Sinless Perfection?
- Thread starter mark s
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Hi Episkopos,
I can see why you prefer the ESV in view of some of your other comments, and it's not that I disagree with the meaning the ESV has given (though not sure if it was translated from the majority text), but I believe your emphasis on the risen Christ should not be at the expense of understanding that His blood is eternally significant in His Father's sight, and should be in ours.
There are many pagan rituals which involve the shedding of blood for the appeasement of local gods, and to preach the gospel effectively, the blood of Christ has to be proclaimed as THE BLOOD of an eternal sacrifice - the life of Christ poured out - which has the power to cleanse men from all sin. 1 John 1:7, Acts 13:39, Leviticus 17:11, 14.
To shy away from the life that He lived in purity and perfection, which was put to public ridicule and abuse before being hung on the tree in quite a broken state, humanly speaking, is to miss the parallels which many Christians must embrace to endure to the end of what God has called them to suffer for His Name. If it were not that Christ is literally raised from the dead after such an ordeal, there is nothing for a Christian to hold on to; for surely as one is being mangled by temptation and torture, one is sifted and sifted with regard to one's standing before God. I, personally, needed to understand 'the blood' in situations I have already been through, where knowing it is the blood of Christ which satisfied God, has been the difference between my overcoming and my being overcome. Eph 3:8, 9, 10, 11, 12.
You said to Mark,
I would not make this distinction. If the blood of Christ is not efficacious in God's sight, then it is no use to me either.
You seem to be forgetting that there was - for our benefit, no doubt, as much as for the party in heaven when Christ had ascended - a delay between both His death and His resurrection, and His resurrection and His ascension. Then there was another delay before the Holy Spirit was poured out. These periods of time are all stacked with significance in the OT for our edification and encouragement as we abide in Him. These are alluded to by different NT writers Hebrews 9:23, Acts 2:33 and are a very real part of God's preparation of Israel to receive the Holy Spirit - for the continuation of God's own purposes upon the earth; the earth of our own bodies, if we will yield them to Him.
Now, maybe you aren't 'forgetting' these things, and maybe you aren't an evangelist or a preacher, but to those who are given the message to proclaim, 'the blood' is a very important part of it, especially for those who have certain sins on their conscience, or, who are coming out of an alternative sacrificial system, such as every occult and pagan alternative to faith in the Saviour of the world.
I can see why you prefer the ESV in view of some of your other comments, and it's not that I disagree with the meaning the ESV has given (though not sure if it was translated from the majority text), but I believe your emphasis on the risen Christ should not be at the expense of understanding that His blood is eternally significant in His Father's sight, and should be in ours.
There are many pagan rituals which involve the shedding of blood for the appeasement of local gods, and to preach the gospel effectively, the blood of Christ has to be proclaimed as THE BLOOD of an eternal sacrifice - the life of Christ poured out - which has the power to cleanse men from all sin. 1 John 1:7, Acts 13:39, Leviticus 17:11, 14.
To shy away from the life that He lived in purity and perfection, which was put to public ridicule and abuse before being hung on the tree in quite a broken state, humanly speaking, is to miss the parallels which many Christians must embrace to endure to the end of what God has called them to suffer for His Name. If it were not that Christ is literally raised from the dead after such an ordeal, there is nothing for a Christian to hold on to; for surely as one is being mangled by temptation and torture, one is sifted and sifted with regard to one's standing before God. I, personally, needed to understand 'the blood' in situations I have already been through, where knowing it is the blood of Christ which satisfied God, has been the difference between my overcoming and my being overcome. Eph 3:8, 9, 10, 11, 12.
You said to Mark,
I would not make this distinction. If the blood of Christ is not efficacious in God's sight, then it is no use to me either.
You seem to be forgetting that there was - for our benefit, no doubt, as much as for the party in heaven when Christ had ascended - a delay between both His death and His resurrection, and His resurrection and His ascension. Then there was another delay before the Holy Spirit was poured out. These periods of time are all stacked with significance in the OT for our edification and encouragement as we abide in Him. These are alluded to by different NT writers Hebrews 9:23, Acts 2:33 and are a very real part of God's preparation of Israel to receive the Holy Spirit - for the continuation of God's own purposes upon the earth; the earth of our own bodies, if we will yield them to Him.
Now, maybe you aren't 'forgetting' these things, and maybe you aren't an evangelist or a preacher, but to those who are given the message to proclaim, 'the blood' is a very important part of it, especially for those who have certain sins on their conscience, or, who are coming out of an alternative sacrificial system, such as every occult and pagan alternative to faith in the Saviour of the world.
