Distinction Between “Sin” (Singular) and “Sins” (Plural)–Part 3–Hebrews

The Scriptures generally draw a qualitative distinction between "sin," in the singular, and "sins," in the plural. "Sin" is our inward attitude of rebellion against God. "Sins" are bad actions. This post gives a series of examples from Hebrews.

This post is the third in a series demonstrating the important qualitative distinction the Scriptures frequently draw between “sin” in the singular and “sins” in the plural. To review, “sin” in the singular, if not used in a context in which it obviously refers to a single discrete and countable act, usually refers to our rotten heart with its attitude and fixed dynamic of disbelief of and rebellion toward God. On the other hand, “sins” in the plural refers to an aggregation of discrete bad acts. The first post in this series discussed examples from Romans, First and Second Corinthians in which “sin” in the singular clearly refers to an inner dynamic rather than bad acts. The second post discussed similar examples from the Gospel of John and the remaining Pauline Epistles. This post will discuss examples from the anonymous Epistle to the Hebrews.

Examples of “Sin” (Singular) from Hebrews

Hebrews 3:13 clarifies the relationship between sin and sins

But encourage one another every day, as long as it is still called “today,” so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of [the] sin.

Hebrews 3:13 (NASB)

As noted in the square brackets, above, Hebrews 3:13 is another example of “the sin,” hamartía singular, with a definite article. In this verse, it refers to the deceitfulness of the inner heart attitude or dynamic of sin, of rebellion, which seduces us to commit discrete sins. The broader context clarifies this:

Take care, brothers and sisters, that there will not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God. But encourage one another every day, as long as it is still called “today,” so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of [the] sin. For we have become partakers of Christ if we keep the beginning of our commitment firm until the end, while it is said,

“Today if you hear His voice,
Do not harden your hearts, as when they provoked Me.”

For who provoked Him when they had heard? Indeed, did not all those who came out of Egypt led by Moses? And with whom was He angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose dead bodies fell in the wilderness? And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient?

Hebrews 3:12-18 (NASB).

Verses 12 is a warning to guard our hearts (cf., Proverbs 4:23, Luke 21:34) to be sure that they are not “evil” and “unbelieving” in that they “fall away from” God. Verse 13 then warns us to “encourage”–parakaleite, come alongside–each other daily to hold each other up, the same role played by the Holy Spirit as “Helper” or “Advocate” (paráklētos), so that the deceitful attraction of our inward rebellion, the sin, will not draw us away from God.

Verses 14 through 18 then tell us that it is our characteristic reaction to seduction by our old inward rebellion that demonstrates whether we have, in fact, become partakers of Christ. If our old inward rebellion repeatedly seduces us, we will become “hardened”– sklērynthē, literally “dried out” and, hence, “inflexible”–toward God because of it. We will then fall away from God. On the other hand, if we have become partakers of Christ, not just bystanders who have seen his work and made an empty “decision” to follow him, we will remain flexible toward God, and will keep the beginning of our commitment firm until the end.

The writer to the Hebrews then illustrates this by pointing to the history of Israel during the Exodus, quoting from Psalm 95:7-8: “Today if you hear His voice, Do not harden your hearts, as when they provoked Me.” He then explains that the people showed the hardness of their hearts by refusing to act when God spoke. This passage does not refer generally to violations of the Law, but to Israel’s refusal to trust God on three specific occasions: two occasions on opposite ends of the Exodus when they refused to trust God to provide water, and the singular occasion toward the beginning of the Exodus when the people refused to enter the Promised Land.

In the first of these incidents, described in Exodus 17:1-7, the people grumbled against Moses and against God because they had no water, so they thought God had brought them out of Egypt to kill them in the desert. Thus, they showed they did not trust God’s good purpose for them. God told Moses to lead the people to a rock, and then to strike the rock with his staff. He did so, and water gushed out of the rock. Moses called the place “Testing and Contention” (“Massah and Meribah”), because the people had tested God there.

