The Obscure Pervasiveness of Sin
The idea of sin has become a nebulous concept in Christianity. Some behaviors are viewed as less immoral than they may have been. Some believers emphasize some sins over others. Other sins appear to be largely ignored. While God has a very clear and emphatic stance on sin, His children often don’t. While there are no longer eternal consequences for the sin of a believer, it still has tremendous power to limit their their growth, efficacy, and witness. If left unresolved, it still holds tremendous power to weaken the Kingdom.
Today’s church culture holds a diminished view of what sin is. Too much of the church coddles it. We make excuses for it by blaming others and our environment. We abuse the grace of the Lord for which was paid an infinite price. We too easily bow our knee to the Deceiver who no longer holds authority over us.
To have a realistic chance of defeating something, we need to understand it as completely as possible. For this reason I thought it important to spend some time exploring and evaluate the meaning of sin from a renewed perspective.
In my view, sin is much more encompassing and pervasive than we think. But this pervasiveness has been obscured by culture, bad theology, and accommodation. By the time we’re done, you may find the concept of sin much closer and more tangible than you’re comfortable with.
At least I hope so.
Cultural Ethics
First, let’s talk about the thing that most people think of when we say “sin”.
For many, sins comprise a list of things that God doesn’t want us to do. Even non-religious folks who may not believe in a divine moral code might agree that things like hate, murder, greed, malice, lying, and stealing are bad. Many might also agree that it’s equally bad to not do the things we know should be done.
Lets say we asked groups from different religious or cultural backgrounds to provide their own list of sins. Would they all match? Probably not. There may be some items in common, but some lists would include things that wouldn’t be mentioned in others. For example, in India, lying isn’t considered a vice. In Moscow, infidelity by men is viewed as normal and expected. Even in the U.S., Judeo-Christian ethics are quickly eroding into situational ethics and cold pragmatism. Last week, someone on Facebook posted a home security video of someone in an upper-class neighborhood stealing their neighbors sidewalk lights in the middle of the night. While there are certainly more heinous crimes, their nonchalant appearance during the act was unnerving.
Lists of sins may differ even between Christian denominations or even between individual believers who are members of the same church. Even if one of these lists were correct, which one would it be?
Given the complexities of cultural relativism, we look elsewhere to derive an objective definition of sin.
Clues from Greek and Hebrew
When we examine a term with such spiritual weight, it’s important to understand what was meant by it from the beginning (which can be quite different from what is means today).
In the Old Testament, the word sin is most often translated khata (חָטָא). Khata literally means to ‘miss the mark’ or ‘miss the goal’. It’s the same word used in Judges 10:16 when referring to members of the tribe of Benjamin who were so accurate with their slingshots that they could launch a rock at a single hair on someone’s head and not miss the mark. To the Hebrews, to sin was to fail to hit a designated moral target.
In the New Testament, the Greek word for sin was hamartia (ἁμαρτία). This was a similar word than khata in that it is derived from hamartánein which also means to “miss the mark”. But it was also used hundreds of years earlier in Aristotle’s Poetics to discuss the literary tragedy. In this context, scholars interpret the word to describe the departure from one’s core character that drives them toward disaster. Other Greek scholars suggest that this departure has less to do with moral failure and more with misfortune or poor discernment. In either case, hamartia is related to a person’s failure to choose the ideal path or remain on the proper course.
So scripturally speaking, sin is any action that fails to conform to a prescribed mark, goal, or course. The moment our activity misses the goal or strays from the path, we have sinned. So, sinning is not about engaging in an arbitrary list of behaviors. Rather, it’s engaging in any behavior that strays from the moral ideal.
If this is true, then what is this ideal moral behavior? From where do we derive it?
Is Sin Not “Following the Bible”?
Some will define sin as whenever our action gets crossways with a biblical precept. This mentality reveals itself when we hear well-meaning Christians advocating biblical morality. When I hear this, sometimes I want to ask whether “biblical morality” includes King David’s unfaithfulness, Peter’s betrayal, or Paul wishing castration upon the Judiazers (since those morals are also found in the Bible).
“Well, maybe not those biblical morals…”
Which ones then?
If pressed, what gets articulated is a list of objective moral imperatives derived from scripture. Some may cite the 10 Commandments. Others will tease out a list from disparate New Testament scriptures that include the commands of Jesus and Paul’s admonishments from his epistles.
If properly interpreted and applied, our failure to uphold such imperatives can constitute sin. But is this method comprehensive enough? What about the things that don’t specifically see in scripture but we sense as sinful? It seems like there should be some core attribute that all sins share that makes them inherently sinful. What makes a sin a sin?
The first moral code we find in scripture is the Hebrew law. The Hebrew Law corresponds to the Old Testament books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Scripture tells us that God gave the Jews the law to act to act as a “schoolmaster” (guardian, trainer) to teach them His ways (Gal. 3:24-26). The law would work for the Jews the same way we come to know and love of our parents by obeying their commands. Our parents tell us not to play in traffic and to be kind to others. When we’re children we may not understand the point of these instructions—we just to do them because we’re told to. But over time, we recognize the heart of the instruction as our obedience shapes our character and prepares us for greater moral agency. In the same way, the purpose of the law was to provide the Hebrews a means of knowing God and, over time, reflecting His nature.
