What is sin?

Status
Not open for further replies.
ChananBachiyr

ChananBachiyr

Puritan Board Freshman
Westminster Larger Catechism
Q. 24. What is sin?
A. Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, any law of God, given as a rule to the reasonable creature.z
(z) Lev 5:17; Jas 4:17; 1 John 3:4; Gal 3:10,12

May we discuss what sin is?
How do we, as children of God, discern what exactly sin is, other than the obvious sins such as murder, theft, adultery etc?

Coming from an Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) background, I've learned that that denomination almost seems legalistic in determining what sin is, with all of their touch not, taste not, hear not, handle not, wear not, speak nots... so to speak.
As I've learned a bit about liberty in Christ, much of what the IFB says is sin, simply has no basis in Scripture; caffeine is a great example, or wearing females wearing pants or skirts just above the knees.

Romans 14:14 "I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but to him who thinks anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean."

When I'm not sure about something, I ask my session and take their advice, but I'd just like to know how we/they (session) determine boundaries of sin and liberty... when it's not so obvious.
 
Daniel, outside of an exhaustive look at all the implications and application of the Ten Commandments, as extrapolated throughout Scripture, I can commend to you nothing better as a baseline than questions 91 through 148 in the Larger catechism, especially 103-148, wherein several implications and applications are drawn out from each commandment. Also, important distinctions are drawn out in question 99 which are helpful to understand our duty according to place, station, circumstance, etc:

Q. 99. What rules are to be observed for the right understanding of the ten commandments?
A. For the right understanding of the ten commandments, these rules are to be observed:

1. That the law is perfect, and bindeth every one to full conformity in the whole man unto the righteousness thereof, and unto entire obedience for ever; so as to require the utmost perfection of every duty, and to forbid the least degree of every sin.

2. That it is spiritual, and so reacheth the understanding, will, affections, and all other powers of the soul; as well as words, works, and gestures.

3. That one and the same thing, in divers respects, is required or forbidden in several commandments.

4. That as, where a duty is commanded, the contrary sin is forbidden; and, where a sin is forbidden the contrary duty is commanded: so, where a promise is annexed, the contrary threatening is included; and, where a threatening is annexed, the contrary promise is included.

5. That what God forbids, is at no time to be done; what he commands, is always our duty; and yet every particular duty is not to be done at all times.

6. That under one sin or duty, all of the same kind are forbidden or commanded; together with all the causes, means, occasions, and appearances thereof, and provocations thereunto.

7. That what is forbidden or commanded to ourselves, we are bound, according to our places, to endeavor that it may be avoided or performed by others, according to the duty of their places.

8. That in what is commanded to others, we are bound, according to our places and callings, to be helpful to them; and to take heed of partaking with others in what is forbidden them.​

 
Christian liberty and the interpretation and application of the law can be misused for God-dishonoring activities. Good doctrine and convictions call sin what God calls sin. Proper liberty allows us to enjoy the earth that God has provided for us. However in our fallen state, none of us achieve obedience and apply wisdom to Christ's perfect standard.

In general it seems to me the starting point in all such questions related to "Is this or that sin?" begins with motive. Are the motives ultimately related to glorifying God (Psalm 86:12; Col. 3:17)? If so, then how exactly does what is contemplated genuinely glorify God? After all, our motives may not be aright and they should be examined.

We should also not assume that the ten commandments are not complete enough to deal with modern society. Let me just assert that there is no sin, now or in the future, that is not anticipated in what has been commanded by the two tables of the law. Yes, the "biggies" are obvious, but that does not mean there are unforeseen circumstances of sin left silent by the commandments. From this comes the need to have a more comprehensive knowledge of the commandments than just their usual succinct recitation.

This is where our Confessions and Catechisms provide much help. Consider the ninth commandment. Most think it is simply about explicit lying. Yet, compare that sentiment with this:
https://www.puritanboard.com/help/9th-commandment/

I suspect anyone taking the time to read through all of that content will find themselves surprised to learn some things perhaps assumed "OK" are, well, suspect at best, rank sin at worst.