The second of these incidents, reported in detail at Numbers 13:25-14:38, once again involved the same people declaring their distrust of God’s good intentions for them. God had led them on a straight path to the nearest border of the land he had promised them. He then told them to go in, and he would give it to them without a fight, driving out its current inhabitants before them. They sent in twelve spies, all of whom returned with reports that agreed that the land was very good. But ten of the spies also reported that the land had strong walled cities and was inhabited by giants whom the Israelites would not be able to conquer. Two of the spies said yes, there are giants, but God is able to deal with them. The people followed the advice of the ten spies and refused to enter into God’s rest, because they thought (correctly!) that they couldn’t conquer it themselves. Thus, the ten spies and the people disbelieved God’s promise to give them the land, and disobeyed his instructions to enter it. And they once again accused God of leading them out into the wilderness to kill them–this time at the hands of the giants in the Promised Land. It was at this point that God swore the oath reported in Hebrews 3:11 and 18 and 4:3-5:

“How long shall I put up with this evil congregation who are grumbling against Me? I have heard the complaints of the sons of Israel which they are voicing against Me. Say to them, ‘As I live,’ declares the Lord, ‘just as you have spoken in My hearing, so I will do to you; your dead bodies will fall in this wilderness, all your numbered men according to your complete number from twenty years old and upward, who have grumbled against Me. By no means will you come into the land where I swore to settle you, except for Caleb the son of Jephunneh and Joshua the son of Nun. Your children, however, whom you said would become plunder—I will bring them in, and they will know the land which you have rejected.  But as for you, your dead bodies will fall in this wilderness. Also, your sons will be shepherds in the wilderness for forty years, and they will suffer for your unfaithfulness, until your bodies perish in the wilderness. In accordance with the number of days that you spied out the land, forty days, for every day you shall suffer the punishment for your guilt a year, that is, forty years, and you will know My opposition. I, the Lord, have spoken, I certainly will do this to all this evil congregation who are gathered together against Me. They shall be worn out in this wilderness, and there they shall die.’”

Numbers 14:27-35 (NASB)

It was this generation who is said in Hebrews 3:17 to have “sinned” (hamartēsasin), by refusing God’s voice when he called, and whose bodies fell in the wilderness.

The third incident, recounted in Numbers 20:1-20 was very similar to the first one, in that the people grumbled against Moses and against God because they once again had no water. But the flow of the text implies, and it is generally thought, that the incident in Numbers 20 occurred about forty years after the incident in Exodus 17 (See, Encyclopedia of the Bible–Massah and Meribah). So the people who were now grumbling and distrusting God because they were thirsty were the children of the people who had grumbled in the first incident, and the children of the people who God had sworn would not enter his rest in Numbers 14. This time God has different instructions for Moses–he was to lead the people to the rock and speak to the rock. But even Moses, in his anger on this occasion, failed to trust God. He led the people to the rock and once again struck it with his rod, instead of speaking to it as he was commanded to do. God, who remembered his promise to bring the children of the generation who disobeyed in Numbers 13 and 14 into the land, once again gave the people water out of the rock–and, subsequently, led them into the Promised Land. But Moses himself was denied entrance into the Promised Land because he distrusted God and disobeyed his instructions on this occasion.

Hebrews 3:7-11, which quotes Psalm 95:7-11, actually appears to refer to all three of these incidents, in which first the generation which left Egypt and then, forty years later, their children, even after seeing all of the things God had done in the wilderness during those years, hardened their hearts toward God and expressed their distrust of his good intentions toward them. However, the further discussion in Hebrews 3:16-4:7 naturally appears to fit only the second incident, in which the people flatly refused to enter into God’s promise for them. In these verses, it is repeated four times that, because of their unbelief and disobedience (which were the same thing), God swore they would not “enter my rest.” Indeed, when Joshua led the people into the land, it was not the ultimate “rest” they could have had if their parents had listened to God the first time around. God told the Exodus generation that he would give them the land; but when Joshua led them in they had to fight for it, a fight which has never ended to this day. “For if Joshua had given them rest, He would not have spoken of another day after that.” Hebrews 4:8

But God has something better for us–resting from our own works to let God do his:

For the one who has entered His rest has himself also rested from his works, as God did from His. Therefore let’s make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will fall by following the same example of disobedience.

Hebrews 4:10-11 (NASB)

Hebrews 4:15

Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let’s hold firmly to our confession. For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things just as we are, yet without sin. Therefore let’s approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace for help at the time of our need.

Hebrews 4:14-16 (NASB)

In verse 15, “sin” (hamartias) is in the singular but without an article. Jesus can sympathize with our weakness when we come to him, because he has felt temptation as strongly as we have in all the same ways we do, yet endured it without rebelling against his Father, because there was no rebellion (sin, singular) in him.

Hebrews 9:23-28 (possibly both singular and plural concepts)

Therefore it was necessary for the copies of the things in the heavens to be cleansed with these things, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ did not enter a holy place made by hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Holy Place year by year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been revealed to put away [the] sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And just as it is destined for people to die once, and after this comes judgment, so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.

