There is no concept of "sin" in the Bible

I consider this post as far reaching, questioning the very foundations of didactics of salvation of religions claiming to be based on the Bible.

1. There is no way for you to argue against the grammar. So that whenever the Bible disagrees with your doctrines, you willy-nilly invent an exception to suit your pre-determined doctrine. Which would mean, the Bible is meaningless to you - since you will deliberately and willfully make grammatical exceptions anytime you wish to cherrypickingly construct your doctrine to fraudulently claim your doctrine aligns with the Bible. Backpedal and then reinventing and finetune your translation until you get it to agree with your cart-before-the-horse doctrine.
   
   
2. {חטא} is the nearly the only Hebrew word translated as {sin}, the only Hebrew word used as the evidence of concept of {sin}. An evidence that is hanging by a thin thread. Here, I demolish that evidence.
   
3. In Genesis 3, after humans ate the FoToKoGaE, Almighty did not even bother to use any sin word. There goes the ideology of "original sin" down the drain.

There is no such concept as "sin" when you read the Bible in the original Hebrew. More precisely, "sin" is as much a concept as "walk" is a concept. In English and Greek, "sin" is an evil concept. But in the Hebrew of the Bible, {חטא = sin} is as neutral as the word "walk". You can {חטא sin} for G'd or {חטא sin} against G'd. Just as you can walk for G'd or walk against G'd,

Because {חטא} simply means {separation or gap}. Just as {שטן = satan} is a neutral word, so is {חטא}. Because the word {חטא} is used in the Hebrew of the Bible,

• positively (separation-consecration for G'd)
• negatively (separation-gap, deviation from G'd)
• neutrally (separating items)

And since there is no word for "sin" in the Hebrew of the Bible, then there crumbles the paganistic concept of "original sin". Don't be mistaken - Yes, in the Hebrew of the Bible there are words for {transgression, violation, violence, wicked, evil, bad}, but there is no word of "sin".

{Sin} is a concept found in ancient cultures all over the world, especially those pagan cultures surrounding ancient Israel and yet the concept of "sin" is not found in the Hebrew of the Bible. You may proceed to invent your scholarly excuses. The action of inventing a context and then applying that invented context, that context will return to bite your doctrine in the tail.

Let us begin ...

• Let us for a moment pretend to accept that the word {חטא} = {sin}.
• Then, grammatically, {יתחטא} is the 3rdP reflexive of {חטא}
• Specifically, {יתחטא} is the 3rdP reflexive masculine singular cohortative-subjunctive of {חטא}
• That is to say, without dispute that, grammatically {יתחטא} is an exhortation {shall sin against oneself}. There is no way for anyone to dispute against this because verily verily I say unto you, grammatically {יתחטא} would mean {shall sin against self}.

Then now, look at the book of Numbers, and apply {יתחטא = shall sin against self} and {חטא =  sin} to those verses, compared to the actual meaning of {חטא = consecrate, separate, gap}

