What are sins in the New Testament?

There are many different words both in the O.T. and N.T. signifying 'sin,' 'iniquity,' 'wickedness,' etc., with various shades of meaning.

It is important to notice the scripture definition of sin. It is 'lawlessness.' 1 John 3:4. Hence the distinction made between 'sin' and 'transgression,' the latter being the infraction of a known command. From Adam to Moses man "had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression," yet men had sinned and died. Rom. 5:14. A positive law was given to Adam, which he disobeyed; but from Adam to Moses no definite law was proclaimed, consequently there was no transgression, yet there was sin in the sense of lawlessness, and such sin as called for the deluge. The same distinction is plainly involved in Rom. 4:15; "Where no law is, there is no transgression," yet there may be sin, and it is averred that "as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law." Rom. 2:12.

Again, taking Romans 4:15; and Rom. 5:13-14, it would perplex all to bring in the common version of 1 John 3:4; for it would follow thence that there was no sin, because it had not the form of a transgression of law between Adam, who had a law, and Moses, by whom the law was given. So fatal may be a mis-translation of scripture. In fact, practically, it lowers the sense of what sin is throughout the length and breadth of Christendom, others having fallen into an error similar to that of our own translators. It is therefore as certain as it is important to see that sin embraces much more than a transgression of the law. In this case there could be no such thing as sin without the law, and all would be judged alike as under the law and transgressors of it, contrary to the express word of God. Our version is wrong. Sin is not the transgression of the law, though every transgression of the law is a sin. The true meaning, as I have said, is, "sin is lawlessness."

The subject of 'law' is not restricted in scripture to the law given by Moses. God gave a commandment (or law) to Adam, which made Adam's subsequent sin to be transgression. Where there is no law there is no transgression (Rom. 4:15), though there may be sin, as there was from Adam to Moses: "until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed [or put to account] when there is no law." Rom. 5:13. This doubtless signifies that specific acts were not put to account as a question of God's governmental dealings, when there was no law forbidding them. Men sinned, and death reigned, though they "had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression" (Rom. 5:14), for no definite law had been given to them. The nations that had not the law were however a law unto themselves, having some sense of good and evil, and their conscience bore witness accordingly. It is not a true definition of sin, to say that it is "the transgression of the law," as in the A.V. of 1 John 3:4. The passage should read "Sin is lawlessness:" that is, man doing his own will, defiant of restraint, and regardless of his Creator and of his neighbour.

We often find, in course of conversation, that people do not know the difference between "sin" and "sins." Were you asked what the difference is, perhaps you would say, "'Sin' is singular, and 'sins' plural." Such an answer is frequently given, but that is not what Scripture means by "sin" and "sins." Sin is the evil nature we brought into this world; sins are the things which that nature is guilty of committing. Sin is like a crab-tree, and sins the fruit that appears on it. It is just as much a crab-tree if it has only one crab-apple on it as if it had a thousand. When you are clear as to the difference between sin and sins, you will find that the Epistle to the Romans will help you in a remarkable way. The first part of Romans, from chap. 1 to 5:11, is about sins we have been guilty of. From verse 12 of chap. 5 it is a new subject, and the question of sin is taken up, not "sins." In chap. 6 sin is mentioned seventeen times; "sins" not once. Death is also presented in one form or another seventeen times in the same chapter. The moment the Holy Ghost mentions sin, He mentions in connection with it death! Why is this? Because nothing short of death would meet what is due to sin — nothing but the death of Christ.

*It is very important to see the difference which Scripture makes between sin and sins. Sin is the evil principle in us which we acquired through the fall, the evil nature. Sins, the natural fruit of having an evil nature, sinful actions committed.

