Yes We Do, But Do We Have To?

I heard a popular preacher teach in a gospel meeting on June 28 – someone asked me “Do you think we can live without sin? I said I don’t know about that one, but we do (sin, ptd). I have a hard time understanding why we get into all this discussion about whether we can live without sin when the Bible says we sin.” Since I have been hearing this compromise more and more lately, I felt the need to form a response …

I Cor 10:13 conclusively proves this “have to sin” idea false since it reads “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.” If we say we don’t know if we have to sin, isn’t that the same as saying God might allow us to be tempted above what we are able to bear? And if we say we have to sin, isn’t that the same as saying God doesn’t always provide a way to escape with every temptation? So isn’t there a huge difference in saying I Cor 10:13 is absolutely true and in saying I don’t know if it is true?

And if we don’t think such false teaching by this gospel preacher is a big deal, aren’t we respecting the man more than the scriptures? No wonder the average Christian is getting weaker and weaker, because the teaching we request more and more from the pulpit (II Tim 4:3) gives audiences excuse for their sin instead of strongly challenging them to do better (Heb 12:1).

Most preachers use I John 2:16 to show Adam is a model for us facing temptation to sin and succumbing. So let’s use Adam as a test case to investigate the issue before us. In Gen 3 did Adam have to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, or did he choose to? And is it important to understand the difference between those two possibilities? If Adam couldn’t help but sin, then how could God have held him responsible for his “original sin” (Gen 2:16-17)? And if Adam is our model, what does he prove about our question of does man sin (by choice) or does man have to sin?

Do homosexuals (Rom 1:26-27) have to commit that sin? If so, it must be because they are born that way, right? Are the scientists correct who say some are born with more of a weakness for alcohol than others, so they can’t help but to be problem drinkers (I Cor 6:10)? Do those who cheat on their wives have to commit the sin of adultery (Gal 5:19)? Do liars have to lie (Rev 21:8)? Since we agree those sins don’t have to be committed, pray tell me what sins we do have to commit? It is beyond me how anyone who is even halfway familiar with the truth would not know that we don’t have to sin. And why is this issue so important? Because if man has to sin, then he wouldn’t be responsible for his sin. That is a pretty big false consequence, wouldn’t you say?

There must be thousands of passages like Josh 24:15 and Matt 23:37 that teach this most basic truth – the free will of man. And the Christian who takes the “have to sin” position shows he doesn’t fully accept any of those scriptures. Instead he is letting what “seemeth right” (Prov 14:12) unto him take precedence.

Did Cain have to kill Abel in Gen 4? Did David have to commit adultery with Bathsheba in II Sam 11? Did Jezebel have to have Naboth killed in I Kings 21? Did Uzza have to touch the ark in I Chron 13:9? Did Ananias and Sapphira have to lie to the Holy Ghost in Acts 5? Did Demas have to forsake Paul having loved this present world (II Tim 4:10)? Did King Saul have to offer a sacrifice in I Sam 13 that he was supposed wait on Samuel to offer ? Did King Saul have to sin by not fully destroying the Amalekites in I Sam 15? Did Simon the sorcerer have to try to buy to gift of God with money in Acts 8:20? Did the brother in I Cor 5:1 have to commit fornication with his father’s wife? Did Jezebel have to seduce Jesus’ servants to commit fornication (Rev 2:20)? Of the perhaps hundreds of sins recorded for us in the scriptures, I challenge you to find even one where that sin had to be committed. I mean – are we even reading the same Bible here?

Let’s use Jesus as a second test case. Either Jesus “was in all points tempted like as we are” (Heb 4:15) or He wasn’t. And of course everyone agrees Jesus never sinned (same verse). To me His is the greatest accomplishment in the history of the world to live probably thirty something years without a single sin. But there is really no great accomplishment if Jesus wasn’t actually tempted as we are. On the other hand, if Jesus had to face temptation just like any other man, then His perfect life proves man does not have to sin. To imply it is not important to understand or discuss that, both cheapens Jesus’ accomplishment and cheapens the significance of our sin – which has the opposite effect as demanding (the impossible?) of our audiences “go, and sin no more” (John 8:11).