I don't prefer the ESV...but in the case of this verse it shows the proper emphasis. I read the KJV the same way...but it coiuld be open to a wrong interpretation is all.
We are to live in the life that the blood of Christ paved the way for. So our emphasis is always on the life. The same goes for the cross. So many people get hung up (no pun intended) on what Jesus DID in the past that they miss the emphasis on their OWN death as a requirement to access the benefits of the cross of Christ. So our focus is on our own death...with Him...and living the life WITH Him. We focus on what was bought...not on the payment.
I find that Christianity has become a head game..an ideology where you somehow accept a sacred rite that transfers a special status to the devotee.
Again I say...where is the life? Where is the witness? Where is the reality?
The blood of Christ applied today has but one purpose. To allow us an entrance into the Spirit in order to fellowship with God and the brethren.
1Jn 1:3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.
1Jn 1:4 And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full.
1Jn 1:5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.
1Jn 1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
1Jn 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
Do we see the blood of Jesus or the light???
Since when do we have any requirement for blood ourselves? It would seem only vampires have this need!
Jesus has made a way for us to be with Him...NOW through the Spirit. The testimony of the Spirit is the fruit it brings to us and the commitment and love we have towards the brethren.
People don't need to understand blood to be regenerated in the Spirit. They need to understand faith in Christ. If a gate is open do I need to understand the locking mechanism in order to enter in???
Hi Episkopos,
I need the blood of Jesus - in its spiritual application - all the time. This is what 1 John 1:7 is saying. And I receive its ministrations by walking in the light as He is in the light.
And definitely I need to know how the gate opens and closes and locks and unlocks, even if you don't. John 10:9.
I need the blood of Jesus - in its spiritual application - all the time. This is what 1 John 1:7 is saying. And I receive its ministrations by walking in the light as He is in the light.
And definitely I need to know how the gate opens and closes and locks and unlocks, even if you don't.
John 10:9.I accept that the KJV says what it says...it is the interpretation of what it says that is at issue.
Hi D.
Ironically the verse you quoted showed the ESV version which reads
Romans 3:25
25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.
I think this version more accurately states the case.
Hi Episkopos and dragonfly,
Regarding scriptures (ESV), I don't really like that translation because it changes some critical meanings so when you write a verse reference, this site (CyB) will link it to the ESV, automatically. The way to fix that is to go ahead and post your reply then edit it and edit each verse and put in the KJV link.
Such as http://biblia.com/books/kjv/Ro3 instead of http://biblia.com/books/esv/Ro3
It takes some work, though.
Axehead
Thanks Axehead. I'd wondered about that...
Do you know what the manuscript background is, of the ESV? (Random question. Just wondering. No pressure... really.)
Hi Axehead,
Thank you. I should probably look at it more carefully before forming an opinon, but my impression from previous discussions elsewhere, is that Westcott and Hort's work was not universally acknowledged with acclaim.
Thank you. I should probably look at it more carefully before forming an opinon, but my impression from previous discussions elsewhere, is that Westcott and Hort's work was not universally acknowledged with acclaim.
Yes, far from it. You should compare Phillipians 2:6 from the ESV with the KJV.
Axehead
Man, I must be a heterodoxical nightmare. I'm reading this and want to go comment on nearly every post. So I figured rather than flooding the spot, I'd hit the ones I could remember.... What I've found on this topic is the idea of someone reaching a point where they do not commit a sin in their life, scares the heck anyone who still sins so they have to react defensively. It's pretty understandable since the Church teaches a sin centric theology and misses the point of the Gospel entirely.
The other issue is peole look at the topic and think "WHAT CAN I DO", "I CAN'T HELP IT", and of course that's true too.
But the result is, rather than exegetics we try to prove our presuppositions to justify our own skin.
It's not very fair. Not to the discussion/argument. I have no denominational ties. While at a glance I'm Wesleyan, I would be happy to debate John Wesley, or Finney and refute some of their claims. I'm sorta unique I guess.... but I'm there honestly.
Some dilemmas in the conversation.
Last third of Romand 7 Paul seems to say HE personally struggles with the flesh daily. Except in Romans 7:5 he says he's not in the flesh any longer. So that would imply there is something to figure out, or Paul was an idiot.
Another dilemma is people associate the word FLESH/SARX with the human body which is SOMA. (although sometimes Sarx is used for the body whole, but context context context... it's usually pretty obvious.)
Another dilemma is people ask, "who have you met that is sinless"? Well, probably more than I've met that raised from the dead after three days.... what's the point of that?
