Though not the focal point of Christianity, an essential foundation to understand the need for Christ is the recognition of human sin.

The theological understanding of sin was central in the Hebrew congregation preceding Christ and continues to heavily influence Christianity today; however, because the concept has been around for thousands of years, it can be easily taken for granted. This dismissal can lead to misunderstanding and ignorance, which can affect how Christianity as a whole is understood.

To Carry a Burden

The first way that sin is described in the Bible is with the word “ǎwōn,” which is the Hebrew word for “burden,” Gary Anderson explains in his book “Sin: A History.” Taken with the verb, “nāśā,” which means “to carry,” the phrase “nāśā ǎwōn” translates “to bear the burden of one’s sin” and “was used as the word for ‘forgive’ because it was literally associated with carrying a weight.”

This image relates to the process by which sin was purged from a community. Leviticus 16 describes the “scapegoat” ceremony where a priest would impart the community’s sins on the shoulders of a goat, who would carry these sins out of the community and into the wilderness. Professor Rene Girard, who recognized this mechanism in ancient myths and literature, saw this process as essential to the formation and development of human communities, uniting its members and maintaining a sense of balance.

To Pay a Debt

Later, another word for sin becomes more prominent in the biblical text. The word, “ḥôb,” translates to “debt” as it is used in financial considerations. Tying the secular financial world and the sacred together is how “sacrifices” are described as something to “repay.” This is applied to the “sufferings” of the Israelites themselves, specifically after they have been exiled from Jerusalem and their Temple, where these sacrifices would have occurred.

This follows from the common way that Israel’s exile in Babylon, especially the length of the exile, was described as paying off a debt created by their sin.

For Christians, this has implications for something called the “Ransom Theory” of atonement, which posits that Jesus, by his sacrificial death, paid the ransom owed to Satan for the debt of human sin originating in the first human parents, Adam and Eve. This creates a shared experience for all humans by virtue of their human nature. If humanity fell into debt by sin together, it follows that all of humanity’s debt was collectively paid by Jesus.

Missing the Mark

The marked difference in the way sin is described in the Bible comes from the change in the language of origin. The Christian Old Testament largely came from original Hebrew manuscripts, although was often translated into Greek, while the New Testament was originally written in Greek.

The newest term for the concept of sin comes from Greek prior to the New Testament and is used heavily throughout the work. The term borrows heavily from philosophy and was part of the incorporation of Greek philosophy into Christian theology which began with the work of Plato and continued with the work of Aristotle as theology developed into the Middle Ages.

The term, hamartia, means “to miss the mark” like an arrow toward a target. This word implies more agency. One can be given a burden or a debt, but one only misses a mark if one shoots. This image argues for a more personal responsibility of sin.

“Missing the mark” also emphasizes the telos, the end or purpose, of our actions and the fact that completing an action that goes against that end goes against the purpose of the action itself. This implies that actions have an inherent purpose irrespective of the person who does them.

One Common Source

Regardless of how sin is described throughout the Bible, the practical question is how one can avoid sin. Virtues counter these three perspectives of sin, and in order to combat sin, one must identify and practice the opposing virtue. For example, considering the image of carrying a weight, one would need the moral strength, or fortitude, to do so. Also, the image of paying a debt implies that there are objective demands of justice. Finally, “making the mark” requires the virtue of temperance, which acts as a balance to one’s appetites and actions.

This appears to leave out the fourth cardinal virtue, prudence, which some consider the most important virtue because it forms the other three. This is because prudence, practical wisdom, determines when, where, and how best to practice the other virtues in day-to-day life. The practice of these virtues, and how they oppose sin in all its images and forms, creates a happy life in the one living them.

—

This article was made possible by The Fred & Rheta Skelton Center for Cultural Renewal. 

Image credit: Pixabay