I can tell people are scrapping for this discussion:

What should a Christian do when confronted with an apparently homeless person asking for money?

Christians often ask whether a particular action is “allowed” or “permissible.” But maybe that is the wrong question. Instead, the question is whether a particular action is beneficial. “All things are lawful for me, but not all things are beneficial.” 1 Cor. 10:23. If one must ask whether an action is permissible, the answer is “yes.” But the outcome-determinative question is whether it is beneficial. Perhaps, if one is asking whether something is “permissible,” it is indicative of a much bigger issue than the specific situation at hand; it suggests an entire misconception of human purpose as “what can I get out of it?” instead of “what is good to do?”

Do you think this is right?

If so, some questions:

If all things are permissible, what about categorical sin? In 1 Cor. 7:36, Paul says the man who marries “…is not sinning.”

And if there is categorical sin, then in what way are 'all things permissible'?

What does God expect from us in this life? I mean this question practically, not theoretically. I know He expects us to love God, and our neighbor, and to be perfect as our Heavenly Father is perfect. But I don't know a single person who claims to have achieved anything close to those goals. So what can we actually expect to achieve - in this life - in terms of our spiritual aspirations?

I constantly struggle with the story of Uzzah. The Israelites are transporting the Ark of the Covenant, and an oxen stumbles. The Ark is jostled and nearly falls over. Uzzah reaches out to steady the Ark, touching it. "The LORD's anger burned against Uzzah, and he struck him down because he had put his hand on the ark. So he died there before God." 1 Chronicles 13: 10.

How should I feel about and act upon the knowledge that God is so holy?

Hypocrisy vs. Failure: Ted Haggard, analyzed in the abstract

After Jeff's recent post about Haggard's problem being hypocrisy, not the flesh, I ran the issue by some local compadres.

Most of them immediately agreed with Jeff.

However, I then posed this hypothetical to them: suppose you knew that your pastor had at some point in the last year done something he wished he hadn't done: he'd looked at pornography. Should he then never say from his pulpit that you shouldn't look at pornography?

There's a difference between hypocrisy and failure; and Christianity has built into it a certain degree of failure on the part of its adherents.

However, another person brought up the need for transparency or honest, saying this is what would save someone from hypocrisy. 'It's one thing to fail to live up to your own ideals, it's another thing to imply that you are living up to them, when really you are not.'

So that's what I'm about: failure with transparency.

I'm not familiar with Haggard's work, but I suspect that his preaching implied that he himself wasn't indulging in sexual immorality, so that was probably hypocrisy.