yes.
I think the line is crossed (or not) depending on the intent... and the means used to do it.
such that going to war to get the barb city with the nice reagant in its BFC will surely be greedy.
If you attack it to eliminate a potential source of great problem your ways, it might be a different matter.
If you just build monuments and carnivals to get more culture and pop the reagent in your border it mmight not be greed ; only planing and strategical reasoning.
greed, IMO would be the unneeded action going to fight just to get one more city and not because you really feel threatened.
EDIT: regarding counselor :
IMO you have multiple ways of playing him :
Remember : the councilor is councilor for the mana shpere (here Mind) and not councilor for the God of the sphere (here Mammon).
(it is a simili-magocracy where the councilors are aspected through their mastery or representativity of the
Mana Shpere (here mind mana)... and not a theocracy-council where the councilor would represent their gods/beliefs (here mamon/ greed))
IMO in most cases, it is easier for good/neutral Gods to have their councilor think/act in parallel ways : as the god have not fallen, they are close to the aspect of the mana sphere they represent. The god that fell use distorted aspects of the mana sphere they were related to... therefore the councilor for the mana sphere might be more closely related to the mana sphere than to the fallen god.
So the councilor needs not be representative of your God actions/plans. They may oppose it, they may go for it...
-The mind councilor might be a genuine mind mana expert; very clever, almost clairvoyant, almost telepathic.
-It might also be a very uncanny successful trader that seems to always guess the good tricks... and he would be the mind councilor because there are no master of mind mana and his understanding of human/humanoid mind makes him the best representant.
-He can be a greedy guy, that won the seat buy buying it.... but he should be very clever... (the seat is the seat of mind and not of greed/trade/gold)
then you can play him as :
-either as a (evil) lackey for your God (mage is influenced by the fallen aspect of the god of mind/the merchant is infact member of the secret society of mammon worshipers)
-either as an independant/neutral voice , might be a good guy or not but not due to following mammon.
-he can be the exact counterpart for your god, trying to "redeem" the mana sphere ; this allowing you to play both sides of the coin : the evil mammon-worshipper and the good councilor. (as alignement goes, Mind would be neutral IMO, unless the councilor is greedy per se)
last, IMO, whatever the case, the councilors (save in case of dimensional and maybe a future Os-Gabella), should be loyal to the amurite cause and not to the God.(unless they prefere their own personal cause ... and this cause goes hand in hand with the God. but as their cause is linked to their place in the council, they might not want to put hardships for the amurites; only, maybe, in case of amoral ones, hardships to their fellow councilor position to "earn" more power.)
What could be fun would be to have a good/neutral Mind councilor .... and Mammon tries to make him become greedy (using is overmastery of the mind mana... he could have an easier access to a mind-related councilor to make him "fall"

)