Understanding the full nature of what the commandments teach us will serve us well in our walk of faith. For we will often check ourselves when we are about to do this or that against what we have come to understand related to the shall nots and the shalls. Boundaries between sin and liberty are made more clear and more firm once we appropriate these understandings and put them into practice.

Lastly, unless one is a psychopath, we should pay attention to that nagging "No!" in our heads when we are about to do something. This inward provocation, often directly from the Holy Spirit, is a signal to check oneself.

EDIT: I see Johsua has weighed in while I typed this out. Good advice there!
 
ChananBachiyr said:
but I'd just like to know how we/they (session) determine boundaries of sin and liberty
Click to expand...
I know this is your question, but for me I made for more progress in understanding the nature of sin before moving on to a question like that.
ChananBachiyr said:
May we discuss what sin is?
How do we, as children of God, discern what exactly sin is, other than the obvious sins such as murder, theft, adultery etc?
Click to expand...
Sorry, my response will not be based on confessions. I will give some personal thoughts in this post. Then in the next post I will provide some quotations from John Owen.

I struggled with "what is sin?" for many years, because for me personally there was always something missing from the standard views on sin. These are the most common views I heard.

Sin is breaking the law.

Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (1 John 3:4 KJV)​

Many times I've heard it explained that sin is missing the mark. This idea comes from the Greek word hamartia (Strong's G266) which is translated into English as sin 172 times in the KJV. One definition of that Greek word is "missing the mark".

"Sin" is from those various lists of acts of sin in the Bible.

...for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons,... (1 Timothy 1:9, 10 KJV)​

But before I believed on Jesus Christ I was a good person. I had not done any of the things in the various lists of sins so there was nothing there to bother my conscience. It always seemed a stretch to me when preachers tried making those things applicable to me. I finally came to learn the issue for me was that no one was explaining the Biblical concept of sin being opposition towards God.

First example:

Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane,... (1 Timothy 1:9 KJV)​

What are these highlighted words? Why do they start one of the lists of acts of sin? All of those words have definitions which I had not been trained in. Creating a paraphrase by substituting in those definitions gives:

Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man [believers], but for those who are without God's law written in their hearts, those neglecting or refusing to obey God, those who are irreverent towards God, those lacking respect or esteem for God and his authority, those who by nature disobey God, the godless and the ungodly,... (1 Timothy 1:9 paraphrase)​

Next, there are a couple of different New Testament Greek words which are translated into English as unbelief. One of them is ἀπείθεια (apeitheia, Strong's G543). The definition of this Greek word from Thayer and Smith is:
obstinacy, obstinate opposition to the divine will
This Greek word is used 7 times in the New Testament.

Rom. 11:30-32 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy. For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

Eph. 2:2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

Eph. 5:6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

Col. 3:6 For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:

Heb. 4:6 Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:

Heb. 4:11 Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.
​
Finally, my favorite example of sin being opposition towards God is in Deuteronomy chapter 1. God tells the Israelites to go in and take the land. They rebel and don't go in. Then they repent and say they will. God says don't go in. But they rebel and do go in. No matter what God says, the nature of sin is to rebel against God, to be in obstinate opposition towards God.
 
Last edited:
excerpts from John Owen
(indented sections are quotations)

Introduction

In his book, The Nature, Power, Deceit, and Prevalency Of Indwelling Sin, John Owen gives an excellent description of what the nature of sin really is. The nature of sin is different from the fruit, or acts, of sin. Understanding "the law of sin" (Romans 7:23, 7:25, 8:2) is a fundamental key in understanding how sin separates man from God, and therefore why we need a Savior.

  • As the world by its wisdom never knew God aright, so the wise men of it were always utterly ignorant of this inbred evil in themselves and others. With us the doctrine and conviction of it [original sin] lie in the very foundation of all wherein we have to do with God, in reference unto our pleasing of him here, or obtaining the enjoyment of him hereafter. (p.229)
The Law Of Sin

The term "the law of sin" is used three times in the Bible.

