StrongerBible

hamartēma

ἁμάρτημα

GreekG0265sin

Appears 5 times · tap a cell to see the verses

Mrk 3:28Mrk 3:29Mrk 4:12Rom 3:251Co 6:18
Root family
Word studyResearch-gradehah-MAR-tay-mahnoun

What hamartēma means

a sinful deed: a single wrong act someone commits, counted as one concrete offense rather than sin as a state or power

TranslatabilityApproximateCertaintyStrong

This word names a sin you can point to and count: a particular wrong act, a deed that has been done. Greek built it from the verb "to sin" the same way it built "the thing made" from "to make" or "the thing written" from "to write." The word form marks the finished product of an action, so the sense is roughly "the thing sinned": one committed offense, not sinfulness in general.

That sets it apart from its far more common relative, hamartia (ἁμαρτία), the ordinary Greek word for sin that English also renders "sin." Hamartia can mean the single act too, but it stretches much further, covering sin as a settled condition and even, in Paul's letters, sin pictured as a ruling power that holds people captive. This word never carries that larger, personified weight. It stays at the level of the concrete deed.

Scholars caution that by New Testament times the two words overlapped a good deal, so the concrete-deed sense here is a strong tendency rather than an ironclad rule, and only the surrounding context can confirm it in a given verse. But in every place the New Testament uses this word, the context does confirm it:

  • the many forgivable sins and the one unforgivable sin in Mark
  • the specific offenses committed before Christ that God had passed over (Romans)
  • Paul sorting one kind of wrong act from another (1 Corinthians)

In each case the point turns on individual deeds, not on sin as a force.

Mrk 3:28Mrk 3:29Mrk 4:12Rom 3:251Co 6:18

Disputed

How firmly the concrete-deed nuance signaled by the noun's -μα ending should be pressed, given that ἁμάρτημα and ἁμαρτία overlap heavily in Koine.

  • minorityThe -μα form marks a genuine, theologically weighty distinction: ἁμάρτημα is sin only ever as a discrete concrete act, never as sinfulness or the act of sinning in the abstract.; R. C. Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, §66
  • majorityThe concrete sense is a Koine-era default tendency confirmed by the New Testament distribution, not a rule the lexeme can bear on its own; syntax and context, not the ending, carry the theological weight.; James Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language (Oxford, 1961); Moisés Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning, rev. ed.; TDNT I:267-316, s.v. ἁμαρτάνω κτλ. (Quell, Bertram, Stählin, Grundmann)
  • minorityThere is no lexical distinction worth marking; ἁμάρτημα and ἁμαρτία belong to one undifferentiated semantic domain for translation.; Louw-Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains, 88.289

What scholars say about hamartēma

The major reference works agree on the gloss (LSJ "a failure, fault"; BDAG, 3rd ed., p. 49, "a sinful deed, sin") while differing on how firmly to press the distinction from ἁμαρτία. Morphologically the noun is a nomen rei actae in -μα, the productive suffix that forms result-nouns (πρᾶγμα, γράμμα, ποίημα; cf. Smyth §840, BDF §109), so the classical triad is ἁμαρτάνειν (the act of missing) / ἁμάρτημα (the concrete miss) / ἁμαρτία (missingness, sinfulness), part of a family of NT parallels (δικαίωμα/δικαιοσύνη, ἀδίκημα/ἀδικία, ῥῆμα/λόγος). The philosophical background runs through Aristotle's culpability spectrum in Nicomachean Ethics V.8 (1135b), where ἁμάρτημα stands between ἀτύχημα (misadventure) and ἀδίκημα (deliberate wrong), and through the Stoic technical opposition to κατόρθωμα (Zeno, SVF I.54; Chrysippus, SVF III.500); documentary usage (P.Tebt. I 5, the 118 BCE amnesty decree; Moulton-Milligan) fixes it as a legal-administrative term for an offense. In the LXX (Muraoka: "sinful action, misdeed, offence") it renders חַטָּאת, חֵטְא, and פֶּשַׁע but is far less common than ἁμαρτία, so the choice is often stylistic variatio (Deut 19:15; cf. Tov, Aejmelaeus). TDNT (Stählin, Grundmann) holds that in the NT ἁμάρτημα always names the individual concrete deed and never the personified cosmic Sin of Romans 5-8, and EDNT labels it a result-noun; against overloading the ending stand Barr and Silva, while Louw-Nida (88.289) group it with ἁμαρτία without distinction. The passage-level debates (πάρεσις vs ἄφεσις and the pre-Pauline-formula question at Rom 3:25; the slogan hypothesis at 1 Cor 6:18; the sense of αἰώνιος at Mark 3:29; Croasmun's emergence account of how the concrete deeds relate to Sin-as-power) turn on syntax and theology rather than on the lexical meaning of the noun itself, which remains well understood.

In-depth research

This is a research paper, so it may be hard to read without scholarly background. It is useful if you want to dig even deeper into this word.

Sources

  • LSJ (Liddell-Scott-Jones), s.v. ἁμάρτημαlexicon
  • BDAG, 3rd ed., s.v. ἁμάρτημα, p. 49lexicon
  • TDNT I:267-316, s.v. ἁμαρτάνω κτλ. (Quell, Bertram, Stählin, Grundmann)theological dictionary
  • EDNT (Balz-Schneider), vol. 1, s.v. ἁμάρτημαtheological dictionary
  • T. Muraoka, A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint (Peeters, 2009), s.v. ἁμάρτημαlexicon
  • C. Spicq, Theological Lexicon of the New Testament, I:82ff.theological dictionary
  • R. C. Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, §66monograph
  • James Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language (Oxford, 1961)monograph
  • Moisés Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning, rev. ed.monograph
  • Louw-Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains, 88.289lexicon
  • Matthew Croasmun, The Emergence of Sin: The Cosmic Tyrant in Romans (Oxford, 2017)monograph

All attested forms of ἁμάρτημα

nominative n p

ἁμαρτήματα

Mrk 3:28, Mrk 4:12

genitive n p

ἁμαρτημάτων

Rom 3:25

genitive n s

ἁμαρτήματος

Mrk 3:29

nominative n s

ἁμάρτημα

1Co 6:18