(Is It Ever Okay to Sin? Post 5) Food for Thought

            You know, sometimes I manage to annoy even myself. I came across an article online that 

detailed a biblical case for telling a lie. I told myself, “You better save this somewhere; this would make 

for an interesting blog post.” Naturally, I don’t do that. Now I can’t find it. That is reason #100,362 I’m 

excited for a new heavenly body when Jesus rolls around. Maybe I’ll remember something then!

            But here it is nonetheless (from memory): the ninth commandment states that we are not to bear 

false witness. To paraphrase and simplify, Christians just say that we are not to lie. But this writer 

brings us back to the language of the actual passage (found in Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5). It 

doesn’t say not to “lie”, but to “not bear false witness”.

            He argues that this passage is speaking from a court perspective. "Bearing false witness" is 

legally inclined, whereas "lie" is more of an everyday term. The passage is speaking as if there is a 

judge (or a mediator) and an accuser (or defendant) present. We are not to lie to these people when we 

speak. In this situation, the mediator and the accuser deserve the truth, therefore we must be honest.

            How does this change whether or not we can sin (specifically lie) in extreme situations? It 

changes things because we can judge whether or not the people we are speaking to deserve the truth. If 

Nazis knocked on my door asked if I was hiding Jews, I could lie to them because they do not deserve 

the truth. They intend to harm. They are being neither just in judgement nor merciful.

            This person balances that illustration with the fact that almost everyone deserves to hear the 

truth, therefore we should always tell the truth to those people. It is only in extreme situations (such as 

war) where we can lie. This sums up his position.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

            I have to admit, the writer was convincing. He got me with the war illustration. How else can 

nations have useful intelligence agencies if they can’t lie to gain information and stay one step ahead of 

other nations? I admit, I do not know. Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a Christian spy/pastor, and he was fine 

with lying to an enemy. If you read his books on theology (try The Cost of Discipleship) and Eric 

Metaxas’ biography on him, you’ll learn that this guy was a strong Christian.

            Going back to the Bible, God never condoned sin (though he blessed some of the sinners in it). 

Therefore He never condoned lying. The author would maneuver around this fact by saying that lying 

to those who do not deserve the truth is not a sin. God doesn’t have to condone something that isn’t 

sinful.

            Again, I am extremely irked that I can’t find the article. You could read it yourself. Anyway, I 

have one main problem with the whole “you can lie (bear false witness) to those who do not deserve 

the truth” position:

            To counter the "Nazis at the door" example, I will use the "Are you a Christian?" situation. Say 

you are at a church with all your close friends and family members. A gunman then comes inside and 

walks to you. He says, "Are you a Christian? If you say yes, everyone here dies. But if you deny your 

God, everyone goes free." There have been countless Christians who have been shot to death by 

answering yes to this question. Mothers and fathers have watched their children get beaten to death. All 

because they refused to deny Jesus.

            Using this logic, however, it is okay to deny Christ because the murderer doesn’t deserve the 

truth. Often these people are terrorists, so they would fall under the category of those who can be 

misled.

            I don’t know about you, but denying our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is never justified. He 

gave you eternal life, but you would trade Him for this short life? It would be okay to deny Christ under 

this position. That's the problem with saying that sin is okay in extreme situations.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

            This debate can get heated, but I don’t think it needs to be. We all can agree that, even if it is 

ever okay to sin (lie), it would be in extreme situations that we will probably never experience 

anyway. Going back to the premise of my position, we can be sure that God won’t tempt us beyond 

what we are able to handle (1 Corinthians 10:13). That is how I take this often philosophical debate and 

make it practical. We can argue over the finer points of scripture, but we can come together and agree 

that in our day-to-day lives, God won’t give us more than we can chew. There is always a way to 

glorify Him in whatever situation we find ourselves.

(Is It Ever Okay to Sin? Post 4) Blessed Sins

            The closest thing to a condoned lie in the Bible is when Rahab told the king of Jericho that she 

did not know where the Israelite spies went. It turns out that they she hid them on her roof beforehand. 

The result of this episode? Rahab and her family ends up getting saved when the Israelites invade 

their city (Jericho). Let’s study this a little more. It's found in Joshua chapters 1, 2, and 6.

