It’s a foundational teaching in Sunday schools that Jesus Christ, God’s son came to earth and died on the cross to take away sin. My issue is not with the teaching surrounding Jesus’ death on the cross, my issue is with the wording specifically as it relates to teaching children about Jesus.
Just to be clear, I believe that the man Jesus, God incarnate, came to earth to live the life we couldn't live and die the death we deserve. I am not debating that point. Nor am I debating the concepts of imputed righteousness, justification, sanctification or the doctrines regarding the Holy Spirit. What I am debating is whether the use of the verb “take away” is appropriate when talking to children about Jesus.
Why is this even a thing? Surely this is just you being pedantic?
Yes it’s pedantic, but with just cause. In my experience of children’s ministry and from chatting with teachers and ministers it has become clear to me that children, particularly of primary school age or below think almost entirely literally. As a result they don't do abstract concepts well. So when we tell kids that Jesus’ death on the cross was to take away our sins they think literally. In the minds of most kids, heck even most adults, the idea of taking away is synonymous to the idea of removal. And this is where the problem arises, because if Jesus totally removed our sin at the cross, we shouldn’t sin… ever.
What does this mean for kids?
For many kids who grow up in church this can actually become a massive problem for a number of reasons.
It gives kids an unrealistic expectation of what Christians should be like and what living as a Christian is like. It also can get confusing when people start talking to them about the need to strive for godliness and fight temptation. How can they be tempted if sin is not present? This can cause kids to question their faith. If they sin are they really Christian? And if they are and sin is still there then did Jesus not cover their sins?
It sounds extreme but I get these questions from kids often, actually I also get them from teenagers!! Why? Because as they age and start questioning their beliefs, themselves, their lives teenagers start thinking properly about their faith and about taking it seriously. Ordinarily this is easily explained and no harm is done, but when you have hammered home a concept to someone since they were four years old, it’s hard to get past that or correct it.
At no point is our proclivity towards sin taken away, we are empowered to resist it but it remains nonetheless.
Paul actually talks about this in Romans 7: 15-20
“I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.”
“I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.”
This is I think a perfect illustration of the battle between the old sinful self and the new spiritual self that we receive when we become Christian. It is a battle, and some days the sinful self gets the victories, and sometimes it doesn't, but regardless the sinful self is still there. It has not gone away.
When explaining the cross to kids, Jesus died because of our sins, for our sins, to make us right with God.
So…we’re not sinless?
We sin, we came to the foot of the cross as broken sinners seeking forgiveness, we give our lives to God and accept the Holy Spirit into our lives... But we still sin.
So what did Jesus do on the cross?
On the cross Jesus died in our place, he took the judgement and punishment we deserve for our sin. He did this so that we can come before God on the last day pure and holy in His sight. On that final day, when Jesus returns and sets up the New Kingdom, we will be presented holy and blameless (i.e. sinless) before God. Until then I think we need to look at sin like a degenerative disease, while we may have been cured of sin, its effects linger and we have to live with them until we are made perfect on the last day. Jesus dealt with our sins on the cross; he paid the price for it, and he made the way for us to be restored. And yes ultimately he takes sin away… but not yet. It’s part of that confusing “now, but not yet” theology, which is awesome, but entirely abstract.
How would you have us teach children then?
Simple, substitute “takes away” for “deals with”. The concept is almost identical but when interpreted literally it doesn't have the same connotations and is far easier to explain to kids. Obviously there are a lot of other factors at play, should we consider ourselves sinful? What about imputed righteousness? The fact of the matter is that they are both true. And while these are good questions, but I wish you luck trying to explain the doctrine of imputed righteousness to a 7 year old, heck even explaining the concept of righteousness is hard enough. Maybe I'm being pedantic but this whole post has arisen from my experiences in children’s ministry and I think it’s something we should address.
When explaining the cross to kids, Jesus died because of our sins, for our sins, to make us right with God.
