Most of the time when people talk about what the cross achieved, they do so with the perspective that Christ came to eradicate bad behavior, culturally (whether socially or ecclesiastically ) deemed as immoral. However, the scriptures, while not being silent about sins, insists that mankind’s problem is sin. That is, they have a problem at their core. Sins might be manageable. Either with moral therapy or behavior modification, one might be able to subjugate habits and activities over a period of time or for scheduled periods of time (like Sunday 
). This kind of moralism does not touch the notion of sinfulness that is so integral to the fabric of human nature that it renders the will, mind, and heart bankrupt of desire or ability to battle it (Romans 1:18-23; 3:10-18, 23).
The cross is there not to save us from sins, which can be managed to various degrees, but to save us from sin, which, due to our natural and contented slavery to it, we are bankrupt of will or resources to remedy (Romans 3:23-27; Titus 2:11-14).
Amen. Thanks.
By: Adam Christman on July 20, 2010
at 7:31 pm
The wrong focus is not that someone says “the cross saves me from my sins,” whereas they should say “sin” instead. The core problem is the “me” part. Jesus didn’t die for anyone’s sins, he died to reconcile the world to the Father. If Jesus died for sins or sin, than it must be a farce because sin and sins are still here, and will be here for an indefinite amount of time. The focus of the cross is the Father’s will, not the sinner’s need for salvation.
I’m surprised that you didn’t catch that when you work in such proximity to Lewis…
By: Jason on February 4, 2011
at 12:35 pm