Drew -
I’m not sure of your logic, “Definitions can be a cop-out, a way of oversimplifying something?†(emphasis mine) I think being vague and not defining the manner in which one uses words could be classified as more of a cop-out than in doing so. But then, that’s just me.
We each have our opinions. My point was that the world is complex and sometimes does not submit to neat, terse definitions. It is the easy path to say "sin is doing something that is explicitly prohibited in some 'rule' from the Bible". But I suggest that reality is not so simple.
For the sake dialog I will agree to that with one addition, “any activity that (an individual) works against that unfolding project. . . “
Ok - I like your addition.
Having said that, here is my (limited knowledge) definition of sin that I go by: “Any action (or lack of) that a person takes which is in direct contrast to what God has revealed to him or her.â€
I also believe there are several means in which the revelation of God (to include His plan, purpose, and will) may come to an individual (i.e. the bible, intimate prayer, others, and creation itself to name a few). Nonetheless, it becomes a personal revelation, a personal knowledge. And never will any such ‘revelation’ go against who He has revealed Himself to be as declared in His written word.
I am, frankly, suspicious of this kind of argument. You do realize, I trust, that someone can say "
Look, I have never been 'told' by God that smoking is sin, and since its not prohibited in the Bible, it is not sin for me." I confess that I am deeply suspicious about the "personal" revelations line of thinking. For one thing, the Bible clearly presents a "communal" model for Christian living and we, in the 21st century west, are heirs to enlightenment individualism. I think we need to return to a more community-oriented model for "doing Christianity".
You can use this "personal revelation" argument to effectively
side-step having to deal with the very solid arguments against smoking. As I said above, anybody can claim any personal revelation. But I suggest the path of responsibility is to face the cold hard facts:
(1) Smoking kills and wreaks suffering;
(2) God is working against death and suffering;
(3) To smoke is to therefore work against God - clearly this must be sin.
By using the "personal revelation" line, you can avoid having to engage with what I think are solid Biblical and scientific "facts".
If it were possible for our physical (decaying, earthly) bodies to be restored to its’ “Edenic state, or something similar†(and by ‘Edenic’ I assume you mean as in the Garden of Eden) then I could see myself on board with you (based on your definition of sin). Yet we know that is not possible; hence a new body we look forward to.
I think you might wish to re-consider the nature of the kingdom of God. Despite the frankly heretical views of many here,
the kingdom is already underway. And while the great consummation remains in the future, God is
already accomplishing things related to Edenic restoration. Look at medicine - great strides have been accomplished at healing the human body. This is not something
other than kingdom work - it
is kingdom work. The medical community, whether it realizes it or not, is doing "kingdom of God" work.
I must repeat: the fact that smoking is not explicitly identified as sin in the Bible is hardly grounds for thinking its ok. That view reflects an approach that sees the Bible as a kind of "instruction manual". It is not primarly that at all.
It is instead the unfolding narrative of a God ar work in the world to restore and heal it. If we view Bible this way, it is no great leap to conclude that any activity that is anti-life is anti-healing is, yes, sin.
And smoking is
always these things - no exceptions.