in 16, you know, in the 1600s when the King James being made, maybe we had archeology had found and preserved and discovered and collected 5,000 copies of the New Testament, let's just say. And they translated it based on what they had, of course. Well, in the last 400 years, as we have discovered or collected or preserved or done better scholarship, we now have more manuscript evidence. And so you'll find some things that are in the King James that don't show up in the NIV. And that's because we have very high confidence that it shouldn't have ever been there, that it was, it was a, you know, a scribal note in the side. So what we're working from right now when we make, when we continue to study the scriptures is better. And what it will be in 100 years, perhaps, will be better still, right? They will have more, more research. But it's, we looked at this, I think, a few weeks ago. Anytime that there's any manuscript variants, which it's always going to be noted in any credible translation, and they're all basically O'Connell singing off the same song sheet, which is to say the same collection of manuscripts. So that's not a, there are not really competing visions of that. There is enormous academic unanimity of what the Greek and the Hebrew and the Aramaic said, and any modern translation is working off of that body, not just translating translations of translations. We're all going back to the original source. It's just a, it's really, it's not about raw data. It's about, hey, what's the best word in English that would capture the sense of this set of words in Greek? So it's pretty, it's all going to be very, very dependable. You know, you might favor greater technical accuracy. The NAS is more like the ESV. It's even more ESV than the ESV. It's a little more wooden. It doesn't, it's, it's not very fluent in the way that it flows, but it's precise. NIV rounds the corners a little bit, not as precise, but is more, more natural language. That's kind of how it works. Standard also has got through several iterations in the 19th. Yeah. One of the older ones, and in 2011 they have one. Correct. They have another one that they've kind of given a phrase to, I don't remember what it was, but they've tried to make it almost more NIV, but keep some of the literal trends. Yeah, which is unhelpful. So translators tend to update their own translations. There's more than one NIV, more than one NAS. There's actually more than one ESV. The ESV changes have been more minor than the, than the NIV was, but in short, you'd be great. You'd be in good place. Yeah. Want to add one? The TPT, the Passion Translation. Okay. I, Adam just mentioned, I didn't, I didn't comment on that. I don't, I've never heard of that. So. Okay, I, I know it draws from the Aramaic. Huh, well, there's not a lot of Aramaic in the, I mean, very, very little. So I've never, I have to look at it. I've never heard of that before this hour. So, the Passion Translation. It is, I would call it more of a paraphrase because the translator is one person basically, at least that's my understanding. And so it doesn't say or at least stand up to the rigors of the scholarly work that other translators have put forth because it's only one person translating. I think it's very, it, it's very interpretive of this person's perspective. Okay. I've never even heard of it. But that's, that's very interesting. And what Ellen is saying is that the Passion TPT, the Passion Translation is one person's work. It just has less of the error correction that you might get from a group. Okay. But that reminds me of something that I'll come to you in one second Bianca that there is another translation of the Old Testament that might be worth picking up and is by a man named Robert Alter. Does anybody own the Alter version, Robert Alter? This thing came out maybe two years ago and it's one man and he translated the entire Old Testament just himself. But it took him like 20 years and it's universally regarded as a work of genius. And when we say that he did the whole thing, you might have thought like, I didn't know that's not how it worked. No, the way that the ESV is made is there's a team doing Ezekiel and there's a different team doing Romans and there's a different team doing Genesis. There's groups of people that are, that are assigned to this, this portion. What you, what you end up with Robert Alter is one voice doing the entire thing and therefore you've got greater, maybe agreement with himself. Like he's translating Genesis the same way he's translating Isaiah and then he put a, he kind of did his own study battle. So like it's, it's worth looking up. Do you, you probably had, would Bob go, you have it, I would imagine you would have it. Okay. Robert Alter, if you wanted a particularly academic and really very beautiful copy of the Old Testament that comes with some really interesting insights, that's a, that's a great version.

