Biblical Clarity on Sin & Abuse
Recovering Gospel Wisdom for Healing and Repair
Naming the Right Problem
A growing challenge in both the church and the broader culture is a simplistic understanding of abuse paired with a diminished understanding of sin. Within Oaks, we increasingly encounter people who over-identify their experiences as abuse—not always because abuse has occurred, but because the language of abuse has become the primary way our culture communicates harm, pain, and injustice.
Often, this naming comes from a sincere desire to be understood or taken seriously. But when the category itself is inaccurate, the proposed solutions won’t fit. We end up treating the wrong problem, applying remedies that cannot heal what is actually wounded.
Scripture takes sin with profound seriousness. This, we have lost — in the culture inside and outside of the church. Sin is destructive—to individuals, to relationships, and to communities—which is why God opposes it so fiercely. Abuse is a form of sin, but it is a specific (and severe) kind of sin that requires particular responses, safeguards, and consequences. When all sin is labeled abuse, we lose both moral clarity and practical wisdom for addressing the issue.
We often commit an equivocation fallacy—using the same word (abuse) to mean very different things. There is a difference between coercive, exploitative, power-laden harm and conflict, disappointment, or moral injury. When everything becomes abuse, responsibility becomes blurred. We are tempted to excuse ourselves from the moral demands of repentance, forgiveness, and growth—and to place all moral weight outside ourselves.
The gospel offers healing and strength, but only when we understand the nature of the infection. The Scriptures describe the problem and solutions to both categories. Biblical clarity is not about minimizing harm; it is about naming reality truthfully so that true healing can occur.
What’s Upstream? The Cultural Waters We’re Swimming In
Several cultural forces shape this confusion.
Many people are reacting against Christianity as they’ve experienced it—especially where Scripture was misused to silence pain or protect authority. In response, psychological language has replaced theological categories, not as a supplement but as a substitute. This is where we see a diminished understanding of the concept of sin and a broadening of the concept of abuse.
We live in a highly simplistic culture. We are drawn to “one-thing” explanations—one villain, one diagnosis, one label. This feels like justification and justice. It fuels blame, canceling, and binary thinking, leaving little room for complexity, agency, or even change.
Chronic anxiety (a concept from Family Systems Theory by Murray Bowen) drives us toward quick fixes to temporarily relieve the communal anxiety about a problem instead of long term solutions to resolve the core issues. Labels promise relief. If the problem is abuse, the solution seems obvious: distance, exposure, removal. Sometimes that is exactly right. Other times, it bypasses the slower, more demanding work of ownership and repair.
Finally, psychology and Christianity often use the same words with very different meanings. Terms like harm, trauma, boundaries, safety, and abuse can sound identical while functioning in completely different moral frameworks. Without discernment, confusion is inevitable.
What We’re Seeing as a Result
The fruit of this confusion is deeply concerning.
We see the spiritually rich category of sin replaced with the narrower diagnostic category of abuse. This shift reduces moral agency and ownership, and flattens the human condition. People increasingly see themselves primarily as victims as a way to justify themselves rather than as complex beings who are both sinned against and sinners.
Ironically, while shame is rejected as unhealthy, it is often displaced onto others through accusation and public exposure. The result is division, estrangement, and an inability to repair even small issues in relationships.
One tragic outcome is that true abuse becomes harder to name. When everything is abuse, actual abusers are harder to identify, and it makes it easier for them to manipulate systems and shift the blame through therapized language. Scripture and psychological research remind us that abusers are often socially impressive, respected, and trusted (Acts 20:29–30). This is how they can perpetuate the abuse — they are “wolves in sheep’s clothing” (Matthew 7:15). They look like one of the flock. Simplistic frameworks do not protect the vulnerable; discernment does.
Recovering Biblical Categories
What Is Sin?
According to Scripture, sin is not merely harm or dysfunction; it is rebellion against God that fractures our relationship with Him and with others (Rom. 3:23). Sin is something we commit, something we participate in, and something that shapes us.
Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 18 provides a framework for discerning sin from many other things, including differences or preferences, offenses we should be able to overlook, such as in Proverbs 19:11, and abuse — which requires outside intervention from an authority. Not every offense is sin. Not every hurt requires confrontation. Wisdom involves asking: Has God’s will been violated? Is repentance required? Or is this a matter of limitation, immaturity, or incompatibility?
Scripture repeatedly calls believers to self-examination (Ps. 139:23–24), confession (1 John 1:9), and restoration (James 5:19–20).
Does Scripture Address Abuse?
While Scripture may not always use modern language, it clearly names patterns we would rightly recognize as abusive.
Quarrelsome, divisive people are to be warned and limited (Titus 3:10–11).
Corrupt leaders are to be confronted and, if necessary, disciplined publicly (1 Tim. 5:19–20).
Unrepentant, destructive behavior may require removal from the community (1 Cor. 5).
Power used for harm is explicitly condemned; God opposes shepherds who exploit rather than protect (Ezekiel 34).
Persistent wickedness is something Scripture warns us not to accommodate or imitate (Prov. 4; 2 Tim. 3:1–9).
Importantly, abuse is not the same as ordinary sin or corruption. Jesus knew Judas was stealing (John 12:6), yet allowed him to remain until the appointed time. Discernment, timing, and purpose matter.
Why This Is Good News
The gospel offers more than diagnosis—it offers redemption.
Sin is addressed through confession, repentance, forgiveness, and restoration (1 John 1:9; Matt. 18). These practices assume moral agency and real change. They declare that people are not trapped in their worst moments.
Abuse, however, requires protection, limits, and sometimes separation. Scripture affirms the proper use of power for safeguarding the vulnerable (Ezekiel 34) and warns against naivety in the presence of persistent evil (Proverbs 4).
When categories are clear, responses can be faithful and effective. The church becomes an ecosystem of healing—strong enough to confront sin, wise enough to recognize abuse, and compassionate enough to walk patiently with those who suffer.