The Validity Ratio of Translating Sin as 'Missing the Mark' (16,000 Characters)

▼Related Articles

The Validity Ratio of Translating Sin as 'Missing the Mark'

v3.9

[Note] This article is composed based on the author's personal research, reading, and reflection; the author is not an expert in the fields covered herein. In creating this content, I have utilized references to publicly available materials and information gathering, organization, and fact-checking using AI, which has become common in recent years. However, these are merely auxiliary means to assist understanding and do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the information provided. In addition to introducing verifiable information, this article includes metaphorical expressions, hypothetical reasoning, and personal interpretations or re-readings. These are not intended to assert a specific position or conclusion, but rather to provide material for the reader's own reflection. Please ensure you make your own final judgments and interpretations by referring to primary sources and other perspectives.

1. Original Language and Metaphor

In Christian commentary, I have seen criticism of explaining the New Testament Greek word for sin, hamartia, as 'missing the mark.' The core of the criticism involved linguistic observations and theological concerns. Linguistically, the point is that explaining hamartia as 'missing the mark' relies too heavily on old etymology or metaphorical explanation. By the time the New Testament was written, this word was already used to denote 'moral error,' 'wrongdoing,' and 'sin.' Therefore, if one looks only at the etymology and speaks of biblical sin as a 'minor mistake' or 'going in the wrong direction,' it treats the history of the language recklessly. Theologically, there is a danger that by explaining sin as 'missing the mark,' the gravity of sin sounds diminished. Biblical sin includes rebellion against God, broken relationships, responsibility, judgment, forgiveness, and repentance. If it is received as something on the level of 'slightly off target' or 'clumsily mistaken,' the weight of the salvation of the cross is also diluted.

I understand the intent of the criticism. If one confines the meaning of sin solely to 'missing the mark' and places it at the center of what the entire Bible speaks of as sin, that would certainly be going too far. The sin the Bible speaks of includes rebellion against God, broken relationships, responsibility, defilement, judgment, forgiveness, and repentance. If it is limited to a soft story about humans slightly misdirecting their path, the weight of sin is diminished.

The Greek word hamartanō has meanings such as to miss, to err, and to commit sin [1]. The noun hamartia has a semantic range related to sin, failure, fault, and missing the mark [2]. The Hebrew word ḥāṭāʼ also includes meanings of committing sin, missing, and erring [3]. In this respect, the explanation of 'missing the mark' has the power to touch upon a part of the original language. If one covers the entire content of what the Bible speaks of as sin with only that part, the weight of the relationship with God, rebellion, and forgiveness becomes thin.

Even so, I felt that the attitude of rejecting the etymological explanation of 'missing the mark' itself was also going too far in the opposite sense. In the first place, I do not think that those who explain it as 'missing the mark' necessarily mean that 'sin = missing the mark' in the sense that the entirety of sin can be explained by that one word.

Does labeling 'sin = missing the mark' and excluding 'missing the mark' not also seal off words for savoring the teaching, etymology as a mnemonic for faith, and even poetic explanations that work within prayer?

If we liken goodness to a target, the metaphor of calling the deviation from goodness 'missing the mark' has power. Humans should be aiming toward God, love, forgiveness, and their neighbor, yet they aim at their own desires, righteousness, self-preservation, and fear. As a word that briefly reminds us of that deviation, 'missing the mark' works within prayer and meditation.

In the Gospel of Luke, chapter 15, the parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the prodigal son follow [21]. There, that which has strayed, that which is lost, and that which has left home are sought, welcomed, and rejoiced over. Those who have missed the mark, those who have strayed from the path, and those who have left their father's house are called back by the grace of God. This structure shows why the metaphor of 'missing the mark' has power in prayer and meditation.

To say that all sin is 'missing the mark' is 'missing the mark.' To prohibit all metaphors that treat sin as 'missing the mark' is also 'missing the mark.' The question is in what situation and to what extent it can be used. The 'validity ratio' mentioned in this article is the scale for that discrimination.

2. The Expansion as a Word of the Gospel

Is the explanation of 'missing the mark' a spiritual paraphrase unique to the Japanese-speaking world, or is it a simplified expression that received the explanation from the original language side in Japanese? This confirmation is important when considering the ratio in this article.

In the English-speaking world, there are many examples of explaining hamartia as 'missing the mark.' The Blue Letter Bible explains hamartia in connection with 'missing the mark' [10]. The Church of the Great God defines sin as 'missing the mark' and treats it as straying from the path of God's word [11]. In a sermon of the same lineage titled 'Hitting the Mark,' aiming toward God's standard is developed homiletically [12]. There are also examples of the same lineage in the Center for Action and Contemplation, Grace to Gospel, Hungry Hearts Collective, and Grace Asian Church [13][14][15][16].

