Word of the Week
August 24, 2024
Hamartia: Whatever Became of Sin?
Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body that you should obey its lusts.
Romans 6:12 NASB
Karl Menninger startled the world of psychotherapy with his 1973 book Whatever Became of Sin? A secular scientist, not a theologian, Menninger observed that our society no longer used the term sin to describe human problems. He predicted that it would be replaced by words like illness, disorder, dysfunction or syndrome.
The years have proved him to be a reliable prophet. No one can ignore the myriad ills that plague us, but it is not fashionable to trace their roots to sin. We may hear of societal sins, but but there is little acknowledgement of the idea that bad behavior is an offense against God or His moral standards.
A doctor cannot treat your ailments successfully without a proper diagnosis, and it is unlikely that we can remedy the ills of our souls or our society without an understanding of the underlying problem – one that the Bible labels as “sin.”
What better place to begin than by examining the primary Greek word for sin?
The primary Greek word used for si in the New Testament is hamartia [hah-mar-TEE-ah]. It appears 173 times. The matching verb hamartanō [hah-mar-TAH-noh] appears 43 times. As you can see, the idea is a central focus of the Christian message.
Like our word sin, hamartia has a long and varied history. It first appears in the war epics like the Iliad and the Odyssey, where it means “to miss the mark.” An arrow that missed the target or a spear thrust that failed to land would be a hamartia.
Before long, classical Greek writers used the term figuratively for all kinds of failures. It might mean to make a mistake, to miss out on an opportunity, or to fail to reach a goal. It usually was the result of ignorance, not wickedness. It could cover anything from stupidity to law-breaking – anything that did not conform to the behavior that people viewed as right.
The Old Testament brought a whole new dimension to hamartia. Now sin was an offense against God. He Himself was the yardstick for right and wrong. Sin was anything contrary to God’s character, His covenants, or His commandments.
The Old Testament uses nearly 40 different words for sin rather than one general term like hamartia. By the first century, the Pharisees and other Jewish leaders had developed a superficial understanding of sin, reducing it to mere conformity to the Mosaic Law. If you scrupulously observed all the ceremonial regulations and performed all the prescribed sacrifices, you would be considered blameless. They were correct in viewing sin primarily as an offense against the Lord, but they missed the idea that it went to one’s heart, not just the observable actions.
Hamartia could refer to specific acts of sin, often mentioned in the plural. At Pentecost, Peter urged the Jews to repent “for the forgiveness of your sins” (Acts 2:38). Paul advised that “The sins of some are quite evident, going before them to judgment” (1 Timothy 5:24). Christ died to provide salvation from the guilt of our sins. Revelation describes Him as “Him who loves us and released us from our sins by His blood” (Revelation 1:5).
Hamartia can also refer to our sin nature, the engrained tendency toward self-will and rebellion against God. 1 John 3:5 declares that “He appeared in order to take away sins [plural – acts of sin]; and in Him there is no sin.” Jesus committed no acts of sin, and His nature was free from any taint of sin. We aren’t sinners because we sin; we sin because we are sinners.
Hamartia is portrayed as a slave master in Paul’s great discourse in Romans 5-7, a figurative personification that reminds us of the hold that sin maintains on individuals. Romans 6:12-13 instructs, “Do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you may obey its lusts, and do not go on presenting the members of your body to sin as instruments of unrighteousness.”
We can’t understand our situation without understanding sin. It is more than a miscalculation; it is an offense against the God who rules the universe. It is more than a misstep; it is the expression of a built-in moral twist. And it is more than a casual preference; it is a cruel taskmaster.
We are simply unable to overcome it by our own sophistication or effort. God alone can release us from its guilt and tyranny. That’s why Christ died to pay the penalty for our sins and offers the gift of a transformed life by His power.
Study Hint:
Commentaries often explain that the word means “to miss the mark.” Technically, that was the original meaning of the matching verb hamartanō. That offers a helpful mental image, because sin does miss the target of God’s will. However, hamartia seldom has that literal meaning, and you won’t find any place in the New Testament where it is used to describe physical combat. It consistently carries the later meanings of something that goes against God’s standards.
Such a comprehensive word is much too big to master in one essay. I suggest that you read through the New Testament and circle the word sin every time you find it. It is especially common in Paul’s epistles – 48 times in Romans alone – as well as Hebrews and John.
Coming Up
Do you ever wish you weren’t so timid? Are you tempted to collapse in the face of life’s pressures? Next week we will look at a Greek word that calls us to courage – and tells us how we can do it.
©Ezra Project 2024
7 Responses
Thank you for highlighting this word and contrasting is later usage with the technical definition we have come to know, “missing the mark.” That term, as you said, while true, falls short (misses the mark, lol) of the full meaning and implications of sin as a whole mindset of enmity and offense against God, and I have often wondered if there might be more to it in actual usage (or surely the NT writers would have used a more accurate term). Thank you also for the contrast with the number of terms that Hebrew used to express a more comprehensive sense of what sin really is. Such an important concept to grasp and deal with! (I like the way C G Finney dealt with it as a persistent core choice of selfishness or self-regard in spite of obvious greater considerations.)
In John 16:33, Jesus was telling His disciples about what would happen in the future and we know that at that time the cross and resurrection hadn’t happened yet, however the tense of the verb conquered/overcame was Perfect: In the world you have trouble and suffering, but take courage – I have conquered the world (NET),
Can you explain why the tense is Perfect instead of Future?
Similarly, the tense of the verb judge in verse Jn 16:11 is also Perfect.
Thanks for your help.
In John 16:33, it’s true that he was speaking before his actual death and resurrection, so you might very well wonder why He uses the perfect tense “I have overcome the world,” rather than the future tense, “I will overcome the world.” I think the simplest explanation is that there was no doubt about what Christ was going to do. He may not have carried out all the details of the divine plan, but he had already set it all in motion and it was as good as done. Jesus had demonstrated His power over Satan many times in His ministry from the temptation onward. He was already the winner; he was just getting ready to land the final blow.
I’m going to try and purchase this book if it’s available.
Thank you!
Very helpful! It highlights how we can take a simple etymology of a word, like ‘hamartia’, and continually define it as ‘missing the mark’, without seeing HOW the term is developed in the NT. It then loses the punch it’s supposed to have in, for example, Romans 3:23. It is an important verse in evangelism, but to only define it as ‘missing the mark’ allows people to hear our problem is just a lack of knowledge or finiteness , not a problem of not loving and trusting God as we should. We are of course, finite, but also fallen!
The “problem” was ate (irrational behavior) often associated with one’s daemon. From what we have, ate is often punishment for hubris — pride that causes one to overstep (or ignore) boundaries or limits. This overstepping was characterized as hamartia. The physical location of such irrational behavior in humans was thought to be the thumos (volatile passions) or the phrenes (logical reasoning)—both understood as elements of the human soul — an insight that takes note of the fallibility of reasoning and logic. As we sometimes say, “It seemed like a good idea at the time.” If I understand him correctly, Paul associates hamartia with “the flesh”, which seems to be inherently vulnerable to “sin”.