A Taxonomy of Sin in the New Testament Worlds

Understanding the contextual worlds within which the New Testament perceptions of sin arose is crucial. The immediate context for early Christianity was the Jewish world out of which Jesus also operated, which included Jewish understandings of sin especially as delineated in the Jewish Scriptures and as addressed within the sacrificial cult of the Jerusalem Temple. But in turning to the Apostle Paul and other later New Testament writers, it is equally important to understand the moral worlds envisioned in Greco-Roman religiosity and philosophy. In this realm, sin as moral failure was much less prominent than sin as ignorance or error in judgment. As Christianity moved into the second century and beyond we find understandings of sin that retain both Jewish and Greco-Roman sensibilities regarding human sin.

Sin in the Gospel of John and the Johannine Epistles

In the Gospel of John, Jesus is the lamb of God whose sacrificial death will provide the ultimate forgiveness of sin. John equates sin with the failure of people to believe that Jesus is God’s son and messiah sent to save the world. By identifying Jesus as the lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world, John’s Gospel conflates the meaning of Passover (celebrating freedom from slavery with the sacrifice of the paschal lamb) with the meaning of Yom Kippur (celebrating freedom from sin with the ritual of the scape goat who bares away sin). The story of the healing of the man born blind (John 9) also makes it clear that the religious leaders who oppose Jesus are spiritually blind and remain in their sins. By contrast, the man born blind not only recovers his physical sight, but has gained salvific spiritual sight through his growing recognition of Jesus as God’s son.

Sin in Luke-Acts

Luke presents more stories than Mark or Matthew regarding Jesus’s interaction with sinners, whether tax collectors, a woman of the city, or the parable of the prodigal son. In each instance, Luke’s Jesus is concerned to extend God’s merciful forgiveness to sinners. Forgiveness of sin is a prominent themes throughout Luke’s Gospel, coming to a climax with Jesus on the cross forgiving the people for what they are doing to him, as well as assuring a sinful thief that he will be with Jesus in paradise. This motif of forgiveness of sin continues in the Acts of the Apostles through the preaching of Peter and Paul, whose message is one of repentance and forgiveness in the name of Jesus.

Sin in the Gospel of Matthew

Matthew’s Gospel builds on the portrait of Jesus and sin found in Mark, but adds a birth story to make it clear that Jesus will save his people from their sins. Matthew thus invokes the significance of Jesus’ death already in the birth story. Although Joseph seeks to divorce Mary because she is scandalously pregnant with Jesus before they are married, Matthew goes out of his way to assure the reader that God has worked in similar fashion before with other women heroes of the faith: Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, the wife of Uriah (Bathsheba) each of whom gave birth in seemingly scandalous circumstances. But like these women, Mary is righteous in the eyes of God and she faithfully bears Jesus regardless of outward appearances. This motif of righteousness continues in Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7), where we find a Jesus who stresses the moral disposition of one’s heart rather than mere outward observance of the Jewish law. Sin originates from within. Like Mark, Matthew’s Jesus will die a sacrificial death for the forgiveness of sins.

Sin in the Gospel of Mark

Mark’s Jesus picks up on John the Baptist’s ministry of preaching repentance for the forgiveness of sins. Mark has Jesus submit to baptism by John without any apparent concern for how this might appear to subordinate Jesus to John, or to make Jesus appear that he is being baptized for forgiveness of sin in the same way as others who come to John for baptism. Jesus claims the power to forgive sins (2:1–12), much to the objection of the scribes and Pharisees whom Mark places in opposition to Jesus’s ministry. Mark also presents Jesus’s death as a ransom for many (10:45).

Whatever Happened to Sin?

The topic of sin has received relatively little attention in popular discourse over the last couple of generations. Instead, sin has mostly been reinterpreted as a series of psychological and social conditions from which individuals suffer. Thus, the sin of gluttony is revisioned as an eating disorder. The sin of sloth becomes attention deficit disorder, and so on. The social dynamics underlying human failures have been emphasized over individual responsibility, as treatments and medications for individual behaviors once deemed “sinful” have risen to the fore. How do we read the New Testament’s many references to sin and sinful behavior in light of modern tendencies to play down sin as moral failure?

Sin in Jude, Revelation, and Beyond

As with most of the New Testament writings, both Jude and the Book of Revelation operate out of an apocalyptic eschatological context. The Book of Revelation stresses that salvation comes through the sacrificial blood of Jesus. Jesus is presented as the conquering Lamb, invoking imagery from Temple sacrifice. His blood cleanses the faithful from sin. Revelation warns believers to maintain a vigilant faith against the assaults of Satan and the forces of darkness. Even though the faithful suffer at the hands of Satan and sinful oppressors, those who remain faithful will be vindicated. They will see the forces of sin be defeated by God. The Roman Empire is portrayed as idolatrous Babylon; those who stand firm in the blood of the Lamb are exhorted not to indulge in the sinful behavior exemplified by Roman society.

Sin in Hebrews, James, and 1 and 2 Peter

Hebrews presents Jesus as God’s perfect sinless savior, through whom forgiveness of sins may be obtained by those who maintain their steadfast faith and do not fall away amidst persecution and suffering. Hebrews presents Jesus as the ultimate high priest who alone makes the necessary once-for-all atoning sacrifice of himself as the perfect victim in the heavenly temple, thus replacing temporal sacrifice. 1 Peter also presents Jesus as the sinless sacrificial victim, through whom salvation is attained, drawing heavily on Isaiah 53. Both 1 and 2 Peter warn against giving in to sinful human desires, especially sins of the flesh. If Christians should suffer, they should suffer for their faith and not because of any sinfulness that warrants punishment. James also warns of the dangers of human desires as the seat of human sinfulness, which can only be held in check by demonstrating one’s faith through righteous works.

Sin in the Letters of Paul and Deutero-Paul

The Apostle Paul presents Jesus as God’s sinless sacrifice to atone for the sins of humanity. For Paul, human sin comes in two primary forms: the sin of idolatry (Gentiles) and the sin of disobedience (Jews). Jesus provides an example of human obedience to God in contrast to the disobedience and sinfulness of Adam and his descendants. Thus, for Paul, Jesus is the “new Adam” who demonstrates the righteousness of God, who pours out his mercy on humanity even amidst their ongoing sinfulness. Before Paul’s conversion/call to believe in the crucified and risen Jesus as God’s son, Paul was a Torah-observant Pharisee who counted himself blameless as to righteousness under the law. But after Paul’s experience of the risen Jesus, Paul came to believe that righteousness and forgiveness of sin was to be found only through the life-giving Spirit of the crucified messiah Jesus, for Jew and Gentile alike.

Sin Then and Now

This chapter summarizes the preceding chapters and, in the process, explores both continuities and discontinuities between understandings of sin in the New Testament and today. In particular, issues related to the atoning death of Jesus as God’s sinless sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins to all who believe come to the fore. While many modern Christians continue to emphasize the language of substitutionary atonement for human sin, others have called into question an emphasis on the language of bloody sacrifice, proposing instead a vision of Jesus as a model of exemplary faith. Another issue concerns the supersessionist approach of early Christians to the Jewish faith out of which they sprung, and whether the Gospel of John’s linkage between sin and disbelief in Jesus remains a legitimate expression of Christian faith.