There are explanations in the same direction in materials from Greece itself. In modern Greek Orthodox materials, it is explained that in Orthodox theology, αμαρτία retains the meaning of ancient Greek, which means αστοχία, that is, missing a target or goal [17]. Also, in Greek faith education materials, there are examples that explain, 'Amartia (αμαρτία) means astochia (αστοχία), and amartanō (αμαρτάνω) means astochō (αστοχώ)' [18]. Furthermore, in Greek theological terminology materials, there is an explanation that 'amartanō means to lose the goal,' and sin is spoken of as an αστοχία in the use of the freedom given by God [19]. In other words, even in materials from Greece itself, αμαρτία is associated with αστοχία, αστοχώ, and στόχος, and is explained as missing the goal, moving away from God, and deviating from the original purpose.

Furthermore, in the English-speaking world, there are also examples of connecting it to 'God's grace.' There are materials that explain confessing to God where one missed the mark and returning through grace. There are also materials that define hamartia as 'miss the mark,' speaking of deviating from God's perfect will and heading toward redemption and restoration through Christ [14][15][16].

Looking at this flow, neither the English 'missing the mark' nor the Japanese 'missing the mark' are spiritual paraphrases created separately and arbitrarily. It is more natural to see them as simplified expressions that received the στόχος, αστοχία, and αστοχώ-based explanations on the Greek side in their respective languages. Of course, one cannot fully express what the entire Bible speaks of as sin with that alone. However, if one condemns the explanation of 'missing the mark' as a translation error unique to Japanese, one would be overlooking the continuity of the Greek materials, English materials, and the reception in Japanese.

This estimation is an observational value based on searchable English materials and materials from Greece itself. It is not premised on public data that measures the frequency of etymological explanations of sin across denominations and language spheres in a lump sum.

Nevertheless, in general-purpose materials that explain hamartia / αμαρτία from its etymology, explanations of the 'miss the mark' or αστοχία type are not uncommon. At the very least, as far as I have confirmed in English materials and Greek domestic materials, it is impossible to dismiss the explanation of 'missing the mark' as a special mistranslation unique to Japanese. It can be confirmed that the explanation of 'missing the mark' has a certain foothold in the language used to speak of the Gospel.

This confirmation shifts the direction of the criticism. The point that 'one should not explain sin solely as missing the mark' is valid. This is because sin in the Bible includes rebellion against God, responsibility, judgment, forgiveness, and repentance. On the other hand, criticism that rejects the explanation of 'missing the mark' entirely needs to pay sufficient attention to the etymological explanations in English and Greek domestic materials, the settings where the Gospel is spoken, biblical definitions, and faith education. What should be criticized is abuse, simplification, and the trivialization of sin. If one rejects explanations inspired by etymology, words of prayer, and introductions to the Gospel, that criticism overlooks the settings of faith where the words are alive.

3. What the Bible speaks of as sin

'Sin' in the Bible is a term with a broader range than legal violation. It is a word that includes the relationship with God, relationships between people, the orientation of the heart, the brokenness of the community, and even forgiveness by God.

In Genesis, a scene is depicted where humans doubt God's word and place their own judgment above God's. The serpent says to the woman, 'You will not surely die,' and the woman looks at the forbidden fruit. This is Genesis 3:4-6 [20]. This scene casts a long shadow over later Christian perceptions of sin. Sin is depicted as an event where trust in God wavers and the creature places itself at the center.

Based on this flow, 'sin = missing the mark' is insufficient to express in one word what the entire Bible speaks of as sin. Even just looking at the breakdown of trust in God in Genesis, sin is depicted not merely as a mistake or failure in aiming, but as a breakdown of the relationship with God. However, 'missing the mark' works as a word that captures the experience of straying from trust in God, leaving the Father's house, and falling short of the glory of God.

4. The attitude of criticism

The author's fundamental point of focus is directed not only at the content of the criticism but also at the attitude of the criticism. If there is an implication at the root of the criticism that 'only I understand precisely' or 'I am on the side that understands, and the other party is on the shallow side,' I believe that attitude is also off the mark from the essence of faith and thought. Pride is one of the most typical forms of human spinal-reflex mechanicality, both in faith and in thought. Therefore, when criticizing the roughness of etymological interpretation or terminology, it is necessary to inspect the pride, the impulse to correct, and the sense of superiority of the critic. I think this is a risk to be wary of when making excessive generalizations.

Knowledge should not be used to place oneself above others, but to support others, deepen understanding, and serve better. Knowing the original language, being well-versed in doctrine, and being able to spot misuse have value. However, the moment that knowledge takes on an air of 'therefore I am above, and you are below,' the knowledge itself becomes a tool for judging people rather than a tool for illuminating them.

