SIN, SINS, SINNER (Part 2)

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: In the last episode, we looked at the language, anthropology, and philosophy of the concepts of sin, sins, and sinner. Now let’s take a look at it from a theological perspective.

THE THEOLOGICAL VIEW

What we mean by theological is what sin is demonstrated to be in the Bible. To me, a ‘theological’ understanding of sin in the Old Testament (OT) and a ‘theological’ view of sin in the New Testament (NT) are the same thing. What I mean is that theologically, the OT and NT understandings of sin are identical. Because the LANGUAGE, ANTHROPOLOGY, and PHILOSOPHY of sin are all present in the Bible’s literature, Bible readers and believers often confuse the above with the Bible’s theology of sin. As a result, the study of sin (Hamartiology) is treated as a separate subject in Christian theology.

The study of sin is as difficult as the study of salvation. The two are crucial because if you get one wrong, you’ve already gotten the other wrong. Let me attempt to make it as simple as possible: In the Old Testament Anthropology and philosophy, sin is a violation of the law-order (Pentateuch and prophets) as well as ignorance (Hosea 4:6). In the New Testament Anthropology and philosophy, sin is a violation of the law-order (Mathew 5-8, 1John 3:4-6) as well as ignorance (1Corinthians 14:37-40). As Bible readers, we must pray that we comprehend when we are dealing with the language, anthropology, and philosophy of sin, sins, and sinners, as well as when we are dealing with the theology of sin, sins, and sinners.

Adultery, for example, is not only a sin but a sin in and of itself, punished by death in both the Old Testament (Leviticus 20:10-12) and the New Testament (Deuteronomy 22:22-24) and (John 8:1-11). While killing is a sin (Exodus 20:13), capital punishment (Deuteronomy chapters 17-19) is not a sin, but rather a means of purging the COMMUNITY. Now, this is not a theology of sin, but rather an Anthropology and philosophical understanding of sin, and Bible readers should be able to distinguish between the two.

The covenant is a significant concept in the Hebrew Bible, particularly in the Old Testament. Since the Deity is the standard, sin is considered to be a violation of the terms (legal and ritual) between man and the deity as established in the covenant, and idolatry is understood to be a violation of the terms (legal and ritual) between man and the deity as stipulated in the covenant (allegiance to another god). In Judaism, sin, sins, and sinners all refer to a violation of the covenant. In the Old Testament, sin has the idea (but not necessarily theology) of a rank offence. It is considered a sin when an inferior offends their superior. In most circumstances, the ranking may be a man, particularly the Priest, Prophet, or King who represents the gods, as in 1Kings 1:21 or 2Kings 8:14. To disobey these is to disobey God, his requirements, and his will.

When we consider the concept of sin in the context of divine redemptive initiatives and ask what God saves humankind from, we have a Biblical theological understanding of sin. The study of sin (Hamartiology) looks into why God couldn’t address the problem of sin, sins, and sinners by floods (Genesis 7), fires (Genesis 19), sacrifices, forgiveness, stoning sinners to death, obedience and ritualism, sacred days and festivals (Leviticus to Deuteronomy= Hebrews 10:1-18). All of this has been done in the past by people and gods, but the fact that the problem persists suggests we overlooked something about the exact problem. The THEOLOGICAL VIEW OF SIN entails determining why an almighty God could not eliminate sin in his all-powerful way without exposing himself to death as a creature.

OLD TESTAMENT VIEW

Jeremiah (Jeremiah 17:1-2, 8-10) and Deutro-Isaiah in Isaiah chapters 40-55 are two prophets in the Old Testament who attempt a theological perspective on Sin. The bulk of other prophets do not address a theological understanding of sin, but do present a view of sin, sins, and sinners through their social language, anthropology, and philosophy. As a result, the OT’s view of sin is essentially social rather than theological. The OT has implied the theological notion of sin through language, and it is important that we examine those words translated as sin. In the Old Testament, there are seven significant Hebrew names for sin, sins, and sinners, according to me, and these are:

Chata/Chatta’ah: Sin or the state of being sinful. It just signifies that you’ve missed the mark. It is possible to miss the Way. Many scriptures in the Old Testament mention Chatta’ah, including Exodus 10:17; 32:34; 29:14; Leviticus 5:17; Exodus 34:7.

Pehshah: Rebellion. It could be a sin against God or a violation of sacred authority. It’s also known as transgression or even trespass in other contexts. Amos 1:3; Exodus 34:7; Leviticus 16:16, 21.

Avon: this means Perversity, Iniquity or Depravity. Exodus 34:7; Numbers 5:15

Ra’a: Bad or Evil. Something that is broken, or shuttered. Broken into pieces. Job 8:20; Psalms 2:9

Asham: Offending, Being Guilty, Offense, trespass offering/Guiltiness. Leviticus 5:18; Psalms 68:21; Isaiah 53:10

Shagag: To go astray, to err, to sin (ignorantly or inadvertently). Leviticus 5:18; Numbers 15:28

Rasha: this can be translated as Wicked or Criminal. Guilty one, one guilty of a crime (condemned). 1Samuel 2:9; Proverbs 3:25; 1Kings 8:32

Given the nature of the Hebrew language, various terms such as sin, sins, and sinner are used throughout the Old Testament, but these are the most common. I prefer to believe that the bulk of those I haven’t listed are simply synonyms for the ones listed above.

HEBRAIC IDEOLOGY OF SIN

To further understand the Old Testament’s ‘meaning’ of sin, sins, and sinners, one must travel back to the beginnings of language evolution. There was illustration long before there was writing. Pictography refers to how ancient humans drew and sketched concepts. Pictograms are the images that these ancient people used to illustrate their literature. Each letter of the Hebrew Alphabet began as an image in the Hebrew language’s growth, and because Hebrew thought is tangible (hands-on) rather than abstract (conceptual), every visual that eventually grew as a letter had a meaning.

When the drawings in ancient pictographs were placed together, they created not only a word, but also a short story within the word. For example, the Hebrew phrase for sin, Chata, is a three-consonant word (Hebrew originally had no vowels) consisting of Chet, Tet, and Aleph. Chet is pictured as a fence to represent restriction, separation, or cutting off, Tet is pictured as a snake to represent coiling around, entangling in an odd manner, good or ill, and Aleph is pictured as an Ox to represent a strong-undisputed power, leader, or head of the family.

This pictography has much too much to tell us about Hebraic sin ideology. Chata is not only off the mark in terms of its pictograms, but also a force that binds and cuts off. This is how the Hebrews saw and interpreted it. In other words, this ancient history and language evolution teach us right away that sin is power before it is personified and an act. Pictography is not an absolute hermeneutic (science of biblical interpretation) engine; that is, an exegete (scriptural analyst) cannot rely on it while dealing with a text; however, it is more useful in the excavation of language evolution in the search for a word’s ideology.

From this historical perspective, we can see that, while Judaism may have grasped the problem as Chata and the solution as God, both the problem and the solution were theologically distorted. It is for this reason that I emphasise to my readers the importance of distinguishing between theological and other perspectives on sin.

Next, we will address the New Testament theological view.

God bless you I invoke TRUTH, REASON and FAITH (2Tim 2:7) 

Priest Isaiah White (+256-775 822833 for further inquiries)

iTiS Well of Worship Fellowship (John 4:24)

Questioning to Believe, Believing to Live