Were it not for sin the teaching of self-expression would be adequate.  Were man perfect as God made him, all the impulses and instincts would be working in the right direction and serving the highest interests of man. . .It is forms of sin that have introduced a complexity into the life of man.  The Bible mentions concupiscence, for instance, as a trait which dominates us all by nature, twisting and perverting acts which in and of themselves are quite right and pure.  The very faculties and powers which were designed to be the servants of man have become his masters. 

Martyn Lloyd-Jones is a well-known Biblical scholar from the 20^th century.  One of his better known books is Spiritual Disciplines.  But he also wrote Truth Unchanged, Unchanging, based on lectures he delivered at Wheaton College in 1947.  Interestingly, he addresses a current issue by another name—a precursor to today’s “self-conception”  and “self-identity.”  He named it “self-expression.”  The biblical principles he expressed then relate to a current controversy taking place in the Presbyterian Church in America and the coming out of one of its pastors, Greg Johnson, as same-sex attracted.

What he wrote then and what is transpiring today in the church fits what the writer of Ecclesiastes wrote, “There is nothing new under the sun.” And since there is nothing new, we can still learn from this great scholar.

What is “self-expression?”  One definition is: “The expression of one’s own personality: assertion of one’s individual traits.”  Doesn’t that fit with today’s “self-conception” and “self-identity?” Greg Johnson has chosen to self-conceive, self-identify, and self-express himself by an individual trait, i.e., same-sex attraction.

Let’s take a look at how D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones perceived this issue in 1947.  Following are excerpts from the chapter entitled, “What is Man?” (the underlining is mine for emphasis.)  He relates it to the gaining secular view at that time:

Now. . . we find that the modern popular view of man and his nature departs radically from the Biblical and Christian view . . . This modern view can be best described, perhaps, as the cult of self-expression. . . Sin, in general, was ashamed of itself.

All this old talk about sin, say the self-expressionists, is utterly foolish, leading to self-repression, which is, they aver, the only sin.  What used to be called sin is just expression of self, the greatest and most vital passion that man has. . .  Man, they say, is a creature possessing various powers, faculties, and instincts, and his highest good is to be found in the exercise of those powers. . . They insist on the rightness of the natural and instinctive.

Really!  Is expression of self the greatest and most vital passion that man has? Is there a greater and holier identification and passion than this for the Christian?

Please note the words, “rightness of the natural and instinctive.” You see what these words mean to some as to the core of their being.  What the Bible describes as “unnatural” some Christians today are carelessly identifying as “natural and instinctive” to them.

The first criticism which we make of this modern cult of self-expression is that it fails to realize the true nature of self.  It talks much about giving expression to self, and yet we can show very easily that its very ideas concerning that self are false, and do violence to man’s true nature. . . . The Gospel answer to this modern cult is not a doctrine of repression, but rather a call to the realization of the true nature of the self.

The view that is so popular today tends to regard man as a mere aggregate of various powers and forces . . . What are these forces?  Well, there is the very physical structure of the human body, and especially the various glands, notably the thyroid, pituitary, and supernal ductless glands, which tend to control some of the most vital functions.

Closely allied with that theory is another, which tends to think of man rather in terms of what are called the instincts.  Man, or the self, according to this view, is determined by the interaction of the various instincts, or by the predominance of any one of the various instincts, such as the herd instinct, the protective instinct, the fear instinct, the sex instinct, the hunger instinct.  Man’s essential personality, his real self, is considered to be only the product of these forces. . . According to this theory, man is what he is entirely as the result of his glands, his instincts, his heredity . . . and his self-expression means allowing these factors to have free play and exercise in his conduct.

The current trend of self-identity as “gay” Christian could relate to two of these instincts:  the “herd instinct”—to belong to a group much touted today as a minority group—and the “sex instinct.”

Though our Lord did not talk in terms of glands and instincts, did He not represent precisely the same thing in talking about the hands, the feet, and the eyes, which are but the external agencies of those other powers?  He did not identify the self with these powers and instruments. . . . According to Christ, man is not a mere collection of biological forces.  For there is within man another element which transcends all these. This element is called the soul.

