Tuesday, 30 June 2009
-
Bad Questions, Part I: Can I Do X and Still Be a Christian?
It's no secret - I like questions. Questions are the starting point of a path towards truth and knowledge. Questions and doubts, if addressed properly, have the capability to buttress our faith and knowledge of the world better than pretty much anything else. Fact is that the moment you think you have all the answers, you've just claimed to be God, and as soon as you stop asking questions you've just cut yourself off at the knee: incapable of ever moving on or growing.
That said, there are some questions that I've seen asked a great number of times, and (contrary to what our grade school teachers told us) they are bad questions. This isn't an exhaustive list of bad questions, but these came to mind while I was thinking about writing this post.
So, while questions, in general, are good things, there are exceptions, and these are some of them along with better alternative questions to ask:
Can I do X and still be a Christian?This is one I've seen on Revelife a few times. It doesn't matter what X is--drinking alcohol, sex, gambling, dancing, seeing R-rated movies, eating potato chips, drinking soda, drinking water--the answer is yes.
Yes! You can be a Christian who smokes. You can be a Christian even if you have sex outside of marriage. Yes, you can be a Christian even if you've murdered someone. Paul writes that, "Everything is permissible, but not everything is beneficial." So yes, just because you engage in questionable activity X does not mean you are not a Christian.
That said, let's not forget the second clause of that sentence. "Not everything is beneficial." Just because I can do something does not necessarily mean I should do something. I am perfectly capable of going to the grocery store and stealing someone's baby out of the shopping cart. That doesn't mean it's okay for me to do that or that I should start baby-stealing. Paul is just writing that even if I stole a baby, that would not mean I am not a Christian.
So instead of asking "Can a Christian smoke cigarettes?" ask "Would it be glorifying to God if I were to smoke cigarettes?" (see verse 31). And ask, "Would my smoking cigarettes cause my brothers and sisters in Christ to stumble?" (verse 32). If something is not glorifying to God, then it is in our best interest to not do it. Being a stumbling block to someone else is decidedly not glorifying to God.
When asking whether or not X is glorifying to God, it's always good to turn to scripture first. The Bible has a lot of good stuff in it. However, the Bible is not (neither is it meant to be) a comprehensive rule book that says "Do this in this situation and do that in that one." There are many things (e.g. smoking cigarettes) that aren't explicitly mentioned. In that case, look for similar things that the Bible does talk about. But not matter what, be honest with yourself: does having premarital sex really--and I mean really--bring you closer to God? If it doesn't, then you probably shouldn't do it, but even if you do, that doesn't change your status as "Christian."
Okay...there are a couple exceptions: You can't really be a Christian if you don't believe Jesus Christ died on the Cross to pay for your sins and you can't be a Christian if you deny all authority of Scripture (since that's really the only place we can really learn about the teachings of Jesus). But you can drink, smoke, do drugs, play cards, dance, and even *gasp* vote Democrat and still be a Christian.
How often do you ask yourself, "Can I do X and still be a Christian?"
Post a Comment
- Back to revelife's Revelife Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in revelife's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
















Comments (77)
@LoBornlite@xanga - I wasn't talking about tradition when I said that. It was in reference to your previous statements on reason. I don't confine myself to anything, especially ideas with limited meaning. I understand the used definitions of words. I do not try to drag out their background history to make an invalid agrument a fact. If you looked in the Webster's Dictionary, you would fine the definition I gave you. Not your twisted interpretation of the word and its background history.
@ToxicAddict@xanga - If you looked in the Webster's Dictionary, you would fine the definition I gave you. Not your twisted interpretation of the word and its background history.
I beg your pardon, but my definitions are main stream religion and philosophy. They only seem twisted because you have severely limited yourself. Dictionaries are great but they are very basic.