Featured In Eph 2:1

When we consider missing the mark, Strong's 266, we need to consider at least two aspects of the concept. One, to miss the mark is to have a thought or take an action which deviates from God's will for us. Thus we fall short of the glory, i.e. His flawless perfection, of God.

Now the second aspect is this unrighteousness creates a debt owned to the holy and righteous character of God. Each sin piles up wrath, increases our sin debt, something because all our works of righteousness are filthy rags, we cannot pay. We are like an indentured servant to sin. Jesus paid our ransom. However only those placed spiritually in Christ "receive" the reconciliation. Once in Christ, we are justified, reconciled, holy and blameless. Yet we continue to live and blunder and miss the mark. So, from our human perspective, we sin, and if we say we have no sin, we make God a liar. But, being born again, from God's perspective we have no sin. Thus sometimes sin is used for one aspect, then the other aspect, but usually both aspects.

 

If we consider our verse, Ephesians 2:1, we must ask what distinction was Paul, inspired by God, making with the two Greek words. Lets consider a road, or way, or path, i.e. the righteous path of God. We can stay on the path, or we can drift off the path, i.e. a lapse, slip, or fall. OTOH, we can drive off the path thinking what is wrong is right, or knowing what is wrong and driving that way anyway. All three circumstances result in being separated from God because of unrighteousness.

 

Good thread. First thing that pops out is how do they fit into Augustinianism? I don't see how given the definitions given.

 

In Romans 5:20 we see that when Strong's 3900 (lapse, slip or fall from righteous) increases, Strong's 266 (missing the mark) increases, teaching the lapses, slips and falls are counted also as missing the mark.

Second, we see that if adherence to the Law is righteousness, then falling away from that righteousness is counted as sin. Thus our knowledge of our failure to keep the whole Law teaches us of our need for grace and leads us to Christ.

 

remember, we are NOT sinners due to us missing the mark, we miss that mark BECAUSE we are sinners, who then shoot crooked arrows!

 

We were made sinners. That does not mean we do not sin, miss the mark and add to the wrath we are storing up if unforgiven. Sometimes we sin on purpose because we are predisposed to sin, we make accommodation with our corrupt flesh, with its lusts and desires. But consider those who thought it was ok to compel men with the rack, they were not intentionally sinning, they thought they were serving God. The old saw, we have little to fear of what men do in the name of evil, but God help us from what men do in the name of good.

As I pointed out missing the mark includes (1) volitional sin, we know something is wrong and we do it anyway, (2) we think something is righteous, but we are wrong, and therefore sin unwittingly, i.e. to be deceived, and (3) we drift or fall from being on a righteous path into unrighteousness due to carelessness or thoughtlessness. All three fall under the umbrella of missing the mark, sin Strong's 265, and 266 as a noun, 264 as a verb. Volitional sins, Strong's3847; unwitting sins, Strong's 4105; and drifting into unrighteousness, Strong's 3900.

 

Lets consider a false teacher, someone, perhaps me, who believes something is true and presents it and others accept it. Now what if I am mistaken. I am both deceived (perhaps self-deceived) and a deceiver (someone who leads others astray.) If we are mistaken, i.e. we go astray into error, unrighteousness, whether deceived by others, or we deceived ourselves, we are sinning unwittingly, Strong's 4105.

Sometimes the word (G4105) is used literally, someone or something goes astray, like a lamb, but metaphorically it is used to describe going astray from the righteous path of God due to being deceived, or mistaken, i.e. to make an error.

James 1:16 tells us "do not err (G4105).
2 Timothy 3:13 speaks of men who are being deceived (G4105)and deceiving (G4105) others.

 

The law prescribed a sin offering and a trespass or guilt offering. In the sin offering, the offense is seen, in the trespass the damage is seen, and restitutions were prescribed.

So if one stole, he brought a sin offering for the sin of stealing, and he brought a trespass offering for the damage that resulted and made restitution.

So, basically, sin is the act, trespass is the damage or guilt.

 

It should be noted that the Lord's prayer says, "Forgive us our trespasses (or debts), as we forgive our debtors . . ."

It does not say "Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us . . . "

 

Understanding 2 Corinthians 5:21

While we will look at the whole verse, the main difficulty with the verse is the claim by Calvinists that this verse says Jesus was made sin. Now, first we must consider what sin is. It is not a pile of dung. Sin is both the act of missing the mark and thinking or doing something that conflicts with the will of God, and the consequence or penalty imposed by God for that offense.

I do not think anyone says Jesus was sinless when He was put on the cross; but when He bore our sins in His body, He became our sins. I think everyone agrees He never became sin, and therefore He is sinless to this day.

But, some will say, why do all the modern translations render the verse made to be sin for us, or made sin for us? Because the word, transliterated hamartian, means sin. However it can be used to refer to the consequence or penalty of sin, rather than the thought or deed that was the offense.

Paul seems to use this word primarily to refer to the consequence or penalty of sin, rather than the offense. Paul uses this form, hamartian, about 10 times, and the idea always seems to be the consequence or result or penalty for either sinning, or being in a sinful state “in Adam.” Paul says we are under hamartian which refers to the result or penalty of sin, Romans 3:9; Romans 7:14; Galatians 3:22. In Romans 8:3 we see Jesus was sent either “as a sin offering,” or “for sin” or “on account of sin.” So the sin problem was being addressed in some manner, and that problem (in bondage to sin) was condemned by Jesus in His flesh.

