What is the definition of sin?

The parenthesis from verse 13 to 17 enters more fully into the contrast between the two heads, Adam and Christ; also bringing out a very important fact, which we may look at for a moment - "For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law." (v. 13.) Many think that the law was always given to man, but it is not so; the law was not given till four hundred and thirty years after Abraham; but "until the law was given sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed where there is no law;" that is, it is not put to the account of the person, but sin existed before the law was given. I dwell upon this point because of the passage in 1 John 3:4 - "Sin is the transgression of the law." It should read, "Sin is lawlessness." It comes from the same word as is translated "without law" in Romans 2:12. If sin was the transgression of the law, there would be no sin before the law was given; but there was, for we read in Romans 5: "For until the law sin was in the world." Besides, it lowers the standard of the holiness of God. Sin is lawlessness, insubjection to God; the very fact of having a will of our own in opposition to God is sin.

If you think of a poor orphan that never livingly knew its own father or mother, seeing with pain its loss of a tie which bound others together, you could better judge the great blank that must be felt there. Here we are precluded from any such feelings. Not only have we a divine nature which is given by grace to abide through every strain and difficulty; but our title holds good as having received Christ to be children of His Father and ours. And what is sin in His sight? Nothing less than a direct stroke at God's nature. The nearness of our relationship only aggravates the insult done to God. It is one acting in his own will, against God's will, for that is the true character of sin; not a transgression of the law, as wrongly in the Authorised Version of 1 John 3:4. So theologians have mistakenly made him say, because they are all apt to sink more or less under the law. What the apostle really wrote there is, that sin is lawlessness. This is both larger and deeper than a breach of the law. Such breaches might be by a Jew under carelessness or provocation without realising God's authority in it; whereas lawlessness has an awful character. Hence Gentiles who know not the law are characteristically thus guilty, so that "lawless" is used to describe them. But this is the definition of sin revealed to the Christian: "Sin is lawlessness." Transgression of the law is sin; but the converse is not true; for sin has a far wider bearing; it is lawlessness, unrestrained self-will.

The other is, "Sin is the transgression of the law." This is really, I must say, a wicked subjection of the word to theology; The word (anomia) is never used for "transgression of the law" anywhere else in the English translation of the holy scriptures; another expression is, parabasis nomou. I call it "wicked," because by it a human system denies what the word of God carefully insists on. Not only so, but it is the word rightly translated elsewhere "without law." Sin is not transgression of the law; to say so, universal as it may be, is a wicked anti-scriptural perversion. Sin is the evil nature which produces lust, the enmity of the heart against God. It is written, "Sin by the commandment became exceeding sinful," which could not be if sin was not there before the commandment. Again, the contrary is expressly stated. "Until the law sin was in the world." There is no transgression without sin. Further, it is said, "They that have sinned without law," the same word as an adverb (anomos), in contrast to sinning under the law. That is, the word of God puts it in direct contradiction to what this false translation does.

Passing to other changes, we note with great satisfaction the faithful rendering of 1 John 3:4. It ran, as our readers will remember, as follows: "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law;" a translation not only serious in its consequences, but amounting to a falsification of the word of God. For inasmuch as the law was given to the Jews, and to them alone — if this were a true definition of sin — Gentiles could never have committed it! How different is the statement of the Spirit of God as now given by the Revisers, "Every one that doeth sin doeth also lawlessness: and sin is lawlessness." Sin is thus shown in its true character and essence — as consisting in independence of God, doing one's own will with freedom from every other law, and thus lawlessness. To the Jew sin, in addition, was transgression of the law; but sin in Jew and Gentile alike is lawlessness, a definition therefore that leaves no loophole of escape for any one upon the face of the earth, but brings in the whole world as alike guilty before God.

