“Everything is permissible”–but not everything is beneficial. “Everything is permissible”–but not everything is constructive. (1 Corinthians 10:23)

Someone disliked my usage of this verse so I thought I’d explain it. I could be horribly wrong about all this but I do think the bible allows the classic question of “Does that mean I could kill someone and get to heaven” to answer in the positive. I do think answers like “Yeah but you have to be truly repentant” are not good enough whilst I do think that if a Christian continues to murder that is a sign that he knows nothing of Jesus (and probably won’t be in heaven). Here it is:

My understanding is that Paul, throughout his writings and most clearly seen in Romans. Is attempting to do 3 different things. 1) Explain the extent to which Sin is involved with us, 2) Explain the hopelessness trying to do things about sin 3) Explain the fullness with which Jesus’ death has dealt with sin and 4) Explain what living in Grace is actually like.

(Then James goes further I think and says that 4 is a good indicator if someone has understood 3, and so we have “justification by faith alone”, whilst also having “faith without works is dead”)

I see the end of romans 5 and beginning of Romans 6 a perfect example of this:

20The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, 21so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

1What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

The beauty of his argument is that when asked “Should we carry on sinning to make God look better”. He doesn’t reply, no because you need to be truly sorry to be forgiven or anything like that. He is just like “No! Thats obviously ridiculous!”

I’ve always likened a sinner to like being someone who is starving and hungry but doesn’t understand how to handle the situation. God is offering us food, some of us take it and some of us are anorexic. But if you’re happily eating the food why on earth would you want to go back to starving yourself?

And the Bible is very clear that some things are sin no matter how you try to explain it away.

I’m not trying to explain away sin. For example Jesus equates lust with adultery and the bible says adultery is worthy of death. Now I don’t know how pure your mind is, but I have met many married men who have looked at pornography during their marriage at least once, although even that doesn’t describe what that verse is trying to do because pornography is just an action. You have have lustful thoughts then any defender of justice OUGHT to stone you. That is just how the way the world is organised.

The thing that I think is dangerous, is to forget that and instead suggest “The wages of sin are to be apologetic”. They are not the wages of sin are death, no amount of repenting will change that.

God’s grace does not give us a license to sin

What God’s grace does does is wipes away our sin so that we literally are no longer seen as having sinned. And that happened all at the cross.

What I think Paul is saying (In the all things are permissible passage and in the romans passage). Is not telling you to actually go ahead and do the sin. But is trying to explain the spirit in which Christians are supposed to live their lives.

Put another way – your comment leads to a once-saved-always-saved-no-matter-what philosophy. And that will only lead a person to eventually reject God since “God already forgave me”.

If you know Jesus, why would you reject him? (Also whilst I do not agree with many parts of that quotation. If it were true what would be the problem with a “philosophy” that allows people to reject God since “God already forgave them”? Are you referring to heaven and hell here?)


Put Simply what seems to be happening is this: Brice seems to be saying:
Because I am a Christian, I must not have sex before marriage
This I think is fine for Brice personally. If it helps him to not have sex. However, I don’t think it is entirely true and for that reasons 1) I think when temptation gets bigger Satan can use this lie against you and 2) It will be ineffectual at talking to the girlfriend.

Instead I think it is important to ask the question “Why does the bible talk about sex being between 2 people”? The Goal is to be in a position where you can say
Because I am a Christian, I do not have to have sex before marriage?

Jesus does not tell us not to sin, he enables us not to sin. (Cause actually deep down no one really wants to sin they just don’t know how to deal with it http://www.biblegateway.com/pa…)

Don’t touch the Fruit

Genesis 3:2-3

The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’

One cool point with this that my study bible came up with, she had already by this point added to God’s command. God told her not to eat the fruit, she added that she is not allowed to touch it. The serpent attempted to add LOADS to God’s command (not eat any fruit) and she rejected that, but the spirit of what the serpent said still lingered. Adding more to God’s rules wasn’t regarded here as going the extra mile, instead it was the first step on the road to sin.