Building a Biblical Theology of Sin

Okay Bianca, I've been pretty fond of the Amplified Bible. Sure. Only because it takes, you know, an English word that we might be familiar with and then it scounds on what some of the dynamic uses for that word might more some other maybe synonyms or meanings for that word in the context of how it is used in a scripture. Yes. I read it and I kind of just, you know, will process in these other translations and just roll through the scripture. But if I use the Amplified to kind of make you cause because it's pretty lengthy, right? It takes one word and it goes found to have an additional words in the verse, but it makes you kind of slow down and think about how poetic or beautiful or dynamic works actually. It's great. Okay. I love this. And that's, that's a great kind of like final comment on all this. Bianca is advocating for the Amplified version. And all that it does is it's, it's, it makes the book about bigger, right? Because it doesn't just say, God so loved the world. It's going to comment on maybe on several keywords and it's going to like build into it like almost parenthetically or in brackets. Like, hey, this is what this word means or here's the idea and it kind of unpacks it more. And this similar to reading a completely different translation of the message or something, because it helps you just slow down and see things that you might have just kind of glazed over, right? And what's so great, you guys, about all of this is what's, what's behind this, not only the work to translate it, but the work that you're doing to read it is it just demonstrates the value of the scriptures. This is a book worth understanding, worth pausing over, worth meditating on, worth reading in multiple translations, worth doing all that we can to really understand it. Some would say worth, worth learning Greek and Hebrew so that you can understand it. Some of you perhaps have the capacity to do that. I just don't, like I just, I just don't have the ability to do that. But maybe some of you do and that you're able to gain insights or maybe you're simply using the tools and the resources that peer behind the English into the original language to get it. When Sloop and I are preaching, we very often are using the tools of people smarter than us to figure out, okay, why is this word used? One thing I'd love to do is say, where is this particular Greek or Hebrew word used elsewhere in the scripture? And Bianca, that's kind of how I amplify it. Like this word here means this, but here it meant that and here it meant that. And so some of the shades of those meanings show up and so doing that kind of work is really, really valuable, right? So here's what I will say is a final thing. These are translations. It's also worth just thinking about the tools that you have, right? Some of you just have a paper Bible, right? Fantastic. I almost never ever read a paper Bible. I read this and I have a piece of software called Accordance. There are generally two of these. There's a Coke and a Pepsi. There is Accordance and there is Logos, right? And they are the primary competitors of the Bible software. Accordance began on a Mac and then got ported to PC. Logos began on a PC and then got ported to Mac. So you can drink Coke or Pepsi. I don't really care. I've been using Accordance for like 30 years and I'm probably never ever going to change because I know how to use it because I've got tens of thousands of dollars invested in it, like literally like Bob has a much more impressive library if you go into his house. It's got an incredible library. I have like three print books, but I have my entire library right here and Bob has to go home to get his, right? I have the... No, it's right. It's not in the cloud, Bob. It's right here, right? But I have like the sum of human knowledge about the Scriptures with me at all times. It is unbelievable what we have available. And so if you wanted to... Maybe we could do this sometime. We could do a class on how to use Accordance or how... I don't know how to use Logos, but it's probably the same essential thing. But I have it at all times. I've got like every translation that we've discussed, except TPT. I never heard of that. And every commentary worth a nickel and some worth thousands of dollars. I have all of these things. I can appear to the Greek in the Hebrew. It's incredible. Like if John Calvin were to be raised from the dead and to see what we have, he would weep, right? And this guy is like looking with candlelight. I mean, what we have, the ability to mine this book is unparalleled in human history, right? It's absolutely incredible. So read a translation. I don't particularly care. Read a good translation. But my goodness, we have... You live in such a sea of wealth that God's word can be made more accessible to you. We have also mentioned the blue letter Bible as a free Hebrew. It's got ways to do much of what's out there from a software. Yes, that's right. So if you Google blue letter Bible, not red letter, but blue letter Bible, it's basically what I'm describing, but it's available online in the cloud free. And I've never used it, because why would I? Because I already have everything. But people who don't have this stuff, some people love it. I have no idea how to use it, but blue letter Bible can give you all kinds of translations and all sorts of resources to help you with your study.

The Doctrine of Sin

Okay, now we're going to turn toward the doctrine of sin. So what I was planning on doing, we're no longer going to do, but let's start with this. We're going to begin... I want to build a biblical index in your mind. I want to build a biblical theology of the doctrine of sin. And so I don't think we're going to get any further than brainstorming the list, okay? I have a list, but I'm not going to tell you what's on it. If we were to try to say, if I wanted to understand what God's word says about sin, what are the 10 or 15 passages that you think we'd have to include? We're going to have to go... We'll list them all out, and then we'll mind them one at a time, the doctrine of sin. What is sin? Why is there sin? What are the impacts of sin? I don't know. Are all sins equal? Why do God allow sin? Whatever your questions are about sin, where would we have to go?