Hebrews 9:23-28 (NASB)

Whether this passage speaks to both the singular and plural concepts of “sin” or to the singular concept only depends on whether “in order to bear the sins of many” (eis to pollōn anenenkein hamartias) in verse 28 is referring to the rebellion of the many (singular concept applied to plural people), or each of the discrete wrong acts of the many (plural concept applied to plural people), a question as to which the language is ambiguous. As is often the case where a scripture is patently ambiguous on a point, there is a sense in which both prongs of the ambiguity are true.

The reference to “the sin” earlier in the context, in verse 26, is plainly an instance of the singular concept. Previous sacrifices under the law had to be made often, to purify the people from their sins individually, one wrong act at a time. But now Jesus has come and suffered only once, for the putting away of the sin (eis athetēsin tēs hamartias) in us all. This is why he only had to suffer once–instead of covering each sinful act one at a time, he was able to put away from us the sin, the inner rebellion, which underlay all of those acts. This was made visible through Jesus’ sacrifice of himself.

Verse 27 names the consequences of our rebellion–death, which awaits everyone (even Jesus had to die), and judgment, from which we can be delivered only through Jesus’ death.

This leads into verse 28. The Greek really doesn’t provide much help in settling the ambiguity–“sin(s)” (hamartias) may either be the direct object of the verb anenenkein, to bear, in which case it is an accusative plural, or it may be the argument of the preposition eis, in which case it is a genitive singular and the infinitive phrase to pollōn anenenkein modifies it. The verb infinitive anenenkein does not carry in its form information about case or number, and so does not indicate whether it “points” toward the people (to pollōn) immediately before it, or toward “sin(s)” immediately after it. Most translations treat “sins,” plural as the direct object of the infinitive, resulting in the reading that Jesus was offered once in order to (eis) bear the “sins”–plural in both grammatical form and concept–of the people. However, the alternate reading appears just as valid. By making “sin” (genitive singular) the argument of eis, the reading becomes that Jesus was offered once to bear “sin,” rebellion (singular). Which sin did he bear? That of the people (plural). Both readings also make sense doctrinally, and it is quite possible that the writer to the Hebrews intended his readers to consider both of them.

The second reference to “sin” in verse 28 is appears to return unambiguously to the singular number. When Jesus appears a second time, it will be for salvation–for our deliverance–totally apart from or without reference to (chōris) “sin” (hamartias). The preposition chōris requires nouns in the genitive case, and it is here followed by the genitive singular (hamartias) rather than the genitive plural (hamartiōn). When Jesus returns, his deliverance will be without reference to our past state of rebellion–our “sin”–which he will have permanently put away. It will no longer be considered. This will, of course, include release from the consequences of the individual evidences of that rebellion–our “sins.” But the heart of the deliverance will be that our rebellion is permanently removed.

Hebrews 10:1-18 (both singular and plural concepts)

For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the form of those things itself, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually every year, make those who approach perfect. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, because the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins? But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says,

“You have not desired sacrifice and offering,
But You have prepared a body for Me;
You have not taken pleasure in whole burnt offerings and offerings for sin.
Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come
(It is written of Me in the scroll of the book)
To do Your will, O God.’”

After saying above, “Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and offerings for sin You have not desired, nor have You taken pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the Law), then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will.” He takes away the first in order to establish the second. By this will, we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all time.

Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time onward until His enemies are made a footstool for His feet. For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.  And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying,

“This is the covenant which I will make with them
After those days, declares the Lord:
I will put My laws upon their hearts,
And write them on their mind,”

He then says,

“And their sins and their lawless deeds
I will no longer remember.”

Now where there is forgiveness of these things, an offering for sin is no longer required.

Hebrews 10:1-18 (NASB)

At least as it applies to the distinction between singular “sin” and plural “sins,” the important thing to note is that all of the references to “sins” in verses 1 through 17 are clearly plural, whereas the reference to “sin” in verse 18 is clearly singular. This distinction makes great sense in the context: verses 1 through 17 speak of the effects of the Law and of distinct sinful acts, leading up to the forgiveness of these acts through the sacrifice of Christ. Verse 18 then sums up: where there is perfect forgiveness of all of these bad acts, there is no longer any offering for “sin,” the underlying rebellion. In saying this, the writer uses a clear singular form: the preposition peri, which takes an argument in the genitive case, followed by the genitive singular hamartias, not the genitive plural hamartiōn. Where God has taken away the guilt of our “sins,” plural, and cleansed our consciences of it, thereby perfecting us for all time (though we may not yet fully see this), there no longer remains any offering “for” (peri)–encompassing, covering–“sin,” our rebellion against God. Not only is no such offering “required”–an extra word added by the NASB–no such offering is even possible. All of the offerings of the Law merely covered discrete sins, not our hearts’ rebellion. There is no other offering that has any effect on our rebellion. Jesus did it all.