The Fulfillment of the Law
But the written law was never intended to be the permanent arrangement. Galatians 3:24-26 goes on to explain that the Law would only continue to fulfill its role as teacher until the promised Messiah arrived. Christ (the Messiah) would then justify them through faith (Gal. 3:24-26). His act of justification would not only remove their sins but would allow Christ to literally dwell inside of them (Col. 1:27). As an indwelling Spirit, He would write the law on their hearts (Heb. 8:10) and He would teach them His nature directly (John 6:45; 1 Cor. 2:13; 1 Thes. 4:9) and speak to them to provide moment-by-moment moral direction. To live by Christ’s indwelling life is to continually defer to His direction in your moral decision making. The mature believer no longer follows neither the Hebrew Law nor the “laws” we interpret from scripture. Instead, they follow Christ who has fulfilled the of the law (Matt. 5:17; Rom. 8:3-4). (For my post on following the Indwelling Christ, click here.)
Of course, the Pharisees missed the law’s intent. They were so focused on following it that it became useless to build God’s character into them. It became useless to prepare them to seek and to recognize its ultimate fulfillment in Jesus Christ.
Today, many believers are “functioning Pharisees”. They see the Bible as a book of rules that must be followed—a New Law. But if the Bible is the new law, then whether something is sin comes down to a matter of scriptural interpretation or emphasis. And when we rely on the flesh rather than the Spirit to rightly divide timeless truth in scripture, error and deception are bound to occur.
As I argued elsewhere, scripture is important for several things, but not as a rule book.
What Sin Really Is
So, considering the above discussion, what is sin?
For a comprehensive appreciation, we should probably take a close look at Paul’s straightforward definition of sin in Romans 14:23b:
For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.
Romans 14:23b (ESV)
According to Paul, sin is the necessary result of any action (or inaction) that doesn’t naturally flow from faith. This means that in any moral decision, we either act in faith or we sin. It’s not about keeping lists; it’s about remaining faithful in our moral decisions.
Let’s let that sink in.
But if it’s about remaining faithful, then what is faith?
Recall from a previous post that we defined faith as a recognition of our King’s sovereign reign that we demonstrate by our thoughts and actions. Applying this definition to Romans 14:23b means that anything we do that isn’t in alignment with Christ’s Lordship is sin. Also, because His rule is perfectly aligned with His character and His eternal purpose, we sin when we aren’t acting in accordance with His character.
Given the above, we can identify sin as any point of misalignment between our actions and Christ’s rule and perfect character.
While the nature of His moral direction comes through the timeless moral precepts we find in scripture, the tactical execution of that nature is often given through momentary whispers of the Spirit as we tread out our daily lives. Scripture and the Spirit will never conflict with one another. Sin therefore includes my decision to ignore those whispers and do something differently. (This would also include an unwillingness to listen for such whispers to begin with.)
Given this understanding of sin, you must admit it’s incredibly pervasive. On any given day, I might be guilty of dozens of sins. Some of them may not even register in my conscience.
Does this bother me?
It does. I’m often frustrated at the willingness with which I bow my knee to the Deceiver. I’m frustrated by the speed of my progress of being conformed to Christ’s image.
Does it make me feel hopeless to the point of ignoring or excusing my sin?
No, it doesn’t.
Why?
Because He hasn’t given up on me. He still calls me to holiness. This alone means there’s value in my pursuit. The patience He exercises in my pursuit is infinitely greater than the patience I exercise in it. Despite His finished work, His desire and purpose are to fashion me into His image. This requires both an awareness of sin’s truest form.
Missing the Bigger Picture
Now that we know the common denominator of all sins, we can use it as a litmus test.
When preaching against sin, conservative fundamentalist churches seem to focus on things like fornication, adultery, or homosexuality. Are these things sins?
Yes, they are. Despite dismissive interpretation or the intentional abuse of grace, these things are still sins. Why? Because they express the opposite of the Lord’s character in terms of selflessness, commitment, and the order implicit in His perfect rule which never changes.
When preaching against sin, progressive churches seem to focus on things like racism, injustice, and ignoring the poor and marginalized. Are these things sins?
Yes, they are. Despite the excuses we come up to avoid these classes, these things are still sins. Why? Because they express the opposite of the Lord’s character in terms of grace, selflessness, and unconditional love. They avoid the redemptive work of the Kingdom in the world.
But what about things like like gluttony, pride, worldly anger, idolatry, impatience, fear, gossip, personal inconsideration, judging the hearts of others, “socially acceptable” addictions, and holding offense. Are these things sins?
Yes they are–each of them. Why? Because they each represent as aspect of misalignment with God’s rule and character. They indicate a lack of trust in Christ’s sufficiency.
Despite this, the church largely ignores these indiscretions. This perplexes me. It makes me think that the church is more influenced more by the momentum of denominational culture and the need to remain relevant than by the Spirit of Christ who despises all sin.
Sin restricts life. For unless we’re willing to confess and repent of the full depth and breadth of our misalignment, both our spiritual maturity and the Kingdom’s influence will be limited.