Guilt

Guilt - (Webster's 1828 Dictionary)

GUILT, n. gilt.

1. Criminality; that state of a moral agent which results from his actual commission of a crime or offense, knowing it to be a crime, or violation of law. To constitute guilt there must be a moral agent enjoying freedom of will, and capable of distinguishing between right and wrong, and a wilful or intentional violation of a known law, or rule of duty. The guilt of a person exists, as soon as the crime is committed; but to evince it to others, it must be proved by confession, or conviction in due course of law. Guilt renders a person a debtor to the law, as it binds him to pay a penalty in money or suffering. Guilt therefore implies both criminality and liableness to punishment. Guilt may proceed either from a positive act or breach of law, or from voluntary neglect of known duty.

2. Criminality in a political or civil view; exposure to forfeiture or other penalty.

A ship incurs guilt by the violation of a blockade.

3. Crime; offense.

Guilty - (Webster's 1828 Dictionary)

GUILT'Y, a. gilt'y. Criminal; having knowingly committed a crime or offense, or having violated a law by an overt act or by neglect,and by that act or neglect, being liable to punishment; not innocent. It may be followed by of; as, to be guilty of theft or arson.

Nor he, nor you, were guilty of the strife.

1. Wicked; corrupt; sinful; as a guilty world.

2. Conscious.

In Scripture, to be guilty of death, is to have committed a crime which deserves death. Mat 26.

To be guilty of the body and blood of Christ, is to be chargeable with the crime of crucifying Christ afresh, and offering indignity to his person and righteousness, represented by the symbols of the Lord's supper. 1 Cor 11.

gilt: The Christian idea of guilt involves three elements: responsibility (Greek aitia, "cause," depending upon a man's real freedom), blameworthiness (Latin reatus culpae, depending upon a man's knowledge and purpose) and the obligation to make good through punishment or compensation (Latin reatus poenae; compare Greek opheilema, "debt," Mt 6:12). In other words, in thinking of guilt we ask the questions of cause, motive and consequence, the central idea being that of the personal blameworthiness of the sinner.

I. In the Old Testament.

1. The Ritualistic and Legalistic Conception:

Not all of this is found at once in the Old Testament. The idea of guilt corresponds to that of righteousness or holiness. When these are ritual and legal, instead of ethical and spiritual, they will determine similarly the idea of guilt. This legalistic and ritualistic conception of guilt may first be noted. Personal blameworthiness does not need to be present. "If any one sin, and do any of the things which Yahweh hath commanded not to be done; though he knew it not, yet is he guilty, and shall bear his iniquity" (Le 5:17). The man is guilty, not because he might or should have known; he may merely have touched unwittingly the body of an unclean beast (Le 5:2,3). The guilt is here because the law has been transgressed and must be made good (compare Le 5:15,16; 4:2,3,13,12,27; see also 5:2,3,4,17).

Moreover, the element of personal responsibility is sometimes lacking where guilt is assigned. The priest may sin "so as to bring guilt on the people" (Le 4:3). One man's wrongdoing may "cause the land to sin" (De 24:4). Israel has sinned in Achan's greed and therefore suffers. Even when the guilty man is found, his children and his very cattle must bear the guilt and punishment with him, though there is no suggestion of their participation or even knowledge (Jos 7; compare 2Sa 24). Here the full moral idea of sin and guilt is wanting because the idea of personality and personal responsibility has not come to its own. The individual is still merged here in the clan or nation.

The central idea in all this is not that of the individual, his responsibility, his motive, his blame. It is that of a rule and the transgression of it, which must be made good. For this reason we see the ú ideas of sin and guilt and punishment constantly passing over into each other. This may be seen by noting the use of the words whose common root is '-sh-m, the distinctive Hebrew term for guilt. In Le 5 to 7 in the adjective form it is rendered "guilty," in the noun as "trespass offering." In Ho 5:15 it seems to mean punishment (see margin, "have borne their guilt," and compare Eze 6:6), while in Nu 5:7,8 the idea is that of compensation (rendered "restitution for guilt").

2. Prophetic Teaching:

With the prophets, the ideas of sin and righteousness come out more clearly as ethical and personal, and so we mark a similar advance in the conception of guilt. It is not ritual correctness that counts with God, incense and sacrifices and new moons and Sabbaths, but to cease to do evil, to learn to do well (Isa 1). Thus the motive and the inner spirit come in (Mic 6:8; Isa 57:15; 58:1-12), and guilt gains a new depth and quality. At the same time the idea of personal responsibility comes. A man is to bear his own sins. The children's teeth are not to be set on edge because the fathers have eaten sour grapes (Jer 31:29,30; Eze 18:29-32; 2Ki 14:6; compare 2Sa 24:17).

II. In the New Testament.

1. With Jesus:

Here as elsewhere Jesus came to fulfill. With Him it is the inner attitude of the soul that decides. It is the penitent publican who goes down justified, not the Pharisee with his long credit account (Lu 18:9-14). That is why His attitude is so kindly toward some notorious sinners and so stern toward some religious leaders. The Pharisees are outwardly correct, but their spirit of bigotry and pride prevents their entering the kingdom of heaven, while the penitent harlots and publicans take it by storm.