The same danger appears in legalistic Christians. They know the Bible well. They are well-versed in doctrine. They can spot heresy and misunderstandings. They are familiar with the original languages. That knowledge itself has value. However, if it is directed toward looking down on others, it becomes the very 'missing the mark' that this paper is addressing.

If the correction of terminology is not for the purpose of bringing the reader closer to the truth or the depths of the text, but only for the sake of showing off that one has found a misuse, then it strays from the understanding of thought and faith. The attitude of condemning a shorthand expression as if one has finally caught the devil by the head has the danger of making the correction itself the goal without looking at the actual circulation and function of the words.

5. The range of twilight

The example the author uses is 'tasogare' (twilight).

The phrase 'The twilight is beautiful today' contains the beauty of the evening light, the color of the sky, and the blurring of the outlines of people and the world.

'Tasogare' is explained as being associated with 'who is that?' (tare so kare) in ancient times, coming from the feeling of asking 'Who is he?' when it becomes difficult to distinguish a person's figure at dusk [4]. Modern 'twilight' signifies the time when outlines fade, the end of life, the sense of decline of an era, and even a quiet loneliness.

Knowing the etymology exists to increase the depth of the word. 'Sin = missing the mark' is the same. If used as a complete explanation of doctrine, it needs supplementation. If used as a prayer inspired by etymology, it leaves in the heart the feeling of straying from God.

Pop songs, haiku, prayers, sermons, and meditations do not live by dictionary definitions alone. They reach people through the resonance, margins, memories, and associations of words. 'Missing the mark' works in those margins. It is dangerous if treated as a word that lightens sin. It works deeply if treated as a word that recalls the pain of straying from God.

6. The ignorance of the corrector

This structure also appears in the world of philosophy. For example, the argument that 'knowledge of ignorance' should be rephrased as 'awareness of not knowing.'

The expression 'knowledge of ignorance' has ambiguity if viewed strictly. The phrasing 'knowing one's ignorance' makes it difficult to tell whether one knows or does not know. If one were to explain the Socratic core, it would be clearer to say 'an attitude of not assuming that one knows what one does not know,' and the phrasing 'awareness of not knowing' has a refined power. In Plato's 'Apology of Socrates,' Socrates speaks to the effect that he is slightly wiser than others in that he is aware of his own lack of knowledge [7].

Up to this point, it is acceptable to concede. 'Knowledge of ignorance' is not a precise translation that renders the original text verbatim. It is an abbreviated form. However, being an abbreviated form is different from being condemned as a mistranslation.

In Greek, there is the phrase 'ἕν οἶδα, ὅτι οὐδέν οἶδα,' and in Modern Greek, 'ένα ξέρω, ότι δεν ξέρω τίποτα,' which circulate as expressions attributed to Socrates [8][9]. This is less a verbatim quotation from Plato's text and more a later formulation that summarizes the Socratic attitude.

Therefore, 'knowledge of ignorance' is imprecise in terms of fidelity to the original text. However, it possesses the power to be understood globally as a paradoxical slogan. Even though there are similar formulations close to the Greek-speaking world, the attitude of condemning it as a translation error unique to Japanese overlooks the function of abbreviated expressions.

What I find uncomfortable is the situation where the conversation ends with just the correction, and the essential Socratic attitude is never discussed. The person who succeeds in correcting the wording has not examined their own impulse to correct. That, in itself, is the knowledge of ignorance.

Why do you want to correct only that phrase? Why do you ignore countless other examples and pour your energy into this one? Does that correction bring people closer to the essence of the thought? Or are you taking away the other person's entrance and using only your own exit as the answer?

Before people correct external objects, they need to observe their own reactions, their own pleasure, and their own sense of superiority. If we value 'awareness of ignorance,' then we also need awareness of ignorance in our own corrections.

7. The World of Nemawashi

In philosophical examples, there is 'nemawashi' (laying the groundwork). A certain philosopher says that 'nemawashi' has a negative nuance. Indeed, in the arena of philosophical public discourse, it can appear that way. When considering Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, or Seiji Takeda, the issues at stake are publicness, deliberation, recognition, freedom, subjectivity, and consensus building.

If we look for a word close to this in the context of Rousseau, there is the French word 'brigue.' It refers to factional maneuvering, backroom dealings, and efforts to push through special interests, and it appears in the plural as 'brigues.' A related term is 'associations partielles,' or partial associations. When partial groups push through their own interests against the public will of the whole, it distorts the general will [6].

I understand why 'nemawashi' in this context looks negative. From the ideal of showing reasons in a public space and freely deliberating with one another, actions that solidify conclusions in advance undermine transparency. If a partial group pushes through special interests while pretending to represent the entire public, it becomes a target for criticism.

