Question: This cliche is usually *quoted* in the context of "the ends don't justify the means", but in *practice* most folks seem to live as if the ends did justify the means even if the means involved sin. However sometimes people cannot see clearly what is sin and what isn't. An example might be with-holding information from a loved one so as not to upset them.

While on clear situation of sin they might come down one way, given a predicament where the right choice isn't clear to a person, they often turn this cliche the other way around and tell themselves that the ends *do* justify the means.

Is there any Biblical content that speaks to this cliche one way or another. Is there a good "retort cliche" that one could use as a reminder of the proper way to make a moral or ethical decision in light of Christian teachings?

Answer: 
The idea that "the ends justify the means" admits that there is something inherently wrong with "the means". Indeed, it admits that "the means" are actually **unjustified** by themselves. The claim, then, is that although "the means" are unjustifiable in themselves, that a particular outcome that is achieved by them results in the justification of the unjustified. 

Christianity certainly **does not** have any basis for this idea, and it doesn't need any. I know of a particular religion that believes it's alright for its followers to lie in a conversation with someone of another religion if lying helps them win the argument. Christianity, however, does not need to do this, because Christianity believes that truth is on its side. That's a key point, because Truth invites questioning, whereas lies and falsehoods do not.

God calls us to do what is righteous and then trust Him for the results.
Let's take the extreme example of Germans hiding Jews in their houses during WW2. (inspired by [this question](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/6055/does-the-bible-condemn-white-lies)) When asked if they are hiding Jews, what do they say? Do they lie to protect them, or do they tell the truth knowing they'll be sent to a concentration camp? I can think of 3 possibilities:

1. **Choose the outcome that is the most loving.** I certainly wouldn't want to be handed over to the Nazi's.

> 
> Do to others as you would have them do to you.
> 
> 
> Matthew 7:12 (NIV)
> 
> 
>
2. You can justify lying in the same way as you **justify resisting an evil government**. See [this question](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/2259/are-christians-bound-to-the-laws-of-their-country). Lying would be ok in the same way that hiding the Jews in the first place would be ok.

> 
> Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego answered the king, "... be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods and we will not worship the golden statue that you have set up."
> 
> 
> Daniel 3:16-18 (NRSV)
> 
> 
>
3. **Faith.** Realize that it is actually not you, but God, who is in control, and he won't punish you for obeying him. Do what he commanded and trust that he will work it out. In our example, you could refuse to answer the Nazi's question even though that causes suspicion.

A controversial Biblical example of this would be Lot refusing to break the hospitality he had offered to two strangers, and instead putting his own daughters at risk. God protects them.

> 
> "Look, I have two daughters who have not known a man; let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please; only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof."
> 
> 
> Genesis 19:8 (NRSV)
> 
> 
>

Which option you choose in the extreme case should also guide your decisions in the everyday moral conundrums. I personally believe that the third option is the highest, but also by far the most difficult in practice, because it requires us to give up control.