By natural generation we are all in Adam, for we all derive from him, and from him in his fallen, not in his innocent, condition. We have our moral nature from him, and are a race of sinful beings obnoxious to the judgment of God. By that one man sin entered into this world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all; for that all have sinned. To this it may be replied that infants die, and that overt acts of sin can scarcely be put down to their account. Quite true. But leave them alone for a very little time, and you will find that in every one of them a very strong will quickly manifests itself. And what is that? Nothing else than sin. Sin is lawlessness: it is doing one’s own will. Nothing but one will, and that the will of God, should be done in the universe. You and I should do His will, and so should every intelligent being. But in this world people think it quite right to do their own will, and as far as ever they can do it. What worldling is there who for one moment thinks he is here to do God’s will? He may, if be is of a generous turn of mind, think that he ought to do all the good he can for those about him, but the good that he supposes he is doing has its origin in his own natural inclination, and not in the will of God, though if he is religiously inclined he may hope that in the day of judgment it will go down to his credit. It is thought that if one is only kind to one’s neighbours, does all he can for the good of humanity, and leads a moral life, all will be well with him in the day of judgment.

To the question, "What is sin?" many contradictory answers would in all probability be given. God's definition of it — which alone is authoritative — may be found in the Revised Version of 1 John 3:4: "Sin is lawlessness." This way of defining it cuts very deep. Every exercise of the human will in independence of God is by this divine statement declared to be sin. It matters not what the act may be, whether it be that which human courts would punish, or whether it be what would pass muster in the eyes of men, every action taken without reference to God is sin. This leaves no loophole for escape to any of us. Judged by such a standard, every child of Adam must be brought in guilty. Man having been created a being dependent upon his Maker, the fact that he acts, and even loves to act, apart from Him is proof of his revolted and alienated condition.

Sin has wrecked God's fair creation, it has ruined men, separating them from God by a gulf that could only be crossed and removed by infinite love; but it has done more than this, it has challenged the very majesty of God in His own universe. Sin is rebellion against God's supremacy; it would climb to the eternal throne if it could and tear Him from thence; and this is what sin means whenever it shows itself in the life of a man; it is the determination of his heart to go his own way regardless of the will of God; it is lawlessness, the refusal to be subject to the throne of God.

As for special revelation, Scripture is full of definitions for sin, which all boil down to breaking God's laws or going against God's will. Summed up, these definitions might be stated: Sin is proud, independent rebellion against God in active or passive form.

H. He takes sin to mean the consciousness of sin (without this there can be no sin), and sin as the transgression of the law. But all this is blunder on blunder. He takes sin as guilt: hence sin is the consciousness of sin, i.e., sense of guilt. But sin is a very different thing from the sense of guilt; were it not, a perfectly hardened sinner could have no sin at all. But, besides, when he says sin is intermediate between good and evil, he is making the faculty which judges the sin the same thing as the sin it judges; that is, conscience, and not merely the actual consciousness of sin, but the sin we are conscious of, to be the same thing! In the next place, he confounds παράβασις νόμου and ἀνομία as equivalent, a mere acceptance of traditional mistake about which he is so loud. Sin is the principle of self-will or lawlessness, which does not own God, and leads a man to gratify his own lusts without acknowledging any rein upon them.

The apostle John says that "sin is lawlessness." (1 John 3:4) The word "transgression" does not develop the true idea of the Spirit in this passage. In order to have "transgression" I must have a definite rule or line laid down. Transgression means a passing across a prohibited line; such a line I have in the law. I take any one of its prohibitions, such as, "thou shalt not kill," "thou shalt not commit adultery," "thou shalt not steal." Here, I have a rule or line set before me; but I find I have within me the very principles against which these prohibitions are expressly directed. Yea, the very fact of my being told not to commit murder, shows that I have murder in my nature. There would be no necessity to tell me not to do a thing which I had no tendency to do; but the exhibition of God's will, as to what I ought to be, makes manifest the tendency of my will to be what I ought not. This is plain enough, and is in full keeping with the whole of the apostolic reasoning on the point.