However, if we confine the entirety of the Japanese word 'nemawashi' to that meaning, the language of the actual field disappears. 'Nemawashi' originally refers to the work of preparing the area around the roots before transplanting a plant to make it easier for it to take root after transplanting, and from there, it is said to have come to mean explaining things to the parties involved and obtaining their understanding before carrying out an action [5].

At my company, 'nemawashi' is a word of wisdom. We hear the concerns of the parties involved in advance. We do not cause them sudden embarrassment in a meeting. We grasp the background of opposing opinions. We build conviction not only among decision-makers but also among practitioners. Before bringing conflict to the surface, we cultivate the soil for consensus building.

Nemawashi is used as a technique to manipulate people. It is also used as a preparation to avoid hurting people. The former is a vice, and the latter is wisdom. In the world of philosophers, it looks like opaque prior adjustment, and in the field of a company, it looks like consideration for creating implementable consensus. Both perceptions are valid.

That is precisely why the attitude of lumping 'nemawashi' together as 'negative' is strange. Words live in laboratories, companies, factories, homes, churches, hospital rooms, and in the field.

At the same time, translating the Rousseauian context of 'brigue'/'brigues' as 'nemawashi' is also weak. 'Brigue' has a bad ring to it, implying factional maneuvering, backroom dealings, and movements to push through special interests. The Japanese word 'nemawashi' also has a bad ring of opaque prior adjustment, but it also retains the good meaning of listening to the concerns of those involved and preparing the soil for consensus building. Therefore, 'nemawashi' tends to round off the negative implications of 'brigue'/'brigues.' Here, it is necessary to think of the Japanese word 'nemawashi' itself and 'nemawashi' as a translation in the Rousseauian context separately.

However, at the same time, there is a track record of usage here, just as there is with 'knowledge of ignorance.' So, can we not calculate the ratio of the validity of these words quantitatively, even if it is just an estimate?

8. Validity Ratio

Therefore, in this paper, I will look at the validity of words using four scales based on the examples so far.

First is historical meaning. We look at what the word referred to in the past. This is a scale for confirming the original language, etymology, old examples, and the context of the original text. For the Bible, this includes Hebrew, Greek, usage at the time, and translation history. For philosophy, this includes the original language, the author's context, and the historical background.

Second is current meaning. We look at what meaning the word is currently perceived to have. Even if the old meaning is correct, if modern readers perceive it with a different meaning, we must look at that discrepancy. Conversely, if we judge a word that has become fully established as a modern term solely by its old meaning, we will overlook its current living usage.

Third is validity in circulation. This examines the extent to which a meaning spreads and the contexts in which it functions. It is a scale to confirm whether it is used only by experts, in faith education, in sermons and meditations, if it is understood by general readers, or if it functions in institutional and practical settings. Even if an expression is weak as a strict definition, if many people use it as an entry point for understanding, its circulation has meaning.

Fourth is creative interpretation. This examines what metaphors, prayers, education, entry points for thought, institutional understanding, understanding of those involved, and social designs are created, inspired by etymology or older meanings. Words do not live solely by dictionary definitions. Through words, people recall their own states, re-examine the world, and reorganize their relationships with others. Even if an expression only captures a part of the etymological meaning, it can work deeply in settings of prayer, meditation, education, and self-understanding.

These four scales cannot be replaced by one another. Even if the historical meaning is strong, the current definition may invite misunderstanding. Even if it is understood as a current definition, it may be rough as an interpretation of the original text. Even if validity in circulation is high, it may be insufficient as a complete definition. Even if it is rich as a creative interpretation, it may require supplementation in explanations of doctrine or institutions.

The original language is an important witness. However, it is not an absolute authority that judges all current usage from above. The original language illuminates the origin of words and old contexts. The current definition illuminates the understanding of those who hear the word now. Validity in circulation illuminates how much the word functions in which communities. Creative interpretation illuminates how much the word opens up human prayer, thought, education, and institutional understanding.

Let us apply these four scales to the cases handled in this paper.

8-1. Explaining sin as 'missing the mark'

The answer in this paper is that if 'sin = missing the mark' is used to replace sin throughout the entire Bible, it is around 30%, but if used as an explanatory term with supplementary notes, the overall average is around 70%.

Viewed as a complete definition, sin includes rebellion against God, broken relationships, responsibility, judgment, forgiveness, and repentance. Therefore, 'sin = missing the mark' alone is narrow. However, what this paper evaluates is not replacing sin entirely, but the usage of the explanation 'missing the mark'.

Explaining sin as 'missing the mark' is seen as having a validity of around 65% for historical meaning, around 65% for current definition, around 80% for validity in circulation, around 70% for creative interpretation, and an overall average of around 70%.