In Romans 8:10 we again see that the consequence of sin is in view, i.e. the body is dead because of sin. In Romans 7:7 Paul’s says he came to know sin through the Law. Now of course he had known the thoughts and deeds, they were after all his, but that those thoughts and deeds were sin and had consequences - that knowledge came through the law.

In Romans 4:8 we see we are blessed when God does not count our sin against us. So yet again, it is the consequence or result or penalty that is in view, when Paul uses this form of the word. In 2 Corinthians 11:7 we see Paul asking the rhetorical question: Or did I sin in humbling myself? At first blush this seems to refer to the deed rather than the consequence, but in light of the context, did Paul “rob” other churches to obtain support to preach to the Corinthians, the answer is he did the action, but it carried no penalty.
Therefore in every other usage of this form of the word for sin, Paul had the consequence or penalty for sin in view.

Now lets turn to our verse: “For the sake of us, the One not knowing “hamartian,” He makes “hamartian” that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. Now had Jesus been tempted to sin? Yes, in every way we are. So what did He not know? What it was to be “under” the bondage of sin! And the wages of sin is what? Death. And the wages are the consequences, result and penalty of even one sin.

In summary, the One not knowing the bondage of sin was made the penalty of sin, on the cross. Never forget Paul preaches Christ crucified!

 

Jesus bewcame our sin bearer propiation penal substitutionary death atonement!

 

I have always thought of sin as breaking any command against the Lord, and trespasses as more of a willful act, with full knowledge of what one is doing. We think many thoughts, and have many motives daily that are sins that we do not actively plan to sin against the Lord.

Perhaps this is a good modern example, perhaps not. Homosexual activity has always been a sin against God. In past decades, it was kept in the shadows of society and not talked about. Today, we pass laws legalizing gay marriage, making it the official law of the land, and proud of it. Maybe trespassing is sort of like rubbing God's nose in sin.

This might be a bad example, but it is sort of how I have always thought of it.

 

Right On!

I agree with the view any missing of God's will for our life is sin, G266, and that a subset of those misses are willful acts of ours going against God's revealed will. The G3847 word is used in scripture and often translated as a transgression.

So there are sins (G266) that are not in the likeness of transgressions (G3847).

 

A foul ball, but you made contact.

Christ's death of the cross provides the propitiation or means of salvation for all mankind, i.e. the whole world. He paid the ransom for our "sin debt." Believers "receive" that reconciliation when the Holy Spirit baptizes them into the body of Christ, our body of flesh (sin) is removed and we arise in Christ a new creation, born again and made alive together with Christ. Now holy and blameless from God's perspective, we are indwelt, i.e. sealed in Christ with the Holy Spirit forever.

 

We know that one of the reasons we are dead spiritually, separated from Christ who is life, is "the uncircumcision of our body." Romans 2:25 teaches that being physically circumcised cuts no mustard if you are a transgressor (G3848 - noun describing the person who commits a transgression, G3847.) Galatians 6:15 teaches when we become a "new creation" we leave our "uncircumcision" behind.

In Colossians 2:13 we see we were dead in our faults (G3900) not transgressions (G3847) and the uncircumcision of the flesh. Many see this as referring to being physically uncircumcised, i.e. directed to Gentile believers, but might I suggest a different view? Clearly the passage is indeed directed toward Gentiles, they were dead in their faults, for they did not have the Law and therefore had limited opportunity to transgress the revealed will of God. But plenty of opportunity to lapse, slip and fall away from righteousness, and each being a fault with the penalty of sin.

Returning to the meaning of uncircumcision of the flesh, metaphorically what could it refer to? We know that circumcision or uncircumcision means nothing once a person is "in Christ." So it clearly refers to a prior spiritual condition, one that is removed when we are baptized into the body of Christ by the circumcision made without hands, Colossians 2:11.

Romans 6:6 refers to our "body of sin" and Romans 7:24 refers to the "body of this death." Thus the body of the flesh (Colossians 2:11) appears to refer to the same condition as "the uncircumcision of the flesh" (Colossians 2:13.)

In summary, each of our sins, if unforgiven, adds to our body of sin also referred to as our body of the flesh, or the body of this death. The word translated "body" refers to something that casts a shadow, thus the consequence of our misses, the penalty or debt of our sins, is in view, i.e. my alternate view.

 

Actually, jesus death provoded the means by which God would save/redeem all those purchased by His blood shed upon the Cross, all those that received him thru faith and confirmed their election from and by God!

He died for those that were to be saved by it, NOT the whole world!

 

Calvinists, like Yeshua1, never get tired of posting falsehoods without any reference to scripture. Jesus became the propitiation or means of salvation for the whole world, 1 John 2:2. God desires that all men be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth, 1 Timothy 2:4. Even false teaches who deny the Master were bought by His blood, (2 Peter 2:1) teaching the ransom for all (1 Timothy 2:6) was not confined to believers.

The scriptural word, G4105, refers to those who are deceived and deceive others, but God teaches to check what others say against scripture.

Adorning the gospel with fictions that require nullification of verse after verse is indeed, not helpful.

 

Again, Jesus said that he came to be the Sheperd for ONLY those who could hear his voice, those whom the father gave Him to have, and that he died for his own, not for those NOT His own!