  • But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. (Romans 7:23)

    I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin. (Romans 7:25)

    For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. (Romans 8:2)
Owen examines the meaning of the phrase "the law of sin".

  • And as its [the law of sin's] particular workings, which we shall afterward consider, are the ground of this appellation [name], so the term itself teaches us in general what we are to expect from it, and what endeavors it will use for dominion, to which it has been accustomed. (p.244)

    What kind of law indwelling sin is - It is not an outward, written, commanding, directing law, but an inbred, working, impelling, urging law. A law proposed unto us is not to be compared, for efficacy, to a law inbred in us. (p.245)
It Is Always There

  • And though it [the law of sin] has not a complete, and, as it were, a rightful dominion over them [believers], yet it will have a domination as to some things in them. (p.243)

    ...it [the law of sin] always abides in the soul - it is never absent. (p.246)

    "It does not only dwell in me," says the apostle, "but when I would do good, it is present with me." (p.247)
It Dwells In The Heart

  • First, for the seat and subject of this law of sin, the Scripture everywhere assigns it to be the heart. "Madness is in the heart of men while they live" (Ecc. 9:3) "Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, etc" (Matt. 15:19) (p.249)

    O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. (Matt. 12:34)

    Temptations and occasions put nothing into a man, but only draw out what was in him before, hence is that summary description to the whole work and effect of this law of sin, "Every imagination of the thoughts of man's heart is only evil continually" (Gen. 6:5; 8:21) (p.250)

    An evil man, out of the evil treasure of his heart, brings forth evil things (Luke 6:45)
It Grows

  • The more men exercise their grace in duties of obedience, the more it is strengthened and increased... The more men sin, the more are they inclined unto sin. (p.250)

    It is from the deceitfulness of this law of sin... that men persuade themselves that by this or that particular sin they shall so satisfy their lusts as that they shall need to sin no more. Every sin increases the principle, and fortifies the habit of sinning. (p.250)

    ...his heart gathereth iniquity to itself... (Psalm 41:6)
The Law of Sin is Enmity Against God

Here is Owen's key proof text.

  • "The carnal mind is enmity against God" (Rom. 8:7). That which is here called ... "the wisdom of the flesh" [the carnal mind], is the same with, "the law of sin"... it is ... "enmity against God". (p.257)

    ... it [the law of sin] is not only said to be "enmity," but it is said to be "enmity against God." It has chosen a great enemy indeed. It is in sundry places proposed as our enemy: "Abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul" (1 Pet. 2:11); they are enemies to the soul, that is, to ourselves. Sometimes as an enemy to the Spirit that is in us: "The flesh lusts" or fights "against the Spirit" (Gal. 5:17). It fights against the Spirit, or the spiritual principle that is in us, to conquer it; it fights against our souls to destroy them. It has special ends and designs against our souls, and against the principle of grace that is in us; but its proper formal object is God: it is "enmity against God." It is its work to oppose grace; it is a consequent of its work to oppose our souls, which follows upon what it does more than what it intends; but its nature and formal design is to oppose God - God as the lawgiver, God as holy, God as the author of the gospel, a way of salvation by grace, and not by works - this is the direct object of the law of sin. (p.259)
"Against God" is the key to understanding the nature of all sin.

Why It Creates in Man Opposition to God

  • Why does it [the law of sin] oppose duty, so that the good we would do we do not [Rom. 7:19], either as to matter or manner? Why does it render the soul carnal, indisposed, unbelieving, unspiritual, weary, wandering? It is because of its enmity to God, whom the soul aims to have communion with in duty. It has, as it were, that command from Satan which the Assyrians had from their king: "Fight neither with small nor great, save only with the king of Israel" (1 Kings 22:31). It is neither great nor small, but God himself, the King of Israel, that sin sets itself against. There lies the secret formal reason of all its opposition to good - even because it relates unto God. May a road, a trade, a way of duties be set up, where communion with God is not aimed at, but only the duty itself, as is the manner of men in most of their superstitious worship, the opposition that will lie against it from the law of sin will be very weak, easy, and gentle. Or, as the Assyrians, because of his show of a king, assaulted Jehoshaphat, but when they found that it was not Ahab, they turned back from pursuing of him [1 Kings 22:31-33]; so because there is a show and appearance of the worship of God, sin may make head[way] against it at first, but when the duty cries out in the heart that indeed God is not there, sin turns away to seek out its proper enemy, even God himself, elsewhere. And hence do many poor creatures spend their days in dismal, tiring superstitions, without any great reluctancy from within, when others cannot be suffered freely to watch with Christ in a spiritual manner one hour. (pp.259,260)
Against God

