This is a little different in some respects, I think, than what Rey is talking about here. While no one would argue that we should sin that good may come, it is nonetheless also true that God works all things—including sin—for our good.

In your case, it seems that people are balking at the idea that someone should “rejoice in” or think that God would promise to “redeem” pain that was self-inflicted or the natural consequences of wrong-doing. I think that in Romans 8:28, “all things” means “all things” and the categorizing has the result of negating the word of God for the sake of fleshly moralizing.

Another way this is unworkable is that no one can be conclusively shown to be “innocent” in his suffering. It seems, Christianity encourages the perfectionistic part of he flesh so that everything must be put under a microscope until that “guilty” part is discovered (or, even if not, you must know that something is there) and don’t even think that God is going to help you or redeem this. He may, but you are still guilty, guilty, guilty.

Ultimately, the life of Faith is one of trust that God is at work despite appearances. The urge to “protect” God’s promises from “evil” use is a proclamation that in this part of life, God has let you go to your own devices. As much as we like the thought of letting the sinning brother have it, this is a movement and an encouragement to unfaith.

One of the lessons of the cross is that Jesus is always with us—because the cross transcends time, there is a sense in which even in our sin we are not cut off from God; Jesus is already there. When we find ourselves in sin, we are in a sense meeting Christ at the cross. That is not to say that we should sin so grace will abound (and I hope no one mistakes me on that subject), but it is part of the way we “suffer with him.”

So I guess you’d have to say I’m on your side on this one.