Sin vs. Evil: Why the Distinction Matters in a World on Fire

A biblical deep dive into Hebrew language, modern media, and the moral clarity we desperately need when interpreting war, suffering, and propaganda.

Jun 17, 2025

The current headlines have pushed me into a word study deep dive around the words “sin” and “evil” in the Tanakh (the Jewish word for the Old Testament).

In this climate, we have to stop being lazy with language. It doesn’t fit nicely into a soundbite or a headline I realize, but the distinction between sin & evil is important.

I’ve headed to the Old Testament to figure it out.*

Three words for sin in Hebrew: Offense, Iniquity, Transgression

Each one gets deeper in meaning and impact on the human heart.

חַטָּאת (chattat) – Sin / offense / to miss the mark

Root: chata (חָטָא) – to miss, to go wrong
Usage: This is the most common word for sin in the OT.
Idea: It’s like an archer missing the target. You aimed for good but fell short.
Example:

“If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin (chattat) is crouching at the door…” (Genesis 4:7)

עָווֹן (avon) – Iniquity / guilt / perversion

Idea: This is deeper than missing the mark - it's a twisting of what is right.
Often implies a pattern of sin or habitual rebellion.
Example:

“He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities (avon)...” (Isaiah 53:5)

פֶּשַׁע (pesha) – Transgression / rebellion

Idea: Deliberate breach of trust or rebellion against authority.
This is willful sin, not accidental or weak.
Example:

“Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity and cleanse me from my transgression (pesha).” (Psalm 51:2)

Three words for evil in Hebrew: Destruction, Wickedness, Malice

Notice the words that depict evil get bigger and more consequential. It often denotes systems, spirits, events, regimes, and societies.

רַע (ra) – Evil / bad / destructive

Root: Used for moral evil, harm, calamity.
Can describe people, actions, spirits, or even events (context matters).
Example:

“The intention of man’s heart is evil (ra) from his youth.” (Genesis 8:21)
“Woe to those who call evil (ra) good and good evil...” (Isaiah 5:20)

רֶשַׁע (resha) – Wickedness / lawlessness

Often describes systemic, hardened evil- especially of rulers, regimes, or societies.
Associated with injustice, oppression, and those bent on doing harm.
Example:

“The wicked (rasha) plots against the righteous and gnashes his teeth at him.” (Psalm 37:12)

זִדּוֹן (zidon) – Arrogant pride / presumptuous evil

This is evil rooted in arrogance and defiance, not just action but attitude.
Example:

Used in Deut. 17:12 about the “presumptuous man” who refuses to heed God.

Sin is a spectrum. Evil is an allegiance.

Jump into the comments section of any clickbait headline about the Middle East, and hold onto your hats- sparks fly. Before I make my main argument, I want to establish this: As someone coming from a Biblical worldview, I believe the following:

All humans on Earth sin.
Evil is a real consequence of a fallen world.
God’s arm is not too short to save even the most far gone person, IF they turn in repentance.
The position of the heart matters more than anything else. A hardened heart cannot access the mercy of God, no matter how pious. And alternatively, a heart of a deeply sinful man/woman that is repentant will meet God’s grace.
God’s promises do not die, even when it seems like all hope is lost. Because they are held by Him, not man.
The pain and suffering in the Middle East will not fully end until Jesus returns (there may be temporary peace yes, but the ultimate resolution lies in His return to Jerusalem).

Given all that, I want to break down a common problem in comment sections and social media when it comes to discussing the issues in the Middle East.

Let’s start with the mainstream media. Every platform has an agenda. And it starts with CLICKS. They want people to click and read. There may also be political agenda or bias, but that’s the first goal of every piece of online content put out by the mainstream media.

Let’s take a look.

95% of people won’t read the article. That means their news source is derived from the headline alone. And if you read the headline quickly you surmise:

Israel troops killed 34 Palestinians trying to get food.

Let’s look at the word definitions of sin and evil above. What would you call this kind of behavior (if true)? A bunch of authoritative military men and women, killing women and children who are hungry. Definitely evil. Destruction yes. Wickedness yes. Malice yes.

If you read the headline carefully, you realize what the headline actually says:

“Palestinians SAY Israeli troops fire on Gazans TRYING TO REACH GHF aid hub, with 34 REPORTEDLY killed.”

Someone is alleging. Who? The people who are fighting with Israel.
Trying to reach. Means they were on the path to, not at the aid hub itself.
Reportedly killed. Means they don’t know exactly the number.

This changes the story slightly. Were 34 people killed? Probably. Could be 32, could be 36. This is a horrible horrible reality. Doesn’t really matter the exact number because even one life lost is a tragedy.

But we don’t know exactly where this happened. It sounds like they were on their way to the aid station, not exactly at it. Which changes the context.

And we’re getting the story from the people who are most invested in getting the world mad at Israel.

All from a headline. Now, let’s read the article.

I asked ChatGPT, my research assistant in this case, to strip this article down to the verifiable facts… separating what’s actually known from what’s emotionally implied.

Here's what came back:

Confirmed Facts in the Article

These are the things that either:

Are directly observable or sourced from both sides, or
Have been consistently reported from multiple independent channels.