Building a Biblical Framework

Fetser. Romans 3. Okay. Absolutely. You've got to include Romans 3, right? I might be thinking of Romans 3:23, which says... All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and I'll just... As a teaser, even though I've been bragging with the NIV speaks like people speak, nobody ever says things like all of sinned and fall short of the glory of God. That phrase, "fall short of the glory of God." What does that even mean? That's one of these religious things that we'll just repeat out. It actually means something, and it's not... Well, maybe surprisingly, it's a bad translation of what Paul actually said. He did not say that we fall short of the glory of God, but I'm not going to tell you what he did say until next week when we look at it, okay? But Romans 3:23 would be an important thing to get. Where else would you go? Doctrine of sin. Okay. We go to the scene of the crime, right? If we're going to build our understanding of what is even sin, it would just absolutely... You cannot do it if you don't go to Genesis 3 and watch the breaking of the world. Romans 5 is going to say sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and this way death came to all men because all sinned. And that should make us curious, well, where did death... Where did sin enter the world? And who was the one man? And the interest to all of that are Genesis 3. So we'd have to go there, and then we may also mention Romans 5, which is what I just said, okay? Chris? James? Yes. 14. Where is the James 1 passage? Yeah, for sure. I would probably start in verse 13. So James 1:13, when tempted, no one should say God is tempting me, for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone. But then listen to this and how insightful this is. But each one is tempted when by his own evil desire he's dragged away and enticed, then after desire is conceived it gives birth to sin. And sin, when it's full grown, gives birth to death. Okay, that'd be worth slowing down on a little bit. Okay, what is this progression? What does sin come from? What does sin lead to? James 1 would be a really important place. Genesis 3, Romans 5, James 1, what else makes our top 10? Dan? Romans 6 in terms of how do we deal with sin as Christians? Shall we continue to sin so the grace may increase? Absolutely. By no means. Right? Okay. And so, yeah, you've got to come over to the NIV. If they're saying absolutely, right? So we've already said Romans 3, Romans 5, Romans 6, we could add to that Romans 3, Romans 1, Romans 2, Romans 4, Romans, I mean Romans. I mean over and over again. The doctrine of sin just permeates Romans. The whole great passage in Romans 7 about, I don't do what I want to do. The thing I don't want to do, I do, I don't do that whole thing. That's pretty central if we're going to understand the doctrine of sin. That is Paul practically working out like, what in the heck is wrong with me? So Romans, Romans, Romans, Romans, would be really helpful. Okay. What else we got? Oh, a little off the path. So, judges, read that to me. That was not on my list. Okay. Okay. This is the refrain of judges, right? I like this. I'm going to add this to my list. So, judges, in those days, Israel had no king. Everyone did as he saw fit. And if you've not read or if you haven't recently read or you're not familiar with the book of judges, it is a train wreck. Like, the whole point of that book is like, man, we are a mess, right? So, that would be, I'd like this. Well, I'll add to judges. We'll take a minute. We'll walk through, like, my goodness, how much spins out of control. You may have been alive long enough that you have experienced this thing. Very much part of the human experience that I think I can get away with this. I think I can draw a line. I can sin within this little pocket. Like, as long as I'm, I will sin, but I'll sin in my own prescribed limits. How did that work? Does it not? Do you not find that the addiction takes over, right? I thought like I could get away. I could take it this far and no further. Judges is all about like, hey, they're drawing their own little circle, and then invariably it just goes to ruin. That understanding that would be an important understanding how sin takes on a life of its own. And we might see, if you walk through this, the number of times that sin is essentially personified, right? It's like the scripture is anthropomorphized sin. And it treats it as if, even in the very early in Genesis 4, says sin. Do you know the sentence in Genesis 4? Sin is, what is it doing? Crouching at your door, right? Do you see how it treats it like it's this living thing that's coming after you? You think you're in charge or you think you've got it on a leash? Good luck. Sin is crouching at your door. It desires to master you. So Genesis 4 might be a good thing to add to it. Well, we have a first to Adam, and they'll come up. Adam? Okay, first John 1 8. Okay. So first John is fantastic because the great hope of first John is that we can be that sin is forgivable, right? And that's going to be really important. We could also get first John 1 and into 2 and say that sin is universal, right? If anyone claims he's not sinning he's lying, right? So sin is forgivable, sin is universal. That'll be an important part of our picture. I'll come to you in a second. Was it Bob? I was doing first John 1 and 8 and 9. Yeah, yeah. So sin is forgivable. I'll come back to you in a