On the original language side, there is a semantic range of 'to miss,' 'to err,' and 'to commit sin,' and as seen in Chapter 2, there are explanations that correspond to English materials and Greek original language materials. Regarding the spread of its circulation, as an observation rather than a strict statistical value, I estimate it is around 70% when limited to semantic explanation, around 30% to 50% in sermons that deal with sin in general, and drops to about 5% to 15% if sermons that do not make sin a theme are included.

In Romans 3:23, it is said that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God [22]. This feeling of 'falling short' resonates well with the explanation of 'missing the mark.' Even if humans seek righteousness in their own way, they do not reach the glory of God. God's grace receives that lack.

Even if 'missing the mark' were an expression unique to the Japanese-speaking world, its value would not disappear just because of that.

If it can remind people of the pain of straying from God and be used for prayer, meditation, faith education, and as an introduction to the Gospel, it can be evaluated as a creative interpretation.

Since there are explanations that correspond to English materials and Greek original language materials in this instance, the validity in circulation also increases. Therefore, a ratio of around 70% is not grounds for discontinuing its use.

8-2. Twilight / Tasogare

The 'twilight' evaluated here is not the old meaning of 'who is that person,' but the usage as a modern word representing dusk, the time when outlines become thin, the end of life, the sense of decline of an era, and quiet loneliness.

I see 'twilight' as having around 85% for historical meaning, around 95% for current definition, around 95% for validity in circulation, around 90% for creative interpretation, and an overall average of around 91%.

Because the etymology and current definition do not conflict and give depth to each other, it has high validity.

8-3. Knowledge of ignorance and awareness of not knowing

'Knowledge of ignorance' is seen as having around 65% for historical meaning, around 80% for current definition, around 92% for validity in circulation, around 90% for creative interpretation, and an overall average of around 82%.

While it is a rough translation as a precise, verbatim rendering of the original text, there is a formulation close to it in Greek, and it is powerful as a paradoxical slogan.

I estimate the validity of a uniform change to 'awareness of ignorance' at around 85% for historical meaning, around 60% for current semantic meaning, around 45% for validity in circulation, around 40% for creative interpretation, and around 58% for the overall average.

While effective in specialized commentaries on the original text, it is easy to lose the paradox, rhythm, and memorability of 'the knowledge of ignorance.' Therefore, in this paper, based on the result of 82% > 58%, I do not recommend a uniform replacement with 'awareness of ignorance'.

8-4. Nemawashi and Translation Terms in the Rousseau Context

Here, I will look separately at the Japanese term 'nemawashi' itself and the use of 'nemawashi' as a translation for 'brigue' / 'brigues' in the context of Rousseau.

I estimate the Japanese term 'nemawashi' itself at around 85% for historical meaning, around 90% for current semantic meaning, around 90% for validity in circulation, around 85% for creative interpretation, and around 88% for the overall average.

'Nemawashi' is a term that expanded its meaning from the historical sense of preparing a plant for transplanting to the act of explaining things to relevant parties and obtaining their understanding before taking action. In modern Japanese, it functions broadly as prior coordination, consensus building, confirming with stakeholders, arranging, aligning, prior explanation, and the act of listening to the concerns of those involved.

On the other hand, I estimate translating 'brigue' / 'brigues' in the Rousseau context as 'nemawashi' at around 50% for historical meaning, around 55% for current semantic meaning, around 75% for validity in circulation, around 70% for creative interpretation, and around 62% to 65% for the overall average.

The validity in circulation referred to here is not the popularity of the Japanese term 'nemawashi' itself. It is the rate at which readers in the field of philosophy grasp it as negative prior coordination when the term 'nemawashi' is used in contexts such as Rousseau, publicness, deliberation, general will, or partial associations. In this sense, 'nemawashi' has a validity in circulation of around 75%.

However, that does not mean it is sufficient as a precise translation. 'Brigue' / 'brigues' refers not merely to prior coordination, but to factional maneuvering, under-the-table influence, and schemes to push through special interests. It carries the implication of the movements of a subgroup that distorts the general will. On the other hand, while 'nemawashi' in Japanese can sound negative in the field of philosophy, it is also used in Japanese as a whole as practical wisdom or consideration. Therefore, it cannot fully convey the implications of factional maneuvering, special interests, and the distortion of the general will.

As an alternative, 'maneuvering,' 'factional work,' or 'under-the-table schemes' are closer translations for 'brigue' / 'brigues.' For 'associations partielles,' 'partial associations' or 'factions' is natural.

In conclusion, while 'nemawashi' is quite well understood in the field of philosophy, I do not recommend it as a translation for 'brigue' / 'brigues' in this paper.

8-5. Reference Cases for Name Changes and Concept Changes

Here, if we look at the paraphrasing of neurodiversity, mental illness names, developmental trait names, and legal/contractual terms as reference cases, we can see that there are different types of word changes. Since these are reference cases for comparison rather than the calculation of ratios in this paper itself, I will only list the conclusions.

