Galatian Salvation
who gave Himself for our sins so that He might rescue us from this present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, Galatians 1:4 NASB
Who gave Himself for our sins – “Jesus died on the cross so that I could be saved.” That’s the way we usually interpret this phrase. But is that what Paul meant? Too bad we can’t ask him, but since we can’t, we’ll need to do some digging to see if our typical salvation interpretation actually fits the contextual thought of a Jewish rabbi.
Let’s start with the vocabulary. As usual, we’ll take it backwards.
hamartía (singular) requires some careful consideration. Paul uses the term as it is found in the Jewish context (the LXX). That makes a difference.
The LXX with its summary use of hamartía, adikía, anomía, etc. hardly does justice to the rich and flexible Hebrew original and often misses the point, e.g., when “guilt” is in view. The Hebrew terms translated by hamartía and the like (for a full list see TDNT, I, 268–69) do not have an exclusive religious use, so that it is easy in translation either to import this or to weaken it. No uniform or self-contained concept of sin is present in the OT authors, and detailed questions of linguistic history further complicate the matter.[1]
Do you see the implications of Quell’s comment? If Paul is thinking like a Jew, then his concept of sin (hamartía in our Greek text) is far richer than what is captured in this single Greek word. Quell goes on:
the LXX gives greater prominence to arrogance as the chief sin by rendering arrogant as hamartōlós (Sir. 11:9). Sin is also identified with wealth (Hab 3:14). Again, it is sickness (Is. 53:4; Dt. 30:3). In Job 42 the LXX stresses the thought of forgiveness, which is only hinted at in the Hebrew, i.e., by substituting the idea of Job’s sin for God’s wrath in v. 7 and bringing in the idea of remission in v. 9. A similar replacement of God’s wrath by human transgression occurs in Judg. 1:18 (cf. Is. 57:17). Sin is equated with apostasy in 2 Chr. 12:2 (cf. 30:7). Folly or ignorance can also be rendered hamartía according to the familiar OT thought that folly is sin. The idea of sin is introduced into Is. 66:4 with its reference to the cause of punishment rather than the punishment itself (cf. 24:6). A spiritualization may be found in Ezek. 23:49. The thought of the school of suffering, which presupposes a strong sense of sin, is read into Job 15:11. The thrust of the LXX, then, is to make hamartía a general term for sin. In so doing it brings individual sins under the concept of the basic sin which separates us from God and controls us so long as we do not receive God’s saving work.[2]
We should recognize this important distinction: sin is not an ethical concept in the Bible. It is a moral and legal term, connecting covenant obligation with obedient fulfillment. As Wyschogrod pointed out, the idea that a sin is some violation of a universal ethics standard is not found in the Bible. Sin is a confrontation between the Supreme Lawgiver and the subject under that Law. It is first and foremost a relational concept, not applicable to those outside the mutually accepted agreement. When Paul speaks of “our sins,” he is talking about obligations demanded by the covenant agreement, not general moral failures. Therefore, according to Paul, Yeshua’s act was one of repair, that is, restoring a broken relationship. It was not punishment nor was it expiation. It was mending what was once in place but had been subsequently disrupted.
In what way was this restoration accomplished? The text says, “He gave himself.” The Greek verb is dídōmi, with emphasis on the gift rather than the giver. Paul suggests the Yeshua offered himself as a gift, motivated by his desire to fulfill the will of YHVH. Since the Tanakh makes it clear that the only one who can truly forgive is YHVH, Yeshua’s offering is the means by which YHVH forgives, not the forgiveness itself.
Let’s see if we can combine these two important words. The gift somehow reconciles the breach characterized by the range of meanings associated with “sin” in the Jewish context. How, precisely, this is accomplished is not revealed in this verse. What we know is that however this act is to be understood, it heals the wound between God and Man, and it is God’s will that it does so. Perhaps we are not meant to cross all the t’s and dot all the i’s when it comes to the operations of forgiveness. Perhaps it is enough to know that God desires it and Yeshua was willing to participate in bridging the gap. We are rescued. Since Jewish thought is eminently practical rather than theologically abstract, maybe this is enough.
Topical Index: sin, hamartía, gave, gift, dídōmi, rescue, Galatians 1:4
[1] Kittel, G., Friedrich, G., & Bromiley, G. W. (1985). Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (p. 44). Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans.
[2] Ibid.