  • It is true, the pleasures, the wages of sin, do greatly influence the sensual, carnal affections of men: but it is the holiness and authority of God that sin itself rises up against; it hates the yoke of the Lord. "You have been wary of me," says God to sinners [Isa. 43:22]; and that during their performance of abundance of duties. Every act of sin is a fruit of being weary of God. Thus Job tells us what lies at the bottom in the heart of sinners: "They say to God, Depart from us" [Job 21:14; 22:17] - it is enmity against him and aversation [aversion] from him. Here lies the formal nature of every sin - it is an opposition to God, a casting off his yoke, a breaking off the dependence which the creature ought to have on the Creator. And the apostle gives the reason why he affirms "the carnal mind to be enmity against God," namely, "because it is not subject to the will of God, nor indeed can be" (Rom. 8:7). It never is, nor will, nor can be subject to God, its whole nature consisting in an opposition to him. The soul wherein it is may be subject to the law of God; but this law of sin sets up in contrariety [state of being contrary or in opposition to] unto it, and will not be in subjection. (p.260)
Conclusion

  • This is our state and condition: All the opposition that arises in us unto anything that is spiritually good, whether it be from darkness in the mind, or aversation [aversion] in the will, or sloth in the affections, all the secret arguings and reasonings that are in the soul in pursuit of them, the direct object of them is God himself. (p.260)

    What has been delivered might give us a little sense of it [the law of sin], if it be the will of God, and stir us up unto watchfulness. What can be of a more sad consideration than that we should carry about us constantly that which is enmity against God, and that not in this or that particular, but in all that he is and in all wherein he has revealed himself? I cannot say it is well with them who find it not. It is well with them, indeed, in whom it is weakened, and the power of it abated; but yet, for them who say it is not in them, they do but deceive themselves, and there is no truth in them. (p.262)

    The man that understands the evil of his own heart, how vile it is, is the only useful, fruitful, and solid believing and obedient person. (p.283)
 
This might sound counter-intuitive, but I wonder if you'd benefit from studying God's law rather than sin? I spent time in an independent Baptist church and was amazed how often they'd say, "We're not under law, but grace." When asked what they though was right, they'd pull out a list of rules and attach proof-texts. Understanding the law as the standard by which we are being made like Christ could be helpful in understanding specific questions.
 
jwithnell said:
Understanding the law as the standard by which we are being made like Christ could be helpful in understanding specific questions.
Click to expand...

Thanks! Definitely not counter-intuitive. I haven't studied the law much, and nothing but good can come from it! A great suggestion!
 
There is a tension between being and doing in Christian life, and the subject of sin and the law is indicative of this. Did Christ die for the sins, the doing that I did, or did He die for my sin nature, my being that manifested itself in doing? This touches on emotional subjects like the salvation of infants - is the natural, born under the curse, selfishness of an infant as expressed in anger, frustration and demanding satisfaction, indicative of a sin nature needing salvation? Or is there an age of accountability at which point knowledge of the law factors in? Confession of acts of sins? Sins of omission? On down the road, typically focusing on doing, law keeping, etc. However, pastorally I have found discipleship in the area of sin to be most productive when I begin where KeithW and John Owen discussed, acknowledging that I had a heart of unbelief and rebellion prior to regeneration. Personally I then move into Murray and Definitive Sanctification when I disciple on the sins of a believer, but I keep the foundation on the topic of sin rooted in our nature, our being ... with the doing as the fruit or manifestation of that being. This points the believer to grace for triumph over current temptation. I would suggest you consider reading on what it means to be a new creation in Christ, as it relates to sin, to inform your hamartiology. Great subject to explore, and I pray rich blessings for your study.
 