1. The validity of re-conceptualizing developmental disabilities or neurodevelopmental disorders through the lens of neurodiversity is around 80% on the overall average. It is not a replacement of diagnostic names, but a framework that views differences in the brain and nerves as human diversity, and it holds power in education, workplace design, self-understanding, and social participation settings.

2. The change from schizophrenia (formerly 'mind-split disease' in Japanese) to the current term is around 92% on the overall average. The old name had a strong, personality-negating tone, and the current name is more appropriate for medicine, notification, psychoeducation, and social rehabilitation.

3. The change from multiple personality to dissociative identity disorder is around 86% on the overall average. It allows for a shift from the dramatic impression of 'having multiple personalities' to an understanding of the pathology as a dissociation of memory, consciousness, and identity.

4. The change from manic-depressive illness to bipolar disorder is around 78% on the overall average. Since 'manic-depressive illness' still retains intuitive explanatory power, it is easier to convey if the old name is included the first time.

5. The change of dividing neurosis into anxiety disorders and related diagnostic names is around 73% on the overall average. It is meaningful as an organization that breaks down an old, large box into current, individual diagnoses.

6. The change from hysteria to conversion disorder or functional neurological symptom disorder is around 84% on the overall average. It avoids the burden of the old name's misogyny and colloquial insults, and makes it easier to express the relationship between the body, nerves, psychology, and stress.

7. The change from mental retardation to intellectual developmental disorder or intellectual disability has an overall average of around 89%. It weakens the fixed connotation of inferiority and allows the focus to shift toward intellectual functioning, adaptive functioning, and supportive environments.

8. The change from gender identity disorder to gender dysphoria or gender incongruence has an overall average of around 80%. It allows the focus to shift from viewing the person themselves as a disorder to the discomfort or inconsistency regarding gender and the relationship with social systems.

9. The change from autism to autism spectrum disorder has an overall average of around 88%. It is easier to grasp as a range of shades, individual differences, sensory characteristics, and developmental traits rather than a single type.

10. The change of including Asperger's syndrome in autism spectrum disorder has an overall average of around 83%. It allows for organization as shades of traits, moving away from rough classifications like high-functioning or low-functioning and personality labeling.

11. The change from developmental disorder to neurodevelopmental disorder has an overall average of around 65%. While there is a foothold in professional classification, "developmental disorder" is easier to understand as a general term, institutional term, and support term.

12. The change from developmental disorder to neurodevelopmental spectrum has an overall average of around 75%. While "developmental disorder" or "neurodevelopmental disorder" is strong in medical and institutional contexts, "neurodevelopmental spectrum" is easier to use for human understanding, education, workplace design, and self-understanding.

13. The change from defect liability to non-conformity to contract has an overall average of around 88%. It is a term that shifts the focus from the connotation of a defect in the object to conformity with the contract content, and "liability for non-conformity to contract" is the standard in current contract practice.

14. The change from the Subcontract Act, formally the "Act against Delay in Payment of Subcontract Proceeds, Etc.," to the "Act on the Prevention of Delay in Payment of Subcontract Proceeds, Etc. to Small and Medium-sized Subcontractors for Manufacturing, Etc.," abbreviated as the "Small and Medium-sized Subcontract Transaction Optimization Act" and commonly known as the "Toriteki-ho," has an overall average of around 62%. According to the Japan Fair Trade Commission, the effective date is January 1, 2026 [23]. While appropriate as an official change, since the circulation of "Toriteki-ho" is still weak, it is better to write it together as "Toriteki-ho (formerly the Act against Delay in Payment of Subcontract Proceeds, Etc.)" or "Small and Medium-sized Subcontract Transaction Optimization Act, commonly known as Toriteki-ho" during the transition period.

8-6. Types of Name Changes

Organizing these, there are at least six types of name changes and conceptual changes.

1. Those where the harm or misunderstanding of the old name is significant and should be strongly changed. Changes from schizophrenia (formerly mental split disease), conversion disorder or functional neurological symptom disorder (formerly hysteria), intellectual developmental disorder or intellectual disability (formerly mental retardation), dissociative identity disorder (formerly multiple personality), and autism spectrum disorder (formerly autism or Asperger's syndrome) are close to this.

2. Those where the old name still has explanatory power, but the new name is superior in professional classification. The transition from manic-depressive illness to bipolar disorder, or from neurosis to individual diagnostic names such as anxiety disorder, falls under this. In this type, it is better to lead to the new name while supplementarily noting the old name.

3. Those where a new framework is more effective for human understanding or social design than diagnostic terms. Rephrasing from developmental disorder to neurodevelopmental spectrum, or re-grasping developmental disorder/neurodevelopmental disorder through neurodiversity, falls under this. This is not merely a name change, but a conceptual change from a deficit model to a diversity model.

