Customer Reviews

Sin: A History

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Gary Anderson's new book, Sin, is the rare combination of informative academic work and thoughtful theological insight; of penetrating depth of research and commendable breadth in scope. Anderson is clearly well-versed in Hebrew Scripture, early Christian writings, and important works from church history (such as Anselm). And yet, the book never gets bogged down in any of them or becomes tedious. On the contrary, Anderson moves effortlessly and clearly between the disciplines, providing a rich pay-off for the reader. This is one of the best models I've seen of how sound historical-critical research can be theologically constructive. In particular, the discussion of Lev 25-26 and the contextualization of some of Jesus' sayings (such as the Lord's Prayer and his exchange with the rich young ruler) were alone worth the price of the book. Highly recommended.

Who would have thunk to write a history of sin? Starting from biblical sources, Anderson argues persuasively that the metaphors for sin change through time. This change had real implications for early Judaism and Christianity, including Syriac Christianity, an Aramaic form of the religion that offers unique insight into the metaphor of sin as debt. This development of the metaphors for sin are not isolated linguistic or textual issues, but rather have actual impact on church history, including Anselm's theory of atonement and Catholic/Protestant dialogue. As a result, these metaphors for sin have practical implications in the life of the church, and this careful study of the topic can have fruitful impact on both inter- and intra-religious dialogue.

It is a rare scholar who blends cutting edge biblical scholarship with extensive knowledge of Jewish and church history. Anderson's book combines academic acumen, carefully executed methodology, and clear writing. The result is an innovative book on one of the oldest topics in the history of Judeo-Christian thought.

Anderson's book does not attempt to define sin as any sort of transgression of God's commandments. He writes rather in order to describe sin as "debt" (hob 135) and how that debt caused "almsgiving" to emerge as a very important practice among Jews and Christians (Preface x). Taking his clue from St. Anselm in chapter 12, Anderson, in my opinion, sketches his book around Anselm's theological conclusions where debt and atonement come together in "Why God Became Man" (189). Further Anderson argues that sin is not a guilty conscience but "stain" or "burden placed upon oneself" (4). Such development of sin did have its history of evolution (6). Originating from Aramaic sources sin as debt metaphor soon found its way into the Hebrew mindset especially during Second Temple syntextual development (in TOBIT for instance 9). For if people "owed" something then it was supposed that "credit" could be attained. From such discovery of owing God repayment came the possibility of buying credits (by giving alms) for sins commited. Anderson informs us that this was where the Rabbinic discussion of "zekut" or credit arose and from such theological understanding almsgiving ('ham-miswah' 223 note 38) became THE commandment (9-10).

Sprinkled through his book Anderson notes many Hebrew words which dealt with ideas of sin such as "nasa" carry away or "kibbes" wash away (16). Qumran is discussed with its use of the word "debt" (habu 192). This is a fine book where rhetoric flows and meaning empties into an arena of helpful Biblical theology! Anderson's concluding chapter discussing "Why God Became Man" enthralled me with how he tied Old Testament ideas of debt/alms into the New Testament concept of debt atonement (by an Old Testament Professor at that!) Published by Yale University in 2009 this paperback is well constructed. This edition has 202 pages including 32 pages of footnoting and a general and an Ancient sources Index which concludes this worthy book.

To explore the different metaphors the Bible uses to talk about sin is a great idea. I read this book with fascination, and thoroughly enjoyed much of it. The book focuses heavily on the metaphor of sin as a 'debt'. Anderson explores this concept in useful detail, and insightfully demonstrated how other theological concepts linked in with this. He brings many Jewish texts into discussion in a very helpful way, using them to help understand the debt conception of sin. These sections of the book made for extremely interesting reading. However, Anderson spends long sections of the book giving his own interpretations of lengthy Old Testament passages which were unfortunately both boring and unconvincing. It is extremely hard to write biblical interpretation well, and Anderson does not have that gift it seems. That section seemed also a bit tangential to the rest of the book.

What struck me as strange is that a book supposedly about different conceptions of sin in history should cover so few of those conceptions. Anderson gets the concept of sin as 'weight' out of the way in the first 25 pages, and then proceeds to focus almost solely on the metaphor of sin as debt for the remainder of the book, which appears to be his preferred concept. Perhaps the book would be more accurately titled "Sin as Debt"? Particularly missing was any discussion of sin as a 'power' from which we are 'freed', an idea that is particularly relevant to the letters of Paul. In fact, references to the New Testament in general were remarkably scarce, with the Lord's Prayer being almost the only point of New Testament discussion. I would also have liked to see more discussion of the Old Testament conception of sin being 'washed' or 'cleansed'. Finally I was disappointed to see no discussion of the difference between sin as something done in the past which has ongoing effects for us in the present (ie the 'guilt' that stays around after the sinful action), verses sin as something done wrong in the present (ie the 'behavioural' aspect of sin as wrongdoing). In both Judaism and Christian history these two understandings of sin as guilt and sin as behaviour have led to two very different kinds of solutions to sin - 'justification' vs 'sanctification' in a sense. I would have expected a volume that claims to be a history of different conceptions of sin to have explored these points. I think it is better viewed as a volume defending the conception of sin as debt, and thus defending the validity of Anselm's model of the atonement.

Anderson offers an elegant and clear exposition of a particular academic thesis, namely, that the idea of "sin" is linked to the metaphor of sin as "debt."

His use of biblical Hebrew, Aramaic and non-biblical texts to support his argument is deft and sure. Terrific footnotes. Interestingly though, there is no mention of the "Seven Deadly sins," the Desert Fathers or their contribution to this theological idea of sin. It seems to me that any "history" of sin would have covered "the deadlies" and their development.

If you've grown up in the Judeo-Christian religious tradition, this book will blow your mind. It is amazing to think of something like sin, an eternal concept, as having changed throughout the centuries. Just awe-inspiring.

I'm only halfway through Anderson's provocative and fascinating study, but since I just received the email reminding me to write a review and I'm afraid I'll forget (or not have time) later, I just wanted to come here and give this study five stars. Highly recommended to anyone interested in what the Hebrew Bible, later Jewish sources, and New Testament say about the often misunderstood concept of "sin." Congratulations on this great work, Professor Anderson!

If you want to know the history, common interpretations, and a provocative look at what sin is, this is the book. A little academic, but thourough.