All Evil is Sin ?

Apologies! (I'm glad I ended my post, "I may be wrong" ).

 

That would NOT be my exegesis because...first of all you attempted to (I think that is what you believe you were doing) to exegete a different passage than the two mentioned in the OP:

So why you would attempt to tackle other passages and then ask if that was my exegesis of two different verses is something I don't quite see.

As for offer to exegete the OP passages, well you have turned them down.

But your other passages to raise interesting questions such as the use of anthropic language to describe aspect of God...but that is for another thread I am sure.

Again, all evil is sin but not all sin is evil.

 

Alex, perhaps a "for instance" would help make your statements more understood.
Like maybe an instance in which sin is not considered evil, but is wrong nonetheless.

btw, I'm still pondering your idea that God can act outside of His foreknowledge or omniscience. I may have gotten the point you were making correct, but I'm not sure what to do with it.

 

Great idea!

 

To phrase it "God can act outside of His foreknowledge or omniscience" intimates an image that may not appropriately reflect my point or the construct behind my earlier statements.

It is better stated God is not an agent of foreknowledge and omniscience (or any other attribute). On the other point concerning evil being sin but not all sin being evil, I will devote another post.

 

Okay for you both and others.


A theological definition of evil and sin is first required if any distinction between evil (which I believe is always sin) and sin (which is not by default always necessarily evil).

Does the Bible use them interchangeably without distinction or is there a distinction? I believe there is not just a reasonable one but necessary one.

Sin (chata) means to miss the mark, it is a Hebrew word. It functions as the word and thought that represents anything short of divine righteousness, perfect righteousness, and divine holiness. It is the inclusive term that represents all sub-categories of sin (debauchery [all debauchery is sin but not all sin is debauchery], lewdness [all lewdness is sin but not all sin is lewdness...okay you get the point and see where I am heading with this], gluttony, and so on, with which Evil is a sub-category representing a certain class of sin).

The Bible reveals evil to have originated with Satan in eternity past, hence he is called “the evil one” (ponhros John 17:15). While the Scriptures indicate that Satan’s heart was filled with sin, he isn’t prescribed the adjective of evil until he embraces that sin and engages it in a policy and plan to oppose God (Ezekeil 28, Isaiah 14, see Job 38 for the use of morning star to express Angelic persons).

Evil refers to the policy, plan and actions of Satan in opposing God, His protocol, plan and work. Evil is displayed, knowingly or unknowingly by humans at many times in many ways. From the Garden the plan of God was to eat of any tree in the Garden but not the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Satan’s plan, a plan of evil, was an attempt to capsize God’s plan. The evil was not just in the opposition to God but in the construct of the line of questioning Satan introduced. So in evil you will see reflected a philosophy or a mentality that seeks to subvert the clearly established protocol and plan of God.

Was it merely a reaction by Satan or a deliberation? One that involved the construct of a system that seeks to usurp God? And that, to me and to many theologians is where the distinction between all sin and evil, a particular class of sin, lies.

If I am impatient, I have sinned. If I am impatient and then blame God and campaign to justify my impatience, I am now engaged in a form of evil that opposes God’s plan and seeks to usurp it with my own justifications.

Now, please respect that to truly appreciate this doctrine or any weight of argument that there is a distinction between sin in general and the class of sin called evil, THIS thread nor any responses in the thread will suffice, truly. It requires extensive time and study to draw confident conclusions so in responding please avoid the temptation to point to a million areas I did not address.

I am respecting the request for the distinction and a very brief explanation. My hope is that it will be a springboard for more personal research, discovery and reasonable debate.

 

I look forward to your input, challenges and concurrences, as well as those of others this may provoke. Thanks.

 

So how does God relate to His attributes?
Actually I'm going to post this in the thread we've already started.
Sorry for any confusion.