Because it is not primarily a matter of the outward deed but of the inner spirit, Jesus marks different degrees of guilt as depending upon a man's knowledge and motive (Lu 11:29-32; 12:47,48; 23:34). And yet Jesus does not lighten the sense of guilt but rather deepens it. The strength of the Old Testament thought lay in this, that it viewed all transgression as a sin against God, since all law came from Him. This religious emphasis remains with Jesus (Lu 15:21; compare Ps 51:4). But with Jesus God is far more than a giver of rules. He gives Himself. And so the guilt is the deeper because the sin is against this love and mercy and fellowship which God offers us. Jesus shows us the final depth of evil in sin. Here comes the New Testament interpretation of the cross, which shows it on the one hand as the measure of God's love in the free gift of His Son, and on the other as the measure of man's guilt whose sin wrought this and made it necessary.

2. With Paul:

Paul also recognizes differences of degree in guilt, the quality of blameworthiness which is not simply determined by looking at the outward transgression (Ac 17:30; Eph 4:18; Ro 2:9; 3:26; 5:13; 7:13). He, too, looks within to decide the question of guilt (Ro 14:23). But sin is not a matter of single acts or choices with Paul. He sees it as a power that comes to rule a man's life and that rules in the race. The question therefore arises, Does Paul think of guilt also as native, as belonging to man because man is a part of the race? Here it can merely be pointed out that Ro 5:12-21 does not necessarily involve this. Paul is not discussing whether all men committed sin in Adam's fall, or whether all are guilty by virtue of their very place in a race that is sinful. It is not the question of guilt in fact or degree, but merely the fact that through one man men are now made righteous as before through one sin came upon them all. This no more involves native guilt as a non-ethical conception than it does the idea that the righteousness through Christ is merely forensic and non-ethical. Paul is simply passing over the other elements to assert one fact. Ro 1 suggests how Paul looked at universal sin as involving guilt because universal knowledge and choice entered in.

See also SIN.

LITERATURE.

Mueller, Christian Doctrine of Sin, I, 193-267; Schultz, Old Testament Theology; Kaehler, article "Schuld," Hauck-Herzog, Realencyklopadie fur protestantische Theologie und Kirche.

Harris Franklin Rall

gil'-ti: In addition to the general discussion under GUILT (which see), several New Testament passages demand special notice because the word "guilty" is not used in the principal sense of blameworthy, but with one of the two lesser meanings noted above which go to make up the complete idea. In 3 of these passages the King James Version renders "guilty" and the Revised Version (British and American) gives another rendering. In Mt 26:66 the King James Version, Jesus' foes declare he is "guilty of death" (enochos, "liable to"). Here "guilty" simply means the one who is legally held, and the reference is not to the blame but to the consequence. This is a true use of the word in the lower and legal sense. It does not correspond with our higher usage, and so we have it in the Revised Version (British and American) "worthy of death." So in Ro 3:19, "guilty" is changed to "under the judgment," and in Mt 23:18, to "debtor."

In Jas 2:10 and 1Co 11:27, the word "guilty" is also used in the lesser or more primitive sense, not primarily as involving blame but as involving the sinner's authorship or responsibility. This is the first element suggested in the definition of guilt given above, just as the preceding passages illustrate the third element. The man who stumbles in one point is "guilty" of the whole law. James does not refer here to the degree of blameworthiness. "Guilty of" means transgressor of, and he has transgressed the whole because the law is one. So in 1Co 11:27, those "guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord" are those who have transgressed in the matter of the body and the blood of the Lord.

Harris Franklin Rall

Definition

The term “guilt” refers to the fact of having sinned or committed a crime.

• To “be guilty” means to have done something morally wrong, that is, to have disobeyed God.
• The opposite of “guilty” is “innocent.”

Translation Suggestions

• Some languages might translate “guilt” as “the weight of sin” or “the counting of sins.”
• Ways to translate to “be guilty” could include a word or phrase that means, to “be at fault” or “having done something morally wrong” or “having committed a sin.”

(See also: innocent, iniquity, punish, sin)

Bible References

• Exodus 28:36-38
• Isaiah 6:7
• James 2:10-11
• John 19:4
• Jonah 1:14

Examples from the Bible stories

• __39:2 They brought many witnesses who lied about him (Jesus). However, their statements did not agree with each other, so the Jewish leaders could not prove he was guilty__ of anything.
• __39:11 After speaking with Jesus, Pilate went out to the crowd and said, “I find no guilt in this man.” But the Jewish leaders and the crowd shouted, “Crucify him!” Pilate replied, “He is not guilty.” But they shouted even louder. Then Pilate said a third time, “He is not guilty__!”
• __40:4 Jesus was crucified between two robbers. One of them mocked Jesus, but the other said, “Don’t you fear God? We are guilty__, but this man is innocent.”
• __49:10 Because of your sin, you are guilty__ and deserve to die.

Word Data

• Strong’s: H0816, H0817, H0818, H5352, H5355, H7563, G03380, G17770, G37840, G52670