1. People died … probably 34 or more.

Language used: “At least 34 Palestinians were killed Monday…”
Source: Hamas-run Gaza Ministry of Health (not an impartial source, but casualty reporting is often accurate in number, if not narrative).
Later confirms: “Palestinian health officials say scores have been killed since the GHF sites opened.”

Takeaway: High death toll is very likely real. Exact number may vary. Horrific either way.

2. The shootings happened near the food distribution centers, not at them.

Quote: “New shootings near food distribution centers…”
Additional quote: “The traffic circle, hundreds of yards from the GHF center…”

Takeaway: This changes the moral framing. If the shootings happened away from the designated food access zones… especially in high-tension military-controlled areas… the context is significantly different than if soldiers were mowing people down at a food truck.

3. Crowd control measures were involved.

Quote: “Israeli troops opened fire… in an attempt to control the crowds.”
IDF’s pattern in past incidents: “Fired warning shots at what it called suspect individuals approaching their positions.”

Takeaway: Suggests this was not a targeted attack, but part of chaotic crowd control, possibly involving misidentification or overreaction.

4. There are designated safe routes, but people often bypass them.

“Military has designated specific routes… GHF has warned that leaving the roads is dangerous, but many do.”

Takeaway: Israel and GHF created structure for access, but desperation and distrust are driving people off those paths… increasing the likelihood of confusion and unintended conflict.

5. GHF is controversial and run by American contractors.

“Private, well-armed American security contractors.”
GHF was launched in mid-May, not a long-standing or trusted NGO.
UN agencies reject GHF’s model, accusing Israel of using aid as a weapon.
Israel & U.S. defend it, claiming it prevents Hamas from stealing aid.

Takeaway: There is high political tension surrounding the aid system itself, but this doesn’t automatically mean it's malicious… just untrusted.

6. Hamas is the source of most claims.

“The Hamas-run Health Ministry said…”
Witness accounts quoted are from within Gaza… civilians, yes, but under a regime known for media manipulation.

Takeaway: This is important context… these are not independent journalists or neutral observers.

What Is Not Verified

That Israeli soldiers intentionally killed civilians trying to get food.
That the GHF site was the location of the shooting.
That the “lethal distribution system” remark implies malice - this is UNRWA’s interpretation, not direct evidence of intent.

In our outrage, it’s easy to blur the lines between sin & evil.

The article describes a chaotic, tragic scene where desperate civilians are trying to reach food in a war zone. It confirms real deaths, real suffering, and a complex operational breakdown between military zones, aid groups, and humanitarian need.

But it does not confirm that Israeli soldiers maliciously targeted civilians. It confirms conflicting accounts, disputed access points, and a breakdown of trust between all players… in the fog of war.

What Israel is facing is not just war. It’s existential. They are surrounded by enemies who don’t just want land… they want Israel erased. That context matters when assessing actions taken in high-pressure, life-or-death zones.

Did individual people (on both sides) sin in that moment? Absolutely without question. Offense, iniquity, transgression? I’m not sure. God alone knows the heart of each individual at that scene.

But now that we’ve taken a closer look, the conclusion of Israel’s allegiance to evil is not justified.

Could Israel harbor elements that drift toward systemic injustice or arrogant presumption? Absolutely. The prophets warned as much. But does that equate to an institutional allegiance to destruction? I don’t believe the facts support that conclusion.

We did this with just ONE article from a news source that’s not even as biased as some of the others. Imagine the narratives that are being shaped when you multiple this by thousands of articles, clickbait headlines, fake videos, propaganda, and information warfare.

So I go back to the Hebrew definitions of evil, and I ask myself… which regime (the Iranian regime & the Hamas organization) or the Israeli government, has allegiance to darkness?

Israel, for all its flaws, is not launching campaigns to wipe other nations off the map. They are not strapping bombs to children. They are not building terror tunnels under hospitals. These are not semantics… they are moral distinctions.

If I can gather the verifiable facts about the actions of the Israeli government, and the actions of Hamas and the Iranian regime (NOT the Iranian people or Palestinian civilians), is there a clear display of evil on one side or the other?

Who is aligned with destruction and wickedness? Who is calling for the annihilation of people groups?

That’s the question I want you to ask yourself today. Honestly. Do the research. We all have ChatGPT at our fingertips.

This is not about letting Israel “off the hook.” It’s about rightly dividing truth from assumption, the way the Bible commands us to do. There is a difference between being flawed and sinful and being aligned with evil.

Just as God rebuked and judged Israel repeatedly in the Tanakh, we too should expect nations… even those with biblical significance…. to fall short. But conflating their sins with systemic, hardened evil is spiritually dangerous.

Some important final thoughts.

It’s important not to minimize suffering of many people, on both sides.
I’m challenging the moral leap from a tragedy that was reported to allegiance to evil.
In the Bible, God judges Israel harshly sometimes, even though they are in covenant. We’re not letting “Israel off the hook” by acknowledging nuance.
I’m trying to bring discernment. I’m NOT an expert in military policy.
My goal is to try to create space between reading/watching and reacting.

*This article was written with the help of ChatGPT, specifically with the Hebrew word studies, and some of the article analysis. AI is not the moral high ground or infallible. This was my thought piece, aided by assistance from Chat. I did a lot of back and forth before writing this.