            Moses had died (Joshua 1:1). God tells Joshua to move into the land He was going to give them 

(1:2-4). To scout the land in front of them, Joshua sends two spies into the promised land, and 

specifically to the city Jericho (2:1). The king of Jericho learns about this, and tries to find the men (2:2-

3). He specifically goes to Rahab the Harlot and tells her to hand the spies over  (2:3). Rahab lies to 

them (2:4-5). The spies are safe, and promise to spare her and her family (2:14). In chapter six, the 

Israelites conquer Jericho (6:21). Rahab was saved (6:25).

            In Hebrews 11:31, the author writes about Rahab: “By faith the harlot Rahab perished not (was 

saved) with them that believed not (the rest of Jericho’s residents), when she had received the spies with 

peace.”

            People look at these two passages (indeed, any two passages where a sin is committed and good 

follows) and do the following logic*:

1. Someone sins.

2. God later blesses that person.

3. Therefore, God condoned that person's sin (in extreme situations).

           

            What people forget, in this instance and the last one I went over, is that nowhere in the Bible 

is Rahab praised, blessed, or rewarded (etc.) for sinning. The writer of Hebrews doesn’t say, “Rahab is 

awesome because she sinned to save the spies.” No, she was praised for her faith. Look at her 

awesome speech in Joshua 2:9-13. Look at the fear of the Lord and her faith in God. She is being 

commended for that. Her lie was unfortunate, but was not the focus of Hebrews 11:31.

            Are there other instances of people sinning in the Bible and later being blessed? Yes, there is. 

David commits adultery with Bathsheba and murders her husband (2 Samuel 11:2-17). I think we can 

all agree he lived a long and generally happy life. Elisha tells a lie to the Syrians looking to capture him 

(2 Kings 6:13-20). Elisha was one of the great prophets, and he lived a long and wonderful life. But if 

you read the Bible, you will find that nowhere does it condone those sins. The sin never causes the 

blessing. Sin happens, and sometimes amazing things come out of it.

            But nowhere does God permit us to sin. We sin anyway, and in God’s providence He uses it for 

good. But to use the famous words of Paul, “God forbid” us from deliberately sinning so that God’s 

grace and goodness can be made known (Romans 6:1-2).

            To summarize, does God condone sinning if it achieves a higher purpose (saving lives, for 

instance)? My personal answer is no. But again, there are two sides to the issue. Some say that yes, it is 

okay in extreme conditions. I’ll give you some articles for both sides.

            In my next and (most likely) final post on this issue, I’ll go over an interesting position I came 

across.

*For you logicians out there, forgive me if I did something wrong with my example. Anyhoo, the first 

two steps (the premises) were true. But step three (the conclusion) did not follow from the premises. 

It’s wrong because God blesses that person for other reasons (faith, obedience, etc.), not for that sin. It’s 

been awhile since I’ve looked at a logic book, but I think this mistake in general terms is called a non 

sequitur.

P.S. Articles that say sin (specifically lying) can be okay: 

http://www.equip.org/bible_answers/is-it-ever-morally-permissible-to-lie/

http://www.gotquestions.org/right-to-lie.html

Articles that say sin is never okay:

http://bibleq.net/answer/4009/

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=6&article=733

http://www.bibleteacher.org/Lying.htm (this is the best article for this side of the issue)

(Is It Ever Okay to Sin? Post 3) Sin to Save?

            Exodus chapter one details the plight of Joseph’s descendants. There came a time when an 

Egyptian king (Pharaoh) came to power who did not know* of Joseph and what he had done for Egypt 

(verse 8). This king saw the Hebrews as a threat (9). So, naturally, he goes all Hitler on them. He tells 

the Hebrew midwives** to kill the baby boys (16). Because of their fear of God, they did not do it (17). 

Naturally, the Pharaoh learns of this and asks them why they did not obey him (18).

            Here is the rub. Basically, the Hebrew midwives (Shiphrah and Puah) tell him, “The Hebrew 

women have their children too quickly for us to get there in time to kill them” (19). This sounds really 

odd to most, so many assume that this is a lie.

            For the midwives’ obedience and faith, God blesses them by giving them houses and allowing 

the Hebrew nation to grow stronger (20-21).

            People say, “Hey, the midwives lied to save lives, and God blessed them for it! Therefore it is 

okay for us to lie in extreme situations, too.” But hold up a second, tell me where God blesses them for 

lying? Who says they were lying in the first place?