Three words are given in Scripture to define sin; they are brought together in Exodus 34:7, Psalm 32 and Psalm 51 — they are transgression, iniquity and sin. These words are not mere synonyms that could displace one another and nothing be lost, for each has it own terrible meaning. TRANSGRESSION is revolt from, it means a tearing of ones self away. God has declared His will for men, but they prefer their own wills, and in the pursuit of their own wills they tear themselves away from God. INIQUITY means twisted, crooked, perverse. God has laid down a road for the feet of men to tread, and that road is as straight as His everlasting sceptre, but men have made for themselves crooked ways (Isa. 59:8); they are a crooked and perverse generation (Phil. 2:15). SIN means missing the mark. God has set up His mark, the end at which every man should aim. God Himself should be the end and aim of every man's life, but every man has substituted self for God, and set up his own mark to displace God's; and has missed the very mark and purpose of his existence. Along with sin in this threefold character goes GUILE; it permeates the life of every man who has not been honest before God His effort is to appear different from what he knows himself to be, to cover up and hide his sinfulness and even to imagine that be can deceive God Himself as to it. Then the New Testament gives us a striking definition of sin in 1 John 3:4 where we should read, "for sin is lawlessness," and that covers all that sin is; it is not a mere yielding to the sudden and capricious impulses of our nature, but the determination that lies deep in a man's will, though perhaps seldom expressed, to go his own way and be independent of God.

The first of these captivities gives us the root-principle of all, which is indeed but sin, and sin has but one definition in Scripture — "lawlessness" (1 John 3:4): rightly so given in the Revised Version, where the common one has "the transgression of the law." This the word does not mean; and the real thought is a much deeper one. Where law is, sin manifests itself in the transgression of it: of that there is, of course, no question; nay, it was the purpose of the law to manifest it, and "by the law is the knowledge of sin." (Rom. 3:20.) "I had not known sin," says the apostle, "except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet" — "lust;" "but sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of lust" (Rom. 7:7-8). Sin therefore is deeper and more radical than even the "lust" which it works. Sin is the parent; lust is the child. "Lawlessness" is the unsubject spirit of self-will, which in the creature away from God shows itself as want, in cravings which find no satisfaction, and thus rule the man. "Their god is their belly," says the apostle, of such. (Phil. 3:19.) This is the misery of the creature out of the creature's place, of independence on the part of one who is necessarily dependent.

But first of all the true nature of sin must be exposed. One of the few blemishes of our excellent Authorized Version occurs in verse 4, where the word for lawlessness is translated as "transgression of the law." "Every one that practises sin practises also lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness." (New Trans.). If sin really had been the transgression of the law, then there would have been no sin committed in the world between Adam and Moses, as Romans 5:13-14 says. But sin is something deeper than that, for lawlessness is the denial and repudiation of all law, and not merely the breaking of it when given. If the planets that encircle our sun were suddenly to repudiate all law, the solar system would be destroyed. Lawlessness amongst the intelligent creatures of God's hand is equally deadly, and destructive of His moral order and government.

But to return to the question. "Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgression." Not because of sin, observe, but because of transgression. It is important to mark the difference. Again, the apostle says, "Moreover the law entered that the offence might abound." Not, of course, that sin might abound. God could never sanction anything that would cause sin to abound. But what is the difference? some may inquire. Sin is the lawlessness of the flesh, a much deeper and wider thing than transgression. Sin was in man from the fall, but transgression is the violation of a known and positive law. Who filled the world with corruption and violence? And who afterwards filled it with idolatry? Sinners, most assuredly. But this was before the law entered, and they are not called transgressors. "For where no law is there is no transgression." — The apostle does not say, observe, "Where no law is there is no sin." This he could not say, for sin was as much in man before the law was given as after. At the same time let us not forget that all transgression is sin, though sin in its root and principle is never called transgression; it is not necessarily the violation of a given law.

*This very commonly received definition derives apparent authority from a false translation of 1 John 3:5. Upon it, to a very great extent, the formal judgment of the church, as to what sin is, has been founded. That which the apostle states is, not (as our translation has it) "sin is the transgression of the law," but 'sin is lawlessness;' or, the proposition being reciprocal, 'lawlessness (or insubordination) is sin.' Disobedience is sin. This may be proved in breaking the law, in a given instance; but there is a much higher characteristic of sin than the breaking of a commandment; viz., the spirit of disobedience.