Held Fast said:
...I keep the foundation on the topic of sin rooted in our nature, our being ... with the doing as the fruit or manifestation of that being.
Click to expand...
Martin Luther says the same thing in his preface to his commentary on Romans. (By the way, I think the preface is the best part of the book, and every Christian should read it.)
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/luther/romans/files/romans.html

Sin in the Scriptures means not only external works of the body but also all those movements within us which bestir themselves and move us to do the external works, namely, the depth of the heart with all its powers. Therefore the word do should refer to a person's completely falling into sin. No external work of sin happens, after all, unless a person commit himself to it completely, body and soul.​

To study "God's law rather than sin" I believe splits two things apart which should not be split apart. God's law can show what God's standards are to us who don't know or understand God's ways. But Paul goes as far as saying that the law was given to us to be a schoolmaster to lead us to Christ, to teach us that we are sinners in need of a Savior. See Galatians 3:21-25.

And then you have Paul using the word law in different ways right next to each other.

Rom. 7:21-25 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.​

To understand what Paul is talking about here I think one must understand the nature of sin, to better understand the sin nature we are born with and why we sin.

Rom. 8:1-3 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:​

I will add an anecdote about the original question of,
ChananBachiyr said:
...but I'd just like to know how we/they (session) determine boundaries of sin and liberty... when it's not so obvious.
Click to expand...
Jeff Pollard wrote a book called "Christian Modesty and the Public Undressing of America", especially focused on the history of the progressive uncovering of women by the fashion industry. He also did a sermon series on it which is published on Sermon Audio. Many Christians responded positively to his message. He was always being asked what rules of dress women should follow. He always said you are missing the point and often refused to give specific rules, until finally one time he did. Deciding on "rules" involved studying the doctrines of Grace (such as total inability toward God), studying God's laws (you could think of this as boundaries God has set up), studying the nature of sin as opposition towards God, and finally studying the written source materials of secular women's fashion and seeing how this is specifically designed to draw people into sin.

So Daniel, your question is good. You are asking something deeper than the average person who only wants to be told what rules to follow.
 
KeithW said:
To study "God's law rather than sin" I believe splits two things apart which should not be split apart.
Click to expand...
I don't think she was implying a split, but in studying God's law one will gain a better understanding of sin. Just as Romans 7:7 says, "I would not have come to know sin except through the Law..."

KeithW said:
You are asking something deeper than the average person who only wants to be told what rules to follow.
Click to expand...

I'm glad we're all on the same page here! Lol!
 
ChananBachiyr said:
I haven't studied the law much, and nothing but good can come from it! A great suggestion!
Click to expand...

Get to studying brother. The Law of God, learned and continually meditated on, will make you wiser than at least the following three classes of people:

Psalm 119:97-100
97 O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day.
98 Thou through thy commandments hast made me wiser than mine enemies: for they are ever with me.
99 I have more understanding than all my teachers: for thy testimonies are my meditation.
100 I understand more than the ancients, because I keep thy precepts.
 
"For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me." This shows the unity of scripture, and the central truth that joins the two together, even the Lord Jesus Christ. If the Pharisees had believed the substance of the law instead of the letter, then they would have believed what Christ taught. Also there is this truth, that unless you believe Moses first you will never believe Christ. Swinnock wrote this in his sermon on holiness, "through the law is the knowledge of sin, though the gospel is the knowledge of Christ."
I believe that in the law there are principles that we are to regulate our lives by; but the gospel clothes those principles with grace and love and the temper of Christ in our lives to apply them.I know the sweetest of persons who never paints her face, never wears trousers and covers her hair in worship, deriving those principles from scripture, and so clothing herself with the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit which in the sight of God is of great price. But let each be persuaded in his own mind and his conscience be guided by scripture in the light that he or she has received. Many of the distinctions in Christian practice can be discerned through a common sense approach to scripture.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top