second. Robin, Katherine? Did we already say the one that said if you sin God provides a way out? Yeah, so is there a... I mean, that's, oh, temptation. Yeah, where is that? Corinthians what? Where is it? First Corinthians 10, right? The guy provides a way out. Yes. Yes. Yes, there's a way out. There's something escapable about sin. Robin, what would you add? Mine's a part of a question. The unforgivable sin. Okay, sure. Yes, okay. So we could say is, when we say that sin is forgivable, is there any sin that's unforgivable? What is Jesus talking about when he describes the unpardonable sin? That would be an important thing to add to our list. First Chris then, Herrick. We're talking about Jesus, Jesus. I think right before the flood. Every inclination of the thoughts of his hearts was only evil all the time. And then Galatians 5, but that one I just thought was another who said core. Yeah. The problem. Yeah, Genesis 6 is right before the flood is this picture of like things have gotten so, so, so, so bad. And then Galatians 5, you think of the acts of the sinful nature? 13 all the way to like 20. Yeah, just about what sin is, the fact that it's, yeah. But it's, it's more broad as Jesus uncovers. You know, it's, if you even have a thought of lust, it's adultery, if you hate to you, it's murder. And so, it kind of encompasses that it's a ton. Okay, this is great. So Chris is pointing out you've got the picture in the New Testament as sin is not merely the things that we do that biblically we can make a very strong, well, you, your person has three aspects, intellect, emotion and will. And we could line up scripture that shows how the, the Gentiles are futile in their thinking. Ephesians 4 unpacks that we must not live as the Gentiles do in the futility of their thinking. The sin makes us stupid. Have you ever noticed this? The sin makes you stupid. Anger makes you stupid. Have you noticed this? Okay. But it also corrupts our emotions. Like we want wrong things. We love bad things. Sin is affected our intellect. It is affected our emotions. And what is obvious is that it affects our behaviors. But it's not merely our behavior. Your total person has been infected. So we'd have, we'd have to kind of chase some of those things down in Matthew 5. Jesus is going to say, if you lust after a woman in your heart, lust after a woman is committing adultery in your heart. It's more than just the action that's similar to your, to your James comment that sin is conceived. Right? It's an earlier thing. All right. We want to catch all that. I feel like I promised somebody I was coming to you, but I forgot, Eric, yes, thank you. Second Corinthians 5, 21. God made him who had no sin. Is that where you're at? God made him who had no sin to be sin for us so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. Okay. And so something there that we're going to see that more in the, in the atonement, but the Jesus became sin. What does that even mean? Right? Okay. Good. These are big, big, big ideas. Okay. We've got a whole bunch more. Rick. Psalm 51. Okay. And what's the, what's the punch line there? Verse 5. So Psalm 51 is David's working out his sin with Bathsheba. Right? And there's some zingers in there and sin, surely I was conceived in sin. It's going to, it's going to say against you. And what's the next line? And you only have I sinned that God takes the primary brunt of all of our sin. If I were to kick somebody's dog, God would take that as an offense against himself because he loves that person and he loves that person's dog. Right? Right. But also, forgivable. Right? Psalm 51, David's reflexes there. That's, that's a lot of important thoughts. Okay. A couple more. There's a pepper in your mind. Okay. Yeah, Judy. Romans 125. Yeah, Romans. The exchange about God for a lie and worshiped in service created things rather than created. Excellent. Okay. So Romans is going to have this triple exchange. And we're going to, we're going to, that's going to be a very important language. If we're going to build this thing out, by the way, we're going to do all of this in greater detail. We're just peppering your minds here. What I think of is kind of the heading of Romans 1 and 2, is Jeremiah 2, 13. My people have committed two sins, which does not mean we've only sinned twice. Okay. If only. What it means is that all sin is a double sin. My people have committed two sins. Do you know what they are? They have forsaken me. The spring of living water. And what's the second thing? Doug broken sister and the sisters that can hold water. All of sin is what John Piper calls the suicidal exchange of God for something else. He says, live like this. And we say, nah, I'm going to do this instead, right? And Romans is all about this trading in. We trade him in. We trade him in. We could have him, but we'd want something more. All right.

Conclusion

This is a pretty good list. So we've got to stop. So we've got a week. Next week, we will have class not in this room. We'll be in the fellowship hall because the kids are going to be rehearsing in here for some Christmas stuff. Okay. So class will be next week over there. And when we do, we're going to take this list. We're just going to start at the top, which is to say, we're going to start at Genesis 3. And we're going to just walk through it. And we're going to try to build a biblical theology of sin. It's going to take a while. So get comfy. Good enough. See you next week.