Delineating “sin” from “evil”
My apologies for not posting for a few months. Seminary in addition to counseling classes keep me busy. However, the gap between posts allowed me to think about my views on sin and evil. For some time, I wrestled with popular notions of Satan and the housing of Satan — hell — and came to the conclusion that neither exist. I promise to develop my conclusion in later posts. Suffice it to say, my dismissal of these two concepts has much to do with my view of human beings as “accountable”; that is, having responsibility. Along with that responsibility comes the freedom to choose. As such, the “choice” involves “pursuing” God versus “not pursuing” God. The choice of pursuit explains Jesus noting that while some obey the law (e.g., Torah), Jesus claims “not to know them” (Luke 13:22-27). Past posts cover the concept of “pursuing” God and its necessity. They will be revisited in later posts.
A necessary starting point, however, before discussing the plausibility of Satan and the existence of Hell is the distinction between sin and evil. An obvious assumption is that evil is more problematic than sin. I posit in earlier posts that everyone is inherently sinful, viewing “sin” as limitation rather than transgression. The obvious problem with sin as transgression is the untenability of a “hierarchy of sin.” Google “hierarchy of sin” and you find examples of bloggers wrestling with this issue. A more plausible conceptualization is that of sin as “limitation.” Humans inherently are limited, not equal to God. Humans require food, water, oxygen, sex, safety, stimulating environments — the list is endless — to survive and thrive. We can debate the list; however, what is not debatable is the fact that human beings require elements that — if not found — they die physically or existentially (e.g., removal of meaning; see Revolutionary Road for a movie example). Because of these needs, humans inherently are sinful. The logic is thus: the transgressions identified as “sinful” actually originate from human limitation. If I thirst as a human being long enough, I will be compromised morally to survive. Conversely, Jesus in John 19:28 — “I thirst” — acknowledging his human limitation, does not succumb to it by using his divine power. Maslow captures this concept in his hierarchy of needs, noting how basic human needs for survival outweigh any higher intellectual, social, or ethical needs.
Evil demarcates from sin in terms of prevalence as well as magnitude. Not everyone or everything is evil. Unlike traditional gnostics, I believe that God’s creation is amazing and wonderful (vs. Mitigated Gnosticism). Eschewing objects or material as evil is a start. Put simply, people with piercings, tattoos, scanty clothing, certain food tastes, etc., are not evil. This sounds mundane but groups exist that categorize evil, using the simplest terms and the most convenient of definitions. That is, such groups use terms and definitions to categorize people, marginalizing them in the process. The categories point more to the “sin” or limitation inherent in the “Vice Principal Vernons” of the world than the people being categorized. Remember, the need to categorize originates from a human survival mechanism; as such, it is a sin inherent in our very being. Using the sin as limitation argument generalizes nicely to human thoughts and actions as well.
Coming Next —> What is Evil?
While you are waiting, check out some tunes from Stereogum.com
you should see the stereogum.com mp3 player here if you have flash
Related posts:
- Sin Versus Evil Sin and evil arguably remain the most complex aspects...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Are you new to The Divine Spark? Register and become part of the community. If your a registered member, please Login.
If you enjoyed this post, we invite you to register, leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment