The fundamental Hebrew thinking about sin is all about communion. If you scroll through Leviticus, you notice that blood sacrifice does not cleanse the sinner. Rather, a ritual sacrifice is necessary to decontaminate the sacred space where God comes to meet with His people. It reminds humans that they are mortal and imperfect against God’s holiness. We are dragging around a fleshly nature that is no friend of God.
How many times in the Old Testament did people commit sins that should have been a capital offense, but they managed to come into God’s Presence afterward? It’s because they remained fundamentally loyal to God, despite their failures to control their fleshly natures. Retributive justice is not God’s nature. The key to living in this world is personal feudal loyalty to the Lord. We keep saying it: Everything is personal. The rules are merely an expression of His desire to hold your heart.
Stop thinking in terms of trespass and debt. The fundamental problem of human existence is finding peace and fellowship — with God and with His Creation. It’s not about individuals at all, but a necessity for the community of faith. There are no Lone Rangers in faith. Sin is a threat to the stability of community and communal faith. You have a duty to others; your personal private sin can threaten their communion through defilement.
Let’s look at some implications of this.
Numbers 15:22-36 — God commands that those who commit unintentional sins or sins of weakness can confess and restore fellowship with Him. Notice that the first point made is for the covenant community as a whole, the community offering. That’s the focus in the first place. The community as a whole can be pardoned; God will look past the mistakes. Even private individual mistakes must be addressed through the community priesthood, because the issue is a threat to the community as a whole.
The assumption is that you care about the communion of the community with God. The deliberate sin of defiance and rebellion is a threat to the stability of the community. It can poison that stability; you no longer care about them. The biggest threat is to drive a wedge between the people and God, to alienate them by generating a false perception about God’s character. Someone defies God because they feel like He owes them something He’s not giving, so they seize that thing for themselves.
Thus, the man caught gathering firewood on the Sabbath was trying to take care of his own needs without regard to how it would defile the community. The incident is placed in the context of discussing defiant sin, so we must assume the man was defiant about asserting his personal needs against the communion of the covenant provisions. Couldn’t he just ask for some spare firewood from his neighbors? He didn’t simply forget that it was the Sabbath; he didn’t care.
Now, expand this to the entire list of death penalties in the Old Testament. Think about how each of them was a threat to the stability of the community in terms of alienating them from God, encouraging others to seize for themselves something they felt God failed to provide. Some of those deaths came at the hand of God Himself because they were a direct insult, but most of these sins demanded that the community act to remove the threat.
Numbers 11 — This is the manna versus quail episode. Who led the outcry for meat? It was the “mixed multitude” of people who traveled with Israel but were not part of the Covenant. They infected the nation with their attitude that God wasn’t providing what they needed. Notice how they didn’t reverently plead with God for favor; they demanded it by insulting God.
Most English translations paint the wrong picture here. This was part of an annual quail migration in the area. God diverted it toward the camp. The birds normally flew close to the ground (6’/2m) and were easily captured, and then roosted everywhere in masses overnight. The rabble of outsiders were the ones who lusted for the meat and stayed up all night catching them. They were the ones who laid them on the ground to fester in the heat of the day, and probably failed to cook them properly to kill parasites and bacteria.
The passage notes that they buried those who had an insatiable craving for the meat.
Acts 4:32-5:11 — Ananias and Sapphira were craving the attention that church members gained by contributing to the common household welfare. Context: A very large number of Diaspora Jews had come for the Passover when Jesus was crucified. Those who were wealthy enough stayed around until Pentecost. This made the city and surrounding areas quite crowded with visitors renting every available space, plus tents everywhere.
The ones who responded to the gospel message followed typical Hebrew instinct: They created a bond with their new spiritual family and tried to stay as long as possible. This was some time after Pentecost and they were ready to cut ties from their past lives. Many of them began selling their business properties in the lands abroad where they had lived up to that point. Some local Jew would buy the property and travel or send agents to claim the property. The sellers would take the proceeds and hand it over to the elders of their new family.
What Luke describes is not communism, but household feudalism. No one was required to do this; it seemed like the only sensible choice to help the church handle the sudden influx of folks who had grown up abroad and had no other local connections. Ananias and Sapphira suffered from social envy. They wanted the accolades given to those who sacrificed, but didn’t want to sacrifice so much. It wasn’t that they retained any money, but that they lied about it; they lied to the Holy Spirit residing in the community. They had something to hide that alienated them from the communion of Christ and His people.
1 John — John had been there to see that event with Ananias and Sapphira. His letter addresses the major issue of fellowship and communion. That’s what we get from 1:3 of this letter. He goes on to say we are to be a community of divine glory (“light”), escapees from the Kingdom of Darkness.
He sticks with the ancient Hebrew focus on community, all the more so given the command of His Lord at the Last Seder. This whole letter is about fellowship and what it requires. We are all humble before Him; we must recognize the necessity of dragging around a fleshly nature that resists the Spirit. If we are genuinely committed to Christ, He will not separate from us; the door of repentance is always open (1:9).
The second chapter is all about spiritual family having the power to resist returning to spiritual slavery. The primary failure he focuses on is denying Christ in the sense of defiance about what He has commanded and what He promised under the New Covenant. It’s not about us as individuals, but it’s all about His family.
In chapter 3 it’s the contrast between slipping back into slavery versus learning to love the family of faith. Obviously, the business with sin is focused on how it threatens fellowship and communion. “It’s not about you” or what your flesh wants or claims to need. Chapter 4 follows the same pattern, ending with “God is love.” The one who claims to love God must prove it by loving God’s family.
Then in chapter 5, we should stay out of Satan’s clutches. Indeed, we pray for each other to that end. Nearing the end of his letter, John warns that it’s possible for some sins to lead to death. He uses the word “death” (Grk. thanatos) broadly, indicating both literal and figurative death. Given what he’s said up to this point, it’s clear that someone who cannot put the Christ and His family first is “dead” in his sins.
It echoes Hebrews 6 and the warning about forsaking Christ after having experienced the power of the Holy Spirit. The primary root of such an awful thing is deciding that something the flesh demands is more important than the loving communion of Christ’s family.
John didn’t need to define what a “sin leading to death” was at that point. He had already painted a very clear picture of it throughout the letter. It’s not that we cannot pray for people who turn against the Lord and His communion, but that John recommended against it. Someone who defies the command of Christ is no longer family; there’s nothing you can do for them.
Under the Covenant of Christ, we no longer execute such people. Rather, we “kill” them by ostracism or excommunication. They don’t belong to the Covenant any more.