People can't imagine how they could stop sinning, but God doesn't leave it up to man to accomplish. Can we not trust GOD to do what He says He will do?
People imply there are two natures that battle inside of them, sinful nature and Christ's Spirit, except scripture says point blank that position is a farce. See Romans 8:9.
So, here's a quick summary of my understanding.
I can't claim to be indwelled by the Spirit as I still have a sinful nature. Romans 8:9
I can't claim to walk by the Spirit as I still give into temptations, Gal 5:16.
I can't claim to know Him, 1 john 3:6.
I can't claim to yet be in fellowship with Him, 1 john chapter 1.
I can't claim to be born of Him, 1 john 3:9/5:18.
Another interesting thing that pops up in these chats, there are a lot of verses that say "IF" and people assume whatever the most beneficial conclusion is, belongs to them. 8:9 above is an example. IF I am indwelled by the Spirit I am no longer in the flesh. Well, if I still have a flesh nature, then the logic says I'm not yet indwelled by the Spirit. But people just ignore all that and make the claim of having both.
The last thing that interferes with logic in this conversation is Paul spoke as a Mature believer. He's on record as saying he speaks different things to the mature believers, or those that are perfect.... (the word for Perfect in Greek is synonomous with our word for Mature when we discuss human spiritual growth.) So, Paul speaks to the milk drinkers in simpler ways so they can understand.
Why is it that if Paul says WE, the milk drinkers still growing assume that means themselves, rather than the WE that are the mature believers that Paul writes to them as?
The other issue is peole look at the topic and think "WHAT CAN I DO", "I CAN'T HELP IT", and of course that's true too.
But the result is, rather than exegetics we try to prove our presuppositions to justify our own skin.
It's not very fair. Not to the discussion/argument. I have no denominational ties. While at a glance I'm Wesleyan, I would be happy to debate John Wesley, or Finney and refute some of their claims. I'm sorta unique I guess.... but I'm there honestly.
Some dilemmas in the conversation.
Last third of Romand 7 Paul seems to say HE personally struggles with the flesh daily. Except in Romans 7:5 he says he's not in the flesh any longer. So that would imply there is something to figure out, or Paul was an idiot.
Another dilemma is people associate the word FLESH/SARX with the human body which is SOMA. (although sometimes Sarx is used for the body whole, but context context context... it's usually pretty obvious.)
Another dilemma is people ask, "who have you met that is sinless"? Well, probably more than I've met that raised from the dead after three days.... what's the point of that?
People can't imagine how they could stop sinning, but God doesn't leave it up to man to accomplish. Can we not trust GOD to do what He says He will do?
People imply there are two natures that battle inside of them, sinful nature and Christ's Spirit, except scripture says point blank that position is a farce. See Romans 8:9.
So, here's a quick summary of my understanding.
I can't claim to be indwelled by the Spirit as I still have a sinful nature. Romans 8:9
I can't claim to walk by the Spirit as I still give into temptations, Gal 5:16.
I can't claim to know Him, 1 john 3:6.
I can't claim to yet be in fellowship with Him, 1 john chapter 1.
I can't claim to be born of Him, 1 john 3:9/5:18.
Another interesting thing that pops up in these chats, there are a lot of verses that say "IF" and people assume whatever the most beneficial conclusion is, belongs to them. 8:9 above is an example. IF I am indwelled by the Spirit I am no longer in the flesh. Well, if I still have a flesh nature, then the logic says I'm not yet indwelled by the Spirit. But people just ignore all that and make the claim of having both.
The last thing that interferes with logic in this conversation is Paul spoke as a Mature believer. He's on record as saying he speaks different things to the mature believers, or those that are perfect.... (the word for Perfect in Greek is synonomous with our word for Mature when we discuss human spiritual growth.) So, Paul speaks to the milk drinkers in simpler ways so they can understand.
Why is it that if Paul says WE, the milk drinkers still growing assume that means themselves, rather than the WE that are the mature believers that Paul writes to them as?
Very good points and refreshingly honest!
The NT account presents us with many dilemmas and scandals. The way to understand the meaning of these is not to quickly explain them away with a superficial argument.
Well I agree. I'm 12 years on the soteriological arguments surrounding why there are two freedoms in Gal 5:1. That has led to tons of tangents, and this topic is one of them. Most people claim verses they don't own, and that causes the dissension. Then people also tend to claim vss written about mature believers as a description TO immature believers. You can't be immature and mature at the same time...
It really muddies the water. And if you tell these people, or point it out, they react emotionally and it gets really nasty fast.