Hebrews 11:25

By faith Moses, when he had grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter, choosing rather to endure ill-treatment with the people of God than to enjoy the temporary pleasures of sin, considering the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt; for he was looking to the reward.

Hebrews 11:24-26 (NASB)

Verse 25 is an example of hamartias, as a genitive singular without an article, being used to modify a verb–echein, “to have,” present infinitive. In its context, it means exactly what it appears to say–when the time came to choose, Moses demonstrated his faith by choosing to suffer with his people rather than to keep the temporary (proskairon, singular) pleasure (ē … apolausin, also singular) he could have (echein) of or from (significance of the genitive case) “sin,” singular. All of this construction is in the singular–Moses did not choose suffering with his people over the pleasures of particular sins of an Egyptian prince. He chose following God into the sufferings of his people over all the pleasure that could be derived from his “sin,” his rebellion against God.

Hebrews 12:1-4

 Therefore, since we also have such a great cloud of witnesses surrounding us, let’s rid ourselves of every obstacle and the sin which so easily entangles us, and let’s run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking only at Jesus, the originator and perfecter of the faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. For consider Him who has endured such hostility by sinners against Himself, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart.  You have not yet resisted to the point of shedding blood in your striving against [the] sin…

Hebrews 12:1-4 (NASB)

In this passage, the uses of “sin” in verses 1 and 4 are clearly singular, and it does not make sense to ask whether the usage in verse 3 is singular or plural because it is found in an adjective which refers to people rather than acts or attitudes.

In verse 1, “sin” is an accusative singular used with a definite article and an adjective that are also in the accusative case and singular number. Thus, the normal rendering as a singular–“the entangling sin”–is correct. The focus is not on any single act that entangles us, but on the attitude of rebellion that so easily and consistently overcomes our resistance.

Verse 3 speaks of the hostility Jesus endured under (hypo) the temporary authority of “the sinners” (tōn hamartōlōn) to whom he voluntarily became subject (compare John 19:10-11) when he came as one of us. The focus is on the status of these people as “sinners,” not on whether they became that way by rebelling or by committing discrete sinful acts.

Verse 4 uses the accusative singular with the definite article as the argument of a preposition: pros tēn hamartian. The point of this verse is that, unlike Jesus, who endured the Cross for us, we are still in the present life, and so obviously have not yet resisted to the point of shedding our blood in our opposition against–or, more accurately, in contact with (pros)– “the sin,” singular. “The sin” here seems to refer directly to “the entangling sin” of verse 1, but the point of the whole passage is that we can expect to receive the same kind of opposition Jesus did from still-entangled “sinners,” when we put away our own rebellion (“the sin… which entangles us”) and then come into contact with them. This will not occur because we try to pick fights over the lifestyles of “sinners,” but simply because they can see that we are being freed from the entanglement which binds them. However, we should not be discouraged by this opposition, because Jesus, who suffered even more, is sustaining us.

Hebrews 13:11

 We have an altar from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat. For the bodies of those animals whose blood is brought into the Holy Place by the high priest as an offering for sin are burned outside the camp. Therefore Jesus also suffered outside the gate, that He might sanctify the people through His own blood. So then, let us go out to Him outside the camp, bearing His reproach.

Hebrews 13:10-13 (NASB)

Verse 11 contains another use of the phrase peri hamartias, in which “sin” is a clear genitive singular. But the point being made by the passage does not depend on whether the offerings under the Law covered “sin” (singular) or “sins” (plural). The point being made is that, while the blood that atoned for (covered) sin was brought into the holy place, the offering itself was burned outside the camp–just as Jesus was offered outside the city, and we should go to him there. Our way is considered reproachful by the world. We recognize our rebellion, surrender it, and go to Jesus outside rebellious society, to the place of reproach where they killed him. Then he lives through us.

NEXT: Distinction Between “Sin” (Singular) and “Sins” (Plural)–Part 4–The Epistles of James and Peter