Now it is here we see what we must describe as the thorough dishonesty of this view and what entitles us to say that it is nothing but an attempt to justify and to rationalize sin. . . Thus we see that the whole modern view of self and of its real nature is sadly at fault.  This view identifies the self with certain elemental forces in its make-up only, and therefore robs man of his greatest glory, his soul and his spirit, the sense in which he is independent of his body and all his powers, and greater than they.

Following is where the learned doctor diagnoses the problem man faces, and that problem is sin:

Self-expression!  Certainly!  But what is man?  A mere collection of impulses and instincts?  No!  Something infinitely more, something immeasurably bigger.  An immortal soul with power to order and control those impulses and instincts, and to turn them to his use and service instead of being their slave.

Is it possible that the desire to self-express or self-identify with the physical and emotional impulse “to herd” and the “sex instinct” to be sexually attracted to one’s own sex (even if not physically acted upon) are forms of bondage by ignoring the soul and spirit?

The recognition of sin is really the crux of the whole matter.  Were it not for sin the teaching of self-expression would be adequate.  Were man perfect as God made him, all the impulses and instincts would be working in the right direction and serving the highest interests of man. . .It is forms of sin that have introduced a complexity into the life of man.  The Bible mentions concupiscence, for instance, as a trait which dominates us all by nature, twisting and perverting acts which in and of themselves are quite right and pure.  The very faculties and powers which were designed to be the servants of man have become his masters.  But for sin, it would be legitimate for him to allow his impulses to guide him.  Because of sin there is nothing so dangerous as to allow them to do so.

Isn’t same-sex attraction an impulse or instinct related to sin?  Isn’t it a trait that dominated by nature, twists and perverts acts—even desires and lusts, or how about identity?

Likewise, all the other forces, instincts and powers that are within man in and of themselves, are harmless, but as the result of sin become a source of danger.  How tragic it is therefore and how foolish, to ignore sin!  What an utterly false psychology!  And yet that very principle is being advocated today. The whole fact of sin is being ignored; and the advice to give expression to self, therefore, is fraught with the most dangerous consequences conceivable.

Isn’t self-identifying by one’s propensity or proclivity to a sexual sin “fraught with the most dangerous consequences conceivable?”

On the purely human plane we have seen that this talk of self-expression is utterly degrading to the true self. . . For true self-expression has been revealed perfectly once and for all in Him.  The question we shall all have to face therefore is, What have you made of the self?  How have you expressed it?  The consequences are eternal—life or death, heaven or hell.

As for the question related to the sex instinct, “How have you expressed it,” does identifying one’s Christian position or calling with a corrupted sexual instinct not degrade the true self as redeemed in Christ?

Before we begin, therefore, to talk about freedom for self-expression, we must discover whether or not we have that true self which God has desired for all men. . . . The one urgent question therefore confronting every man is the question, What of your self?  Do you possess your soul?  

Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God, came down to earth and lived and died and rose again in order to save.  He has borne the punishment that we deserve on account of sin and for spoiling and marring the image of God upon us.  But more, He restores our soul to us.  He gives us a new nature and fills us with power that will enable us to express this new and true self even as He expressed it Himself.  This self-expression expresses man as a son of God, well-pleasing in the sight of his Heavenly Father and as an heir to eternal life.

What D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones wrote so insightfully and perceptively almost 75 years ago addresses the false and dangerous “self-perception” and “sexual identity” taking place today and threatening the cohesion of the Presbyterian Church in America and its faithfulness to clear biblical revelation.  Furthermore, a PCA pastor who should be the most aware of God’s revealed true self-perception that includes soul and spirit is allowing his unnatural instinct and open confession and identity to bring division and potentially a serious split in and withdrawal of many churches from the denomination.  Has he forgotten or is he ignoring that an immortal soul has the power to order and control those impulses and instincts, and to turn them to his use and service instead of being their slave.  To identify himself and his Christian faith solely with these impulses and instinct appears to be a shackling in life, and that is bondage.

The Presbyterian Church in America and other Reformed Faith bodies would be prudent and wise to consider D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones accurate biblical analysis and exegesis before they legitimately open floodgates that allow elemental biological and elemental forces to overpower and rob Christian men and women of their greatest glory!

Helen Louise Herndon is a member of Central Presbyterian Church (EPC) in St. Louis, Missouri. She is freelance writer and served as a missionary to the Arab/Muslim world in France and North Africa.