At its core, the problem with sin has much less to do with the act itself, and much more to do with the fact that any commission of sin is a rebellion against God’s authority. In our pragmatic world, that is an increasingly rare perspective. Every day we hear Christians attempting to justify, defend or vindicate “biblical commands” because “God’s ways are best for us” or because “doing things God’s way works.”
The typical youth sermon, for instance, attempts to curry obedience to God’s command against fornication by extrapolating its advantages for one’s future marriage, or its guarantee against sexually transmitted diseases. Or consider the daily Christian talk shows which attempt to vindicate God’s prohibition regarding homosexuality by trying to articulate this as a safeguard for “traditional family” and society, or by attempting to demonstrate the benefit of two-gender parenting.
But think back for a minute to the original sin. If pragmatism is the standard for obeying God’s unambiguous commands, then Satan presented a legitimate argument for disobedience (Gen.3:2-6). The “forbidden fruit” was sinful, not because it was “bad”, but simply because it was “forbidden”. Sin isn’t wrong because it’s inherently bad for us (though it often is). Sin is bad because it is a direct act of rebellion against the God who has the authority and right to make the rules.
So look beyond the pragmatic rationale for upholding God’s express commands. Recognize instead, that no matter what God has commanded, it matters little how advantageous it may or may not be to keep his commands, he is Lord and we are not, and one day we must all give an account for what we have done with his instructions (2Cor.5:10-11).