This morning I read through a few chapters of Romans, and have to admit that I am struggling what to write here. Admittedly, when I started this whole blogging idea, I really didn't think it was something that I would be praying over, but I do. It seems that every verse could be expanded upon! So, here I am again, faithful readers, to share what I hope is what God would have me put down in this space.
Romans 3. I really get a kick out of Paul when he starts talking in questions to logically explain his point. He does such a good job of getting to the real issue - usually that of the heart. In this chapter, Paul is defending God's honor. He is defending that age old question "If God is a such a loving God, why would He send people to hell?". Okay, actually, I don't think that Paul is defending that EXACT question, but He does make a good argument that can help us answer that question for a skeptic.
Look at the following passage from the NKJV (Ro 3:5-7):
5 But if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unjust who inflicts wrath? (I speak as a man.) 6 Certainly not! For then how will God judge the world?
7 For if the truth of God has increased through my lie to His glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner? 8 And why not say, "Let us do evil that good may come? - as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say. Their condemnation is just.
Do you see what Paul is doing here? I contend that Paul has a pretty good grasp on how humanity thinks. We try to take any circumstance where we are probably wrong and outwardly try to fool others (and ourselves) into thinking we are okay with our thoughts or actions. In this case, Paul is shooting down the argument that it is okay to sin -and therefore not be called a sinner- because our sin only shows how good and perfect God really is. As a result, we should not be judged because we are indirectly showing God's glory in contrast to our pitiful nature. Did you get that? If not, read it again. I know I've thrown in a lot of words here.
To me, I feel that the bottom line is this: If I have to concoct a lengthy explanation for why an action or thought is okay, perhaps I need to examine my heart and re-evaluate my "plan". Usually, things that are right are easily explained, aren't they?