(5) The conception of sin. — Speaking generally, it may be said that the non-Christian view of sin regards it as natural, and that the Christian view regards it as unnatural. This is, however, a broad generalization, and requires further definition. No system of ethical thought can altogether ignore the fact of sin, though it is sometimes minimized. But there are wide difi'erences in the way in which it is regarded. In pre-Christian thought it was often almost identified with ignorance. It was assumed that a man cannot sin willingly, because no man desires evil for himself. Virtue is therefore know- ledge, and the possibility of knowing what is right and doing what is wrong need not be considered. This was the teaching of a large section of Greek philosophy. Again, wherever Oriental ideas had influence, the seat of evil was thought to be in matter. Sometimes the strife between good and evil was explained as a contest between two rival and evenly-balanced powers. Sometimes a good deity was conceived as acting upon an intractable material. The practical conclusion was usually some form of asceticism — an attempt to be quit of the body and all that it implied ; and this asceti- cism, by a process easy to be understood, not infre- quently led to licence. These tendencies often make their appearance in Church history, and traces of them are to be found in the writings of the NT, but during the Apostolic Age the dangers of Gnosticism and Antinomianism were but rudi- mentary. In modern times the view of evil which regards it as undeveloped good, or as the survival of instincts that are no longer necessary or bene- ficial, has some points in common with the old dualisms. The common feature of all these views is that they regard evil as more or less in- evitable and according to nature. It would not be true to say that they altogether disregard the human will, or deny human responsibility, but they treat the body rather than the will as the seat of evil, and they tend to look upon evil as, upon the whole, natural and necessary. The Christian view of sin, as it appears in the writings of the Apostolic Age, is in the sharpest contrast to this. It is the Jewish view, carried to its natural conclusion, and its chief characteristics may be set down under three heads.
(a) First, the freedom of the will is not considered from the philosophical point of view at all. Tlie metaphysical difficulties are not even touched upon, nor is any consciousness shown of their existence. But the responsibility of man is always assumed. Nor is it for his actions alone that he is responsible. The Sermon on the Mount Inings home to him responsibility for every thought, and for his whole attitude towards God. And in doing so it brings to its natural conclusion the course of ethical thouglit among the Jews. If, however, the root of sin is in the will, it follows that it is not in matter, or in the body, or in anything distinct from the will of man. The whole universe is good, because it is created by God, and sin consists in the wilful misuse
of things naturally good. Asceticism therefore, except in the sense of such training as may help to restore the will to a healthy condition, is excluded.
(6) Secondly, the idea of the holiness of God, as forming a test of human action and a condemna- tion of human shortcomings, is another conception inherited from Judaism. Early Jewish ideas about God are anthropomorphic, but the anthropo- morphism is of a very different kind from that of the Greeks. The deities of Greek mythology who aroused the contemptuous disgust of Plato were constructed out of human experience with all the evil and good qualities of actual men emphasized and heightened. To the Jew God is an ideal, the source of the Moral Law, rebellion against which is sin. So in the Sermon on tlie Mount the perfection of God is held up as the ideal for human perfection, and St. Paul makes the unity of God the ground for belief in the unity of the Church.
(c) Thirdly, sin was regarded as a thing which afi'ects the race, and not only individuals. The beliefs of the Apostolic Age with regard to Christ's redemptive work imply that there is a taint in the race, and that human nature itself, and not only individual men, has to be restored to communion with God, and requires such a release from sin as will make communion with God possible. Some practical results of this belief in the solidarity of mankind are conspicuous in early Christian writ- ings. One is the exercise of discipline. It was felt that the actions and character of individuals compromised and affected the whole body, and that they could not therefore be left to themselves. The injury done by the rebellion of one injured and imperilled the whole community. Both for his own sake and for the sake of the Church a cor- porate censure was required, extending if necessary to the cutting oft' of the ofl'ending member (1 Co 5, 2 Co 2, Mt I8i5-2», etc.). Another result of the belief in solidarity is the emphasis laid upon social virtues in connexion with the corporate character of the Church [e.g. Ro 12, 1 Co 12-14, Gal 5, etc.). It partly accounts for that special prominence of humility in Christian ethics which has been so often commented on from diSerent points of view, for humility is regarded not only as a duty enforced by the example of Christ, but also as the practical means for preserving the unity and harmonious working of the body (Ph 2^■^ etc.).