In recent social media discussion relating to my article on Calvin’s view of sin, temptation and desire, one person suggested that the question posed when John Stevens shared my article should be modified from:
““Are we sinning when we experience sinful desires that are unwanted, unsought and that we resist/rejected.“
To:
“are we sinning when we experience persistent sinful desires that we assert to be unwanted, unsought, and that we assert that we resist/reject?”
The person making the comment says:
Introducing ‘assert’ into the phrasing of the question entertains the possibility of self-deception; that, even if we assert hatred of sinful desire, the persistence of that desire may demonstrate a covert weakness for it and, thereby, sinful concupiscence.
I think that he is mistaken in his suggested change to the question posed. Of course, it is true that the whole pastoral question concerning sin, temptation and desire would benefit from some widening out from the narrow framing of the debate so far, though it is worth remembering that neither John or I have framed the debate so narrowly but have merely responded to others.
Secondly, the suggestion is peculiar, since I note that no one is suggesting that there is no possibility of self-deception. Yet, his reframing raise the question about whether or not we are willing to entertain the possibility that there might be plenty of believers who are genuinely and objectively resisting unwanted desires.
Now, at this stage I just want to deal with the implication he raises from it. I think that the question about whether persistence of a desire demonstrates covert weakness is necessarily linked to the question of self-deception. His claim would be true or false regardless of self -deception. Indeed, I don’t think that there would be any dispute with the first half of the implication. Yes, of course, temptation tends to target our weak points and so we should not be surprised to experience repeated and persistence testing at those weak points. This is exactly the understanding that alcoholics work with when excluding all alcoholic beverages from their diet. It’s also why there is good wisdom in not appointing the person who has been found guilty of theft or fraud as your church treasurer. Recognising the weak points is of course very different from suggesting that this is “thereby, sinful concupiscence.” After all, we know from Paul that God’s grace is not the removal of thorns in the flesh but strength made perfect in weakness.
However, the question of self-deception is worth looking at further. It is a distinct follow on question to the discussion about whether or not temptation counts as sin. So, I wanted to make three brief comments here, not so much to close down the debate as to encourage further exploration.
First of all, pastorally, we need to recognise the real potential for people to deceive themselves. Scripture is consistently clear about this. Part of our pastoral concern as Christians should be to encourage people to learn to be truthful with and about themselves. There are two great helps to this. First, the doctrine of Justification helps us to be more open about our deepest and darkest struggles, especially with ourselves. Secondly, we look more for the Holy Spirt to examine us, than trusting in our own judgement. This is something of John Calvin’s point when he says:
“inasmuch as we are unaware of the sins that lurk within us, it is necessary for God to come and examine our lives. After this, we will learn to humble ourselves. So then, once we see the sins that are known and evident to all, and which cannot be excused, even in the eyes of little children, may we be led even further to sound out the depths, and acknowledge that all our appetites and thoughts are like many rebellions against God.” [1]
Secondly, I am concerned when our default is a hermeneutic of suspicion about the hearts of others. This is particularly true when someone comes to see us and because they are desperate about their struggle. It takes a level of courage to do this. Of course, there is a balancing act here. I usually take a cautious approach in offering pastoral responses, patiently waiting on the basis that it may take time for us to get to know the whole story. However, a hermeneutic of suspicion is something that we best used in introspection rather than as an attitude to others. In other words, I do better to be recognise the danger that I might be self deceived rather than immediately assuming that someone else is self-deceived and deceiving.
Thirdly, whilst there is the now and not yet element of Christian life, I wonder whether we can become over pessimistic in our presumption about self-deception. I wonder whether the believer can really be completely oblivious to where their true wants and desires are, at least over the long term. If we have the Holy Spirit working in our lives and if our consciences have been reawakened when we were raised to new life, then I’m not sure that we can go on deceiving ourselves. There will be at least an element of underlying discomfort and questioning.
Indeed, it is this latter point that means I am likely to lean into the starting presumption that we are not dealing with self-deception when dealing with people who show signs of deep sensitivity.
[1] John Calvin, Sermons on Galatians, trans. Kathy Childress (Edinburgh/Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth, 1997), 542-43
Faithroots 