SIN, SINS, SINNER (Part 1)

QUESTION: Greetings pastor is there are differences between sin, sinning and sinner? If there is, is that difference in our interpretation and experience or one we can deduce from scriptures as well. Are we still sinners ever under Christ? Thanks.

Becky

RESPONSE: Thank you for your inquiry. Before we look at the scriptural differences and whether or not we are still sinners in Christ, let’s have a look at what different worldviews mean when they use the terminology above.

ETYMOLOGICAL VIEW

The etymological study of the term SIN demonstrates that it was never intended to be a concept, but rather a practice. Old Saxon Sundia, which denotes transgression, outrage, or trespass in English, was derived from Dutch zonde and German Sunde. Sin has been defined as transgression, guilt, and crime throughout the history of language.
From a linguistic standpoint, sin is a phrase for a terrible deed committed by an individual or a group of people. That heinous act could be considered a violation of social norms. As a result, sin is not an abstract concept but a physical act, according to language. Sin, sins, and sinner are legal or religious expressions in practically all dialects. As a result, the above terms relating to the law or worship have been grouped together in language. Sin is a legal or sacred tradition transgression; sins are crimes, and sinners are criminals.

ANTHROPOLOGICAL VIEW

A sin, according to the anthropologist, is also an act. It is an act that goes against a society’s standards. In our cultures, sinners are individuals who have insulted the elders, the gods, and those who have broken the community’s laws, procedures, and customs. Again, sin isn’t far behind what’s being done.
Our notion of sin and the distinction between sinners and saints is based on how we interact with one another and whether we are law-abiding citizens. The concept that every community must shun evil and promote good is woven into our social moral fabric. As a result, sin is acting against established moral (legal) criteria that promote the community’s welfare and society’s coherence. However, anthropologically, it is not just the environment’s psychology (how we think) that determines Sin, sins, and sinners, but also our own physiology (how we and things look). Different cultures have different perspectives on sin, sins, and sinners, as well as how they deal with them. When one trespasses against the community, the elders, or the gods, the sinner is punished by death, curse, banishment, or a hefty price in ritualism in the majority of cultures.

PHILOSOPHICAL VIEW

Philosophy is said to have originated in Greece, but I believe it was western philosophy that originated in Greece. However, philosophy as a whole is as old as human cognition, and philosophers, like philosophy, have been around for a long time. The distinction lies in the recording and systematisation of philosophy, which Greece excelled at more than other parts of the world.

I’ll use the TUUTSI and Greeks in this response. For example, in the ethnic group to which I belong (Ugandan TUUTSI).Sin, sins, and sinners (icyaha, ibyaha, and umunyabyaha) are philosophically demonstrated in three areas in African tradition:

1. Ubuhutu (ethnicity: a person born into the wrong ethnic group, not Tutsi or even Tuutsi, but specifically a clan) has already sinned before taking any action. There is already something wrong/sinful about such a person). I suppose this isn’t unusual for the Tuutsi. The Hutu are sinners to the Tuutsi not because of “what” they do, but because of “who” they are.
2. Ubuntu (Humane=the ability to do the right thing even if it goes against the law or the accepted norm.) The kindness that exists outside of the rules. Even though a person is born into the appropriate ethnic group, if he or she lacks Ubuntu, sin is present. Tuutsi people are not legalistic; their well-being takes precedence above the law. Saints, not sinners, are produced through legal, not just civil, disobedience that promotes goodness.
3. Uburyo: (Art/Approach: What distinguishes what is sinful from what isn’t is how it is done, not what is done.) In the TUUTSI, Uburyo is more than just talent, competence, and professionalism. I don’t have a similar English term for UBURYO, but the technical approach to one’s action reveals if someone has Uburyo in whatever they are doing or saying, and this affects how a sinless deed is performed).

These three are fundamental to not only the TUUTSI culture, but also to their philosophical understanding of sin, sins, and sinners in the world. So, in the TUUTSI world, sin isn’t merely an act; it may also be defined as a sinful pre-act based on the philosophy of ‘being.’

Many terms that English loosely translates as sin are used by the Greeks, who are essentially the influencers of modern secular-western thought, but the two umbrella terms for sin in both the religious and secular realms are: Akrassia = lack of mastery/self-control and the other invented by Aristotle and largely advanced by Apostle Paul in the Bible is Hamartia = a mistake in judgment or missing the mark. Sin, according to the Greeks, is a lack of congruence between components of oneself, rather than a moral fault. Because of this, Aristotle reasoned that sin is IGNORANCE, and we all know that IGNORANCE is amoral.

However, from an ethical standpoint, this incongruity (ignorance) can be discovered in the way someone lives…but this is still due to akrassia. Sin (akrassia) is the failure to master your passions and emotions, as well as acting against reason, and one is likely to always miss the mark (hamartia) in practice.

Concerning Akrassia, “Aristotle distinguishes two kinds of akrasia: impetuosity (propeteia) and weakness (astheneia). The weak person goes through a process of deliberation and makes a choice; but rather than act following his reasoned choice, he acts under the influence of a passion. By contrast, the impetuous person does not go through a process of deliberation and does not make a reasoned choice; he simply acts under the influence of a passion. At the time of action, the impetuous person experiences no internal conflict. But once his act has been completed, he regrets what he has done. One could say that he deliberates, if deliberation were something that post-dated rather than preceded action; but the thought process he goes through after he acts comes too late to save him from error.” (Stamford.edu/aristotle-ethics)

What Aristotle doesn’t say is what makes the weak, weak and the strong, strong before they ever try to live and act. The point of Hamartia missing the mark is not so much in the ‘missing’ as it is in the ‘Mark.’ The philosophy holds that there is a pre-existing goal or aim, and failing to meet or act in accordance with that standard is a sin. In his philosophical view, Apostle Paul prefers to use this term when presenting his New Testament Hamartiology (study of sin) in his soteriological (study of salvation) discourses. But from this angle, we have established the perception of what sin is by the Greeks. To them-Greeks sin is ignorance (lack of enlightenment) and lack of mastery (self-control) which results in missing the mark always. It is this thought that has influenced our modern information technology generation and the age of enlightenment.

In this worldview, sin is ignorance, and the only way to sin is to break the law. They are criminals, not sinners, and the answer is education and legal punishment. Apostle Paul’s intellectual worldview, on the other hand, is a blend of Greek philosophy and Christian theology, and it is through this combination that he argues that Sin is a hostile force to the absolute power—God.

Next, I’ll discuss how the Bible portrays sin, sins, and sinners, particularly in the Old Testament.

I invoke TRUTH, WISDOM and FAITH (2Tim 2:7)
Priest M.I.T White (+256-775 822833)
iTiS Well of Worship Fellowship (John 4:24)
Questioning to Believe and Believing to Live