4. Those that should transition to a new concept due to legal amendments or institutional changes. Rephrasing from defect liability to non-conformity to contract falls under this. Like the transition from the Subcontract Act to the Toriteki-ho, there are cases where, even if correct as an official change, dual notation is necessary until circulation catches up.

5. Those that are understood in circulation but are difficult to recommend as translations. "Nemawashi" falls under this. In the field of philosophy, "nemawashi" is quite understood as negative prior adjustment. However, in Japanese as a whole, it is also circulated as practical wisdom and consideration. Therefore, it becomes weak as a translation for words that have implications of factional maneuvering, special interests, and distortion of the general will, such as "brigue / brigues." This is not because the value of the word "nemawashi" is low. Rather, precisely because the circulation and breadth of meaning of the word are strong, it is easy to bring in unnecessary implications when corresponding to a specific original language.

6. Those that do not deserve change or a total ban. This applies to cases where one seeks a total replacement or ban on words that function as old meanings, informal expressions, metaphors, or educational entry points, where the harm or misunderstanding is limited and can be sufficiently managed through supplementation. Replacing all instances of "knowledge of ignorance" with "awareness of not knowing," or completely banning the explanation that "sin = missing the mark," falls under this type.

It is not enough to just point out that it is old, rough, or informal. One must look at where the word causes harm, where it still works, and where it should be passed on to a new word.

Even with the same 60% range, the judgment changes between 60% as a metaphorical introductory term and 60% as a precise translation.

I reject "sin = missing the mark" as a complete definition, but I will leave it as a metaphorical introduction with supplementation.

"Nemawashi" is highly evaluated as a practical Japanese term. In the field of philosophy, it is quite understood as negative prior adjustment. However, I do not recommend it as a translation for "brigue / brigues" in this paper.

A ratio is not a figure from which to draw a conclusion in isolation. It must be read in conjunction with the context of its use.

8-7. The Method Recommended by This Paper

Finally, I would like to apply this validity ratio to this paper itself.

What this paper recommends is not a single opinion, but a method for evaluating words.

Instead of immediately judging a word as correct, incorrect, outdated, crude, or dangerous, we should examine it by separating its historical meaning, current definition, validity in circulation, and creative interpretation.

This method itself can be viewed as having approximately 85% avoidance of assertion, 85% caution against generalization, 75% consideration for validity in circulation, 90% consideration for creative interpretation, and an overall average of around 84%.

However, the degree of adoption of this method is still unknown. Explanations that cut through the correctness of a word with a single stroke are short, easy to understand, and easy to spread. On the other hand, the method of looking at things through ratios is time-consuming.

Even so, the more the discussion surrounding language leans solely toward condemnation, correction, replacement, and prohibition, the greater the need for this perspective becomes. This paper is not intended to make one position win, but to present a method for evaluating words on a case-by-case basis.

This ratio is not a perfect statistical value. It is a scale of thought based on public materials, usage examples, definitions, circulation, and the author's observations. That is precisely why it is used for discrimination rather than assertion.

The main points of this paper can be summarized as follows:

• 'Sin = missing the mark' is too narrow to fully capture the sin that the entire Bible speaks of.

• Nevertheless, 'missing the mark' has a foothold in the original language, and there are explanations that correspond to both English materials and Greek-language native materials.

• 'Missing the mark' is not a complete definition, but a term used as an introduction to prayer, meditation, the Gospel, and faith education.

• What criticism should be directed at is the abuse of using 'missing the mark' alone to explain the entirety of sin, not the shorthand expression itself.

• 'Twilight,' 'the wisdom of ignorance,' and 'nemawashi' (laying the groundwork) are auxiliary lines for considering the gaps between historical meaning, current definition, validity in circulation, and creative interpretation.

• The cases of neurodiversity, disease names, developmental trait names, and legal/contractual terms show that there are multiple patterns in the transition of names and concepts.

• We must distinguish between words that should be strongly replaced, words that should be listed together, words that should be used differently depending on the situation, words that should be treated as conceptual changes, words that are understood in circulation but are difficult to recommend as translations, and words that do not deserve change or total prohibition.

• What this paper recommends is not to judge words by a single standard of correctness, but to view their validity in each situation through a ratio.