            The Hebrew midwives could have been telling the truth. Unless the Bible tells us they were 

lying explicitly (Peter denying Christ) or indirectly (Rahab the Harlot and the spies), we are to assume 

they were telling the truth. Here are three options:

1. Maybe it is true. Maybe the Hebrew women really did have their children quickly, and were able to 

do something with the baby boys before the midwives got there.

2. Maybe the Hebrew women waited until their children were born before telling the midwives they 

were giving birth. When the midwives came, the baby boys would be long gone.

3. This option is just a twist on the second. The midwives could’ve made an agreement with expectant 

mothers beforehand not to come until well after the women had their children. The baby boys would be 

hidden. This is #2 except “pre-meditated”, with the midwives in league with the Hebrew women to 

save their children.

            Simply put, the midwives were telling Pharaoh the truth. The Hebrew women had their children 

too quickly for the midwives to get there. In their obedience to God, the midwives defied the supreme 

ruler of the land. They are an example to us.

            Now back to the purpose of the post. No, the Bible does not condone sin in this instance, 

because the Hebrew midwives did not sin. Simple as that, really. I'll get into Rahab's sticky situation 

next.

* Some speculate that this Egyptian king was Hyksos. The Hyksos attacked Egypt and ruled it for a 

time. Eventually, the Egyptians overthrew them and rules themselves once again. This makes sense. A 

foreigner would have no clue about Egypt’s history, and therefore no knowledge of Joseph. (If you 

click the link, you will have to scroll down to get to the part where the writer states that the Pharaoh 

most likely was Hyksos. It's a somewhat lengthy article)

** Some speculate that the Hebrew midwives weren’t actually Hebrew, but were midwives to the 

Hebrews (as opposed to Hebrew midwives). This doesn’t change the post, but it is an interesting note.

(Is It Ever Okay to Sin? Post 2) The Premise

            1 Corinthians 10:13 states, “… And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted 

beyond what you are able…” (NIV)

            The King James writes, “… but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted 

above that ye are able…”

             Other Bible versions basically say the same thing. This verse is the premise for the rest 

of my post(s) on this subject. If my interpretation (exegesis) of this verse is incorrect, then, most 

likely, so is my opinion on this subject.

             Now, back to the subject. Is sin justified (excused, okay) in extreme situations if it saves 

lives?

             My personal answer is no. Now, I am a teenager, so no one probably cares about my 

personal opinions. That’s okay. Here is the premise of my position:

            For it to be true (that sin is excused in extreme situations), that would mean that God 

would put us in situations “beyond what (we) are able.” I hope this makes sense. For me to say 

that “sin is okay in certain situations,” I would have to believe that 1 Corinthians 10:13, the great 

doctrinal rock in times of trial (I don’t know how many times I’ve heard it quoted), is wrong.

             For sin to be okay when the going gets tough, I would have to believe that God could put 

me in a situation where disobedience to Him is fine. I don’t know about you, but whenever I read 

the Old Testament (and the Bible in general), one of the major thoughts I come away with is…

God hates sin.

             (I was planning to end the post with that thought, but I just thought of something else. Oh well, 

here is the extension:) Now, for me to turn around and say, “Well, you know, sin is okay if it saves 

lives” would be weird because…

Sin is what kills lives.

            Because sin is what allowed death (spiritual and physical) into the world, I can’t turn 

around and say “sin saves.” I hope this makes sense. Now that I’ve established the premise for 

my position, I’ll go into the historical account of the Hebrew (or Egyptian) midwives and Rahab 

the Harlot. I’ll conclude this topic (unless I want to write more) with a fascinating position I 

came across.

(Is It Ever Okay to Sin? Post 1) It's All a LIE!

            Alrighty, I am done with the Strange Scriptures series. I might go back to the book in 

the future, but for now, I’ll write about another topic:

            Is it okay to sin (more specifically, to lie) in extreme situations if it saves lives?

            I recently had a discussion with a friend over this matter. We talked about the hypothetical 

Nazi/holocaust situation. What if I was hiding “enemies of the state” in my house (Corrie Ten Boom 

style), and Nazis came to my door? They demand to know if I am hiding anyone. What do I do? 

Lie to save lives, or tell the truth… and people die?

            Ouch.

            What does the Bible have to say about situations like this? There are basically two Biblical 

accounts of history that pertain to this touchy subject: Rahab the harlot (Joshua 2) and the Egyptian 

midwives (Exodus 1). There also is a handy verse to keep in mind throughout this discussion. It will be 

in my next post.