Sin

For those of you who are unfamiliar, the Westminster Shorter Catechism ... is a misnomer. A catechism is a text summarizing principles of Christian doctrine in the form of questions and answers. The Catholics have their own; the Westminster version is primarily a Presbyterian catechism. "Shorter" is questionable; it consists of 107 questions. The object is to catechize each generation of Presbyterians (and anyone who concurs with the doctrines) so they can answer "basic" questions about the faith. "Basic questions?" Yes, like Question #1: "What is the chief end of man?" Get that? The first question they ask these, say, 12-year-olds is the purpose of life. Nice. (In case you were curious, the answer is "Man's chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy Him forever.") One of the questions they ask is, "What is sin?" Answer: "Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law of God." The catechism includes proof texts, so this one refers to Leviticus 5:17; James 4:17, and 1 John 3:4. The first generalizes that anyone who commits anything that the Lord says they shouldn't, whether they know it or not, has sinned. That's the sin of commission -- doing anything that we are commanded not to. The second says that anyone who knows what is right to do and doesn't is sinning. That is the sin of omission -- failing to do what is commanded. The last says simply, "Sin is lawlessness," anything that violates God's law, positive or negative. So I think the catechism is fairly good. I'm not sure it is comprehensive enough. But, then, it's the shorter catechism, right?

What else does the Bible say about sin? Well, the primary words tell us something. In Hebrew, chattath refers to "an offense" -- general enough -- and chata means "to miss." To miss the goal, the path, the way ... God's law. We get it. The primary Greek word is used in a variety of forms. The word "hamartia" appears 174 times and means, basically, the same as chata -- to miss the mark. So sin is "an offense" and "missing the mark."

The Bible says a lot more than that, though. There is everything from specifics like Jesus's redefinition of adultery to include lust (Matt 5:27-28), for example, all the way to the expansive "whatever is not from faith is sin." (Rom 14:23). That one actually exceeds the "violation of God's law" concept. If I am not convinced it is God's values, it's sin for me to do it. In this case, then, something like smoking can be labeled an actual sin, even though Scripture does not address it, because someone thinks it is. In that case, though, it is an individual sin, not a universal one. The one in Romans 3 is particularly instructive. Most of us can quote it. "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." (Rom 3:23) Our problem is that we use it (correctly) to point out the universality of sin -- "all have sinned" -- and appear to miss the parallel statement about sin -- "fall short of the glory of God." Sin, at its core, is falling short of God's glory.

That's where it gets interesting. Let me say it again. Sin, at its core, is falling short of God's glory. Thus, sin, at its core, is a violation of God. Remember what David wrote about his sin with Bathsheba. "Against You, You only, have I sinned and done what is evil in Your sight." (Psa 51:4). We know sin to often be an offense against others, but, at its root, sin is first and foremost an offense against God. If that is true, in the example of a failure to provide for one's family (1 Tim 5:8), it is a sin which is certainly a violation of one's family, but is first an offense to God. Essentially, it's "God said to do this ... and I said, 'No.'"

God went to a great deal of trouble to emphasize the hugely costly nature of sin. Starting in the garden, he warned that the most seemingly innocuous sin would result in death (Gen 3:3). Really? Eating a piece of fruit? That only makes sense if the sin in question was more than merely eating fruit. It was. It was an offense against God. He went on to prescribe a massive system of sacrifices of plants and animals (see, for instance, Numbers 28:1-8) because "without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins." (Heb 9:22). "Why?" we might reasonably ask. "Sin is just missing the mark." It is the mark that is missed that is significant -- the glory of God. It is the mark that is missed that makes sin the egregious offense Scripture describes as requiring God's wrath (e.g., Rom 1:18). And, if what Jesus said was true (Luke 7:47), we will only love greatly when we really grasp the enormity of sin -- our own sin.