[Source]

[1] Definition of the Greek word hamartanō. Confirmation of the semantic range of missing, erring, and committing sin.
https://biblehub.com/greek/264.htm

[2] Semantic range of the Greek word hamartia. Confirmation of the semantic domain related to sin, failure, fault, and missing the mark.
https://biblehub.com/greek/266.htm

[3] Semantic range of the Hebrew word ḥāṭāʼ. Confirmation of the semantic domain related to committing sin, missing, and erring.
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/2398.htm

[4] Etymology of "tasogare" (twilight). Confirmation of the etymological explanation derived from "tare so kare" (who is that).
https://gogen-yurai.jp/tasogare/

[5] Etymology of "nemawashi" (laying the groundwork). Confirmation of the explanation regarding the shift from preparing plants for transplanting to prior coordination and consensus building.
https://gogen-yurai.jp/nemawashi/

[6] Confirmation of brigue, brigues, and associations partielles in Rousseau's "The Social Contract".
https://www.rousseauonline.ch/pdf/rousseauonline-0004.pdf

[7] Confirmation of the attitude of not thinking one knows what one does not know in Plato's "Apology of Socrates".
https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Plat.+Apol.+21d

[8] Explanation of "ἕν οἶδα, ὅτι οὐδέν οἶδα" in the Greek Wiktionary. Confirmation that the meaning indicates "being aware of one's own ignorance."
https://el.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E1%BC%95%CE%BD_%CE%BF%E1%BC%B6%CE%B4%CE%B1,_%E1%BD%85%CF%84%CE%B9_%CE%BF%E1%BD%90%CE%B4%CE%AD%CE%BD_%CE%BF%E1%BC%B6%CE%B4%CE%B1

[9] Explanation of "Εν οίδα ότι ουδέν οίδα" in Greek sources. Confirmation that it is explained as "Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα" in Ancient Greek and "ένα ξέρω, ότι δεν ξέρω τίποτα" in Modern Greek.
https://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%95%CE%BD_%CE%BF%CE%AF%CE%B4%CE%B1_%CF%8C%CF%84%CE%B9_%CE%BF%CF%85%CE%B4%CE%AD%CE%BD_%CE%BF%CE%AF%CE%B4%CE%B1

[10] Confirmation of the meaning of hamartia in the Blue Letter Bible.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g266/bes/tr/

[11] Sermon and commentary examples of "sin as missing the mark" at the Church of the Great God.
https://www.cgg.org/index.cfm/library/topic/id/3461/sin-as-missing-mark.htm

[12] Sermon examples of "Hitting the Mark" at the Church of the Great God.
https://www.cgg.org/index.cfm/library/sermon/id/4938/hitting-mark.htm

[13] Meditation materials on "Missing the Mark" at the Center for Action and Contemplation.
https://cac.org/daily-meditations/missing-the-mark/

[14] Commentary on hamartia / missing the mark at Grace to Gospel.
https://gracetogospel.com/hamartia/

[15] Commentary on "The True Nature of Sin: Missing the Mark" at the Hungry Hearts Collective.
https://hungryheartscollective.com/2024/12/18/the-true-nature-of-sin-missing-the-mark-and-why-it-matters/

[16] Sermon and faith education examples of "Missing the Mark" at Grace Asian Church.
https://www.graceasian.org/annoucements/2026/5/missingthemark

[17] Confirmation of the explanation in Greek Orthodox sources that in Orthodox theology, amartia retains its Ancient Greek meaning and signifies astochia (missing the target).
https://www.orthodoxtimes.gr/peri-amartias-kai-i-dynami-tis-metanoias/

[18] Explanation of amartia / astochia in Greek sources. Confirmation of the explanation "Amartia means astochia" and "amartano means astocho."
https://oodegr.com/oode/psyxotherap/amartia1.htm

[19] Confirmation of the explanation "Amartano means missing the target" in Greek theological terminology sources.
https://sites.google.com/view/theologia/%CE%B1%CF%81%CF%87%CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%B7-%CF%83%CE%B5%CE%BB%CE%B9%CE%B4%CE%B1/%CE%B1/%CE%B1%CE%BC%CE%B1%CF%81%CF%84%CE%B9%CE%B1

[20] Genesis 3:4-6. The scene where humans doubt God's word and place their own judgment above God's.
https://www.bible.com/ja/bible/81/GEN.3.JA1955

[21] Luke 15. The parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the prodigal son.
https://www.bible.com/ja/bible/81/LUK.15.JA1955

[22] Romans 3:23. The passage stating that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
https://www.bible.com/ja/bible/81/ROM.3.JA1955

[23] Japan Fair Trade Commission 'Subcontract Act'. Confirmation of the legal name, abbreviation, common name, and effective date following the amendment of the Act against Delay in Payment of Subcontract Proceeds, etc. to Subcontractors.
https://www.jftc.go.jp/toriteki/

#Christianity
#Bible
#Sin
#MissingTheMark
#OriginalLanguage
#Etymology
#Faith
#Theology
#Philosophy
#SocraticIgnorance
#Socrates
#Rousseau
#LayingTheGroundwork
#Language
#ContextualUnderstanding