Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness.  

(1 John 3:4)

Modern English receives the word ‘sin’ from the Anglo Saxon synne, which has much in common with the Greek word John uses, ἁμαρτία hamartia, as both convey the sense of a misstep and came to mean a ‘violation of law’ – in the somewhat archaic usage, ‘trespass’ or ‘transgression’.  Sin is an act both of omission and commission, yet in both instances, for sin to be sin, it has to be ‘committed’; even failing do what should be done is a deliberate act; and a sin is no less committed even it is thoughtless, reckless or impetuous as opposed to that which is premeditated or calculated.  Jesus of course, extends this act to include intent, not simply the execution:

‘But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart…’ (Matthew 5:28)

But note, there is still an action, ‘looking with lustful intent’.  Noticing a woman is not the sin, but acting upon that glance to ogle her is to commit the sin.  The woman may be unaware and clearly not a party to that sin, yet the deed visualised in the mind means ‘the heart’ is as much the stage for the act of adultery as the bedroom.  Enactment though is the key, even if rehearsed and one of fantasy.

Committing sin is always then a deliberate and conscience undertaking that transgresses a law.

Once we realise what sin is, John’s summary might seem tautological, as sin is by definition lawlessness, but such repetition is part of the apostle’s style and for good reason.  Humankind is defined by the inability to recognise the existence of law, let alone keep it.  If one ignores law, or deny it exists, then how can one break it?  This, then, is also a deliberate, transgressive act and a futile one.  Ignorance of the law as a defence that does not work in earthly courts, but many presume to think it will serve them well.  

And as to the law John to which refers?  It is God’s, of course.  Sin is always the transgression of God’s law.  While there is often clear overlap between the Ten Commandments with Common Law, for instance, the statute book includes murder, many kinds of thievery and blasphemy, no jurisdiction carries an injunction on dishonouring one’s parents.

In medieval times, the King’s Law (Dooms) would be proclaimed to the populace – but how can any know God’s Law?  Simply put, He also proclaims it.

From the very outset, God makes his will known and speaks law into existence, just as he did Creation (Genesis 1) – indeed, the laws of physics are an expression of that creation.

And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, ‘of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.’  (Genesis 2:16-17)

Adam was given one law, to forebear from eating one fruit out of the surfeit of Eden’s produce.  He sinned, it is the original sin, the origin of all lawlessness, but where did that leave God’s law, let alone the law-breaker.

‘And now, lest (Adam) put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever;’ therefore, the Lord God sent him out of the garden of Eden. 

(Genesis 3:22-23)

What law then existed after the banishment from Eden, where the law was superfluous, as none had access to any of the garden’s fruit?  God did not declare new laws to Adam in his exile. 

How could, for instance, Adam’s sons, Cain and Abel, know what God deemed good or bad, or right from wrong?  The book of Genesis describes the apparent dilemma:

Now Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.  And in the process of time, it came to pass that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground to the Lord.   Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat. And the Lord respected Abel and his offering, but He did not respect Cain and his offering. And Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell. (Genesis 3:2-5)

Was God being fair with Cain, any might ask?  Yet God challenges not only Cain, but all Adam’s offspring:

So, the Lord said to Cain, ‘why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen? If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door. And its desire is for you, but you should rule over it.’ (Ibid 3:6-7)

And so, it can be seen, that first definition of sin (חַטָּאָה chatta’ah Hebrew for ‘an offence’ and ‘the offering’, in other words, the act) implies the law it transgresses.  Sin, then, is pursuing one’s own desire and not seeking to fulfil God’s.  And what follows regarding the Law of God is simple.  God’s law is anything He desires, and it is up to all his sentient creatures to seek His will and subsume theirs to His.

This then is commitment – and one God expects all to make. All may either commit sin or commit to seek His will.  Jesus gives a model prayer for his disciples in which is said, ‘your will be done on earth as it is in heaven’ (Matthew 6:10).  Sin is the opposite expression: ‘my will be done everywhere!’

And seeking God’s will is not impossible.  Its expression is not to be found in esoteric lore, not does it require the skills of intermediary to expound it – both notions form the basis of religion, that which is artifice and ultimately anti-God.

God’s will can be found closer to home in conscience, conviction and His Word.  

