I could be guilty of messing with semantics here, but this is an example of what I'm asserting:
Perhaps another way to put it is that sin is a category of behavior that is mostly a subset of what is wrong, because many things are wrong that aren't sinful, given that we don't turn our back on God when we behave in those ways.
- Most everything can be defined as either being right or wrong.
- It is not right to break the law.
- It's wrong to break the law.
- Engaging in polygamy is breaking the law.
- Therefore, polygamy is wrong.
- However, it has not been defined by God as sinful.
- Therefore, polygamy is not sinful.
I would therefore rest easy in comforting ourselves with the knowledge that sometimes, given the nuanced complexity of life's choices, the better choice will involve simultaneously doing something that is wrong but that is not sinful.
Some governments place restrictions on whether or not you can own a Bible. In this case I believe you are asserting that it would be wrong to own a Bible but not a sin? To say something is wrong is to say that it is the wrong decision. In other words, if it is between God's law and man's law, God's law will be the only right decision and therefore not wrong or sinful. While Jesus commanded Christians to obey local law, the governing law of countries, states, and cities only has authority up until it contradicts God's law. Therefore when local authority contradicts the law of God, it becomes wrong and sinful to follow that law. Right and wrong can only coincide with God's definition of right and wrong.