Hebrew	Misaligned meaning due to {חטא = sin}	Actual meaning {חטא = consecrate, separate, gap}
8:9
וכה תעשה להם		then thus shall you do to them
לטהרם הזה עליהם		to cleanse such upon them
מי חטאת	water of sin	water of consecration/separation
etc, etc
19:9
etc, etc
והיתה לעדת בני ישראל		then be the witnesses of sons of Israel
למשמרת		to safeguard
למי נדה חטאת הוא	the water of excretion sinning it is	the water of excretion separation it is
19:12
הוא יתחטא בו ביום השלִישי	he shall sin against himself on the 3rd day	he shall consecrate/separate himself on the 3rd day
וביום השביעי יטהר		and on the 7th day he then becomes clean
ואם לא יתחטא ביום השלִישי	and if does not sin against self on 3rd day	and if does not consecrate/separate self on 3rd day
וביום השביעי לא יטהר		and on the 7th day he is then not clean
19:13
כל הנגע במת בנפש האדם אשר ימות		All contaminated in/by death in/of life of the man who dies
ולא יתחטא	and does not sin against self	and do not consecrate/separate self
את משכן יי טמא		contaminate housing of Hashem
etc, etc
19:17
ולקחו לטמא מעפר שרפת החטאת	and he shall take contaminant from burnt ashes of the sinning	and he shall take contaminant from burnt ashes of the consecration
ונתן עליו מים חיים אל כלִי		and add/give upon it fresh/living water into a container.
19:19
והזה הטהר על הטמא ביום השלִישי וביום השביעי		and sprinkle the clean on the contaminant on the 3rd day and 7th day
וחטאו ביום השביעי	and he should sin him on the 7th day	and should he consecrate him on the 7th day
וכבס בגדיו ורחץ במים וטהר בערב		and he rinses his garments and washes in water and he is clean in the evening
19:20
ואיש אשר יטמא		And a man who is unclean
ולא יתחטא	and does not sin against self	and does not consecrate/separate self
ונכרתה הנפש ההוא מתוך הקהל		and be cutoff the life of his from amongst the assembly
etc, etc
31:23
כל דבר אשר יבא באש תעבירו באש		Everything which is bringable into fire shall you pass it in fire
וטהר אך במי נדה יתחטא	and but-still cleansed in water of discharge of sinning against self	and but-still cleansed in water of discharge of self-consecration/separation
וכל אשר לא יבא באש תעבירו במים		and all which is not bringable into fire shall you pass it in water

Also let's look at the to-infinitive {לחטאת}

Hebrew	Misaligned meaning due to {חטא = sin}	Actual accepted meaning
15 occurrences in Leviticus 4, 5, 9, 12, 16, 23	for-sinning	for consecration
13 occurrences in Numbers 7 {שעיר עזים לחטאת}	hairy-goat for-sinning	hairy-goat for consecration

And yet the same word {לחטאת} obviously means {to sin}:

• 1 Kings 8:34, 8:36, 12:30, 13:34
• 2 Chron 6:25, 6:27, 29:21
• Prov 10:16
• Ezek 43:19, 43:22
• Zech 13:1

And {חטאם} meaning {sinning} instead of {consecrating} in many occurrences, like in Leviticus 20:20
ואיש אשר ישכב את דדתו ערות דדו גלה חטאם ישאו ערירים ימתו

How is it possible that the same (and ONLY) Hebrew word used to mean {sin} also means {consecration}? Unless {חטא} actually means {separation/consecration}. Separation for G'd or separation from G'd.

In the Hebrew of the Bible, there is transgression, wickedness, evil but not the concept of {sin}. Biblical Hebrew is a primitive language, devoid of abstract concepts like "sin".

"Sin" is a concept from philosophically abstract cultures and languages of Chinese, Indians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians but not of the primitiveness of ancient Hebrew.

Note:

There is no umbrella word for the concept of “sin” in the ancient Hebrew text of the Bible. Almighty deliberately refused to allow any umbrella word for the concept of “sin” in biblical Hebrew. of the ancient Hebrew text.


The opposite of {חטא} is {קרב}.

{קורבן qurvan} is verbal-noun of {קרב}.
{קורבן qurvan} is a category of offerings made to G'd in the Bible.
{קרב} means "close proximity" and is used in the Bible to mean close proximity in intimacy or in battle or internally-embedded.

As Jacob fought in close proximity with G'd, and then became intimate with G'd, so therefore {קרב} is the actions we take to {חטא = consecrate, separate} ourselves for G'd to close our {חטא = separation, gap} from G'd.

Note:
The koine greek word in christian scriptures translated as {sin} is {αμαρτια amartia}.

{αμαρτια amartia} is derived from martial skills and sports of archery and javelin = not on the mark. i.e. when the spear or arrow is not on the target.

Also the Greek word for "sin" does not include the meaning of {consecration}. Therefore, the Christian concept of "sin" is totally misaligned with the meaning of {חטא}. Especially that the Christian origin of "sin" is due to a pagan war god.