In the opening remarks of his defence before the Sanhedrin, the apostle Paul declares:

I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.  (Acts 23:1)

‘Conscience’ is συνείδησις suneidésis from the prefex syn, ‘together with’ and eído, ‘to know or see’; suggestive of a moral awareness that coheres to God’s perfect righteousness.  This is a moral and spiritual alignment, but it should be noted that Paul qualifies this employing the adjective ‘good’, ἀγαθός agathos, ‘inherent goodness’, what is intrinsically good.  

Where good conscience aligns with God, bad conscience seeks another provenance, notably in one’s own morality, which is intrinsically tainted, or worse, listens to the deceptions of Satan and all who promote him in turn.  Evil is then an inherent quality that is outworked in once more in the deed, sin is the doing of evil, as evil is everything that is not of God.  

Only those people diagnosed with psychopathy lack conscience; made in the likeness of God (Genesis 1:27) everyone, male and female, possesses an ethical faculty and an inclination for justice; at issue, therefore, is always whose standards of morality provides the benchmark.  It is not that bad conscience is merely pliant, rather one dares to think that humans are inherently good, especially oneself!  Thus ‘conscience’ is not sufficient, it has to be ‘good’ – that is informed by a better authority, and to this end Jesus sends a ‘Helper’ in his stead:

It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:of sin, because they do not believe in Me; of righteousness, because I go to My Father and you see Me no more; of judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.  (John 16:7-11)

Satan is the ‘ruler of the world’ (although Jesus warns that Satan speaks through many deputies – Matthew 24:24) but it should be noted in wanting ‘my will to be done everywhere’ any might aspire to the post without any Satanic delegation!  

Jesus clarifies that without faith, that is belief in him, conscience is no reliable guide of right or wrong, what is lawful or unlawful in respect to God.  Only His Spirit can inform the wayward conscience of what violates God’s righteousness, only then can conscience be ‘good’.

In Jesus’ statement above, ‘convict’ translates the verb ἐλέγχω elegchó, which means ‘to expose’, especially in the negative, that of wrong-doing; in addition, it is also, naturally enough, is ‘to convince’, that is to supply compelling evidence of infraction.  This used in the courtroom sense, is the proven case of guilt, the conviction of lawlessness, that John speaks of in the head-quotation.

Yet, some may argue, even equipped with moral awareness and spiritual intervention, how can any be judged, even the ‘ruler of the world’, if God has not provided and published legal statute?  On what basis other than a personal conviction can any differentiate right or wrong and be certain of divine unanimity? 

For this then we have the testament of the prophets and apostles, that together make the whole of the Bible.  They are charged with testifying to God’s law, whether it be the Law given to Noah (Genesis 9:1-7), Moses or the authors of the epistles.  Moreover, there is one source that is not prophetic (human utterance on behalf of God) but the record of God’s own voice, that of the Gospels.  In them, Jesus Immanuel (God with us) left his testimony; here, Jesus reproves doubters of the veracity of his standing:

… the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form. But you do not have His word abiding in you, because whom He sent, Him you do not believe. You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.  But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.  (John 5:37-40)

There is nothing Jesus says that was not also found in Scripture, and Scripture testifies that all he spoke is to be taken as commandment.  Paul refers to the law of Christ (Galatians 6:2), while James to the ‘royal law’ (James 2:8) and both have in mind the reiteration of Scripture that Jesus made summarising law.

In answer to a question to define the ‘great commandment’ in the law (of Moses), he answers:

“‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself.’ On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”  (Matthew 22:37-40)

Jesus has defined in the positive what is required of those who would be law-keepers – indeed what is lawful.  His life outworked plus the manner of his death provides the model of what this looks like; moreover, he issues many commandments that require obedience to uphold his ‘royal law’.   

The final instruction to his disciples is clear:

‘All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.  Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.’ (Matthew 28:18-20) 

This is so none can dare argue that they did not ‘commit’ sin, and was unwittingly in the wrong.  While many are lawless, none are law-less; nobody can argue they lacked the means or knowledge to seek God’s will; all can and should know God’s law, through Jesus Christ.  One’s own conscience, the conviction of the indwelling Spirit of God (for all who believe) combined with the written Word, means there will be ineluctable and righteous divine judgment.  The salvation Jesus speaks of is to survive divine judgment.  All can and will be judged.  Paul urges the fellowship of Corinth for each to listen to their conscience and be aligned to what pleases God, whether presently in the body (alive) or hereafter, absent or away from it, (dead):

Therefore, we make it our aim, whether present or absent, to be well pleasing to Him.  For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad. Knowing, therefore, the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are well known to God, and I also trust are well known in your consciences. (2 Corinthians 5:9-11)