 

So far I haven't been able to find very much about the distinction between evil and sin.
I did find this article, but it appears to be taking the opposite point of you.
Do you mind reading through it and seeing where you may disagree?
http://www.goodnewsaboutgod.com/studies/spiritual/the_organized_church/evil_sin.htm

 

First I will tell you that Lorraine Day is not a healthy source for consideration regarding medical or theological issues. I encourage you to research those who have observed her and critiqued her work. But a proper response is not ad hominem so I won't stay here, just to note the controversy. Here is her web page and here you will find cultic characteristic trends in her thinking and outright contention with orthodox doctrine. Lorraine Day, M.D. When people make statements like (as Day does on her web page):

Red flags pop up immediately. Most Christians are worshiping the wrong god but she isn't. Warning Will Robinson...Danger...Danger.

So the article itself and the merits of it are what you want a comment on, fair enough.

First she begins the article with this claims about God:

Evil comes from God? Wrong.

Secondly she attempts to exegete and exposit the infamous Is 45:7 verse:

The word here translated into evil is the Hebrew word ra‛ râ‛âh which is translated evil. Unfortunately because evil contextually has a most common definition associated with sin, its secondary and tertiary uses are by-passed with many people and automatically it is assumed a sinful meaning is being communicated.

The word is often translated (I give Day credit here) calamity or trouble and so on. And that is its proper use and proper understanding here. The context is clear, "I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create trouble". The verse itself is in the context of a prophecy for Israel, that God is their King, hence He is the one that determines and brings peace or trouble.

But never minding that the problem with Day is that she takes this singular passage and the English word "evil" here used not even in the context of moral or spiritual evil and decides all EVIL is to be defined as "calamity". Here is what she says:

At least she recognizes that evil and sin are distinguished, unfortunately she concluded rather ignorantly that they "are not in any way related to each other".

Lorraine Day M.D. may indeed have a doctorate in the medical field but her exegetical skills and the techniques she uses it are horrible.

But imagine her saying sin and evil are not related in any way. Is she kidding? Unfortunately, no.

First she picks a passage where the concept of evil in the context of sin isn't even being used. Secondly she decides this verse is the comprehensive definition of evil everywhere else in the Bible. Bad...bad...bad.

This is not to say that every single sentence or thought in her article contains errors. Even the most heretical teacher (I am not saying she is or isn't a heretic I am just making a point with the extreme) says some true things.

But the thesis itself is based on extremely flawed exegesis and frankly I don't believe she demonstrates that she has practically, intellectually or theologically submitted to the teaching and correction of genuine masters of exegesis or Bible instruction.

Even basic hermeneutics that most faithful Bible studiers employ would have steered her from constructing her article as she did not to mention the faulty conclusions.

 

I know absolutely nothing about her. I didn't even know if the writer was a woman since the name can be used by both sexes. I'll take your word about her though.
Your posts about sin and evil did not deal with the texts where sin is not in view, so I wasn't sure how that meaning of evil fit into your views.

It's hard to find material where the distinction between sin and evil is discussed in detail.
None of our systematic theology books cover that topic.
What theologians have you read on this topic?

 

Why take my word? Red her web page. I am confident that you can form an opinion about her without my input based on the fact that you have dogmatic views regarding related issues. I note your trust in me, thank you, but the web page is worth exploring and filled with enough revelations about herself that you can form a position regarding Day.

Actually my posts did deal with it, somewhat. Though not exhaustive they did deal with evil in the context of sin, particularly its origin and the assignment of "the evil one" to Lucifer.

In all fairness you owe a clear objection to any passage I have dealt with so far as well as the obligation to demonstrate from your own thoughts a rebuttal countering my thesis. State what passages are unclear or why you cannot accept this thesis in view of whatever passages you believe support your objections and an explanation as to why.

And even if you don't have objections per Scripture, make clear and distinct what and why you find objectionable in my thesis.

Maybe that isn't something you want to pursue for now, and if so fine. If that is the case tell me and I will no further elaborate in detail about the topic seeing that the development of my arguments aren't appreciated with equal responses and rebuttals.

I found two websites that deal with evil directly or in relationship to Satan and demons (I am not condoning or condemning the sites or their teaching, both are within the realm of orthodox evangelical doctrine, hence I pointed them out because you had not found others).

Survey of Bible Doctrine: Angels, Satan, Demons
Doctrine of Evil

Thanks
Q

 

Alex, I wasn't criticizing your posts thus far on the issue. I currently have no opinion cause I've never read anything on this topic.
I will check out the links you provided when I get a quiet moment.
Thanks for including them.