There are different ideas. In the OT, sin was seen as a violation of purity rules, though the prophets had more of the OP's orientation.
In the Gospels, Jesus talks a lot about forgiveness of sins, but never accuses anyone of sin or really talks about it very concretely. He talks about judgement based on failure to make a different for people, or rejecting Jesus' message. He also never calls anyone either holy or pure, or sets that up as an ideal.
In the letters, e.g. Paul's, there's more emphasis on sin, particularly sexual sin. Paul also sees purity as an ideal.
Traditional Biblical exegesis doesn't acknowledge that there can be differences among Biblical writers, but just merges their messages. So Paul's emphasis on sin and purity is controlling, and the fact that Jesus doesn't talk about it doesn't matter. That's not an approach I agree with. Paul accomplished lots of things. We owe him a lot. But I recommend Jesus' view where doing the right thing is more important that violating purity laws.
In the Gospels, Jesus talks a lot about forgiveness of sins, but never accuses anyone of sin or really talks about it very concretely. He talks about judgement based on failure to make a different for people, or rejecting Jesus' message. He also never calls anyone either holy or pure, or sets that up as an ideal.
In the letters, e.g. Paul's, there's more emphasis on sin, particularly sexual sin. Paul also sees purity as an ideal.
Traditional Biblical exegesis doesn't acknowledge that there can be differences among Biblical writers, but just merges their messages. So Paul's emphasis on sin and purity is controlling, and the fact that Jesus doesn't talk about it doesn't matter. That's not an approach I agree with. Paul accomplished lots of things. We owe him a lot. But I recommend Jesus' view where doing the right thing is more important that violating purity laws.
Upvote
0