It really muddies the water. And if you tell these people, or point it out, they react emotionally and it gets really nasty fast.
Very good points and refreshingly honest!
The NT account presents us with many dilemmas and scandals. The way to understand the meaning of these is not to quickly explain them away with a superficial argument.
Anyone claiming to be sinless in thought,word,deed,intention and motive is a liar and the truth is not in them.....they are puffed up and full of pride
The following passages are but a few of the many that are pointless if it is possible to be perfect in this life
"and forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors".....not talking about the bank or mortage company here,it is God forgiving our sins against him as we forgive those who sin against us
"blessed is the man to whom the lord will not impute sin" impute means to assign to,why would the bible ever say that about someone who was perfect ? again it would be pointless.
"blessed are they who's iniquities are forgiven and who's sins are covered" the perfect man or woman by definition does not need their sins covered.
"if any man sin we have an advocate with the father" the perfect man or woman needs no advocate.
And last but not least
"if we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive our sins and cleans us from all unrightousness"....perfect men and women have no need of such.
The man or woman of God loves the word of God and the law of God,it is their most sincere desire to not sin and God will keep them on the path of rightousness and will hold them up should they fall because the rightous man or woamn gets up when they fall.....the perfect of course never fall so i guss its just another part of the bible that does not apply to them.
I will say it again....anyone who claims perfection in this life and in this flesh is a liar and the truth is not in them,they are false teachers and are feeding egos and leading people into Hell...which they themselves will not escape.
The following passages are but a few of the many that are pointless if it is possible to be perfect in this life
"and forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors".....not talking about the bank or mortage company here,it is God forgiving our sins against him as we forgive those who sin against us
"blessed is the man to whom the lord will not impute sin" impute means to assign to,why would the bible ever say that about someone who was perfect ? again it would be pointless.
"blessed are they who's iniquities are forgiven and who's sins are covered" the perfect man or woman by definition does not need their sins covered.
"if any man sin we have an advocate with the father" the perfect man or woman needs no advocate.
And last but not least
"if we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive our sins and cleans us from all unrightousness"....perfect men and women have no need of such.
The man or woman of God loves the word of God and the law of God,it is their most sincere desire to not sin and God will keep them on the path of rightousness and will hold them up should they fall because the rightous man or woamn gets up when they fall.....the perfect of course never fall so i guss its just another part of the bible that does not apply to them.
I will say it again....anyone who claims perfection in this life and in this flesh is a liar and the truth is not in them,they are false teachers and are feeding egos and leading people into Hell...which they themselves will not escape.
I'm hoping you don't include the man named Jesus of Nazareth in your tirade...or those who walk in Him who have been crucified with Him.
Well, hehehe that's NO WHERE in scripture, but I know the editing you did to the verse you rip off. Ask yourself how JOHN walked in the light as GOD DOES and still sinned. Are you calling GOD a sinner? Ask yourself why those he wrote to were NOT YET IN FELLOWSHIP WITH GOD, but JOHN WAS. And ask yourself why the ones he wrote to needed more DARKNESS washed off to be in fellowship. You are blowing emotional smoke here, not exegetics. I can match you with MORE verses that say the opposite (apparently) of yours below. What's the point until you make an argument and exegete the verses. Until then it's just slinging appeals to authority around with no reason.
WRONG... You have to be forgiven, to have the confidence to walk to GOD, run the race TO HIM for HIM to heal you and clean you as the Prodigal son was cleaned. So that's a first step, not a prevention. Not even a nice try. See rom 6:22, atonement is the first step, sanctification is the last.
It doesn't deny that someone has sinned, is forgiven, then is matured by God to a point they no longer sin. The verse can't compete with the claim. It's wasted pixels. I really don't like your tone, so forgive me if I'm trying and failing to be polite.
You have no understanding of the word TELIOO translated as perfect. That's apparent. To avoid embarassment you should have that study someday before commenting on this topic again. Being perfect is a finished state, not a utopian state. Your argument would have to claim where GOD says HE changes your heart and mind that GOD LIED AND/OR IS INCAPABLE of doing so.
So until you are perfected, matured, finished, you have an advocate, so failing once isn't reason to quit, CONTINUE TO RUN THE RACE.
No one said perfect from birth. But perfected from a point forward. PERFECTION has nothing to do with the not sinning again in your life when you get down to it. Your arguments are against someone who would claim they have never sinned in their life. They don't have a dang thing to do with this conversation.
(your argument says he can't keep them there.. you have to attend that he fails if he tries.)
No it's a smart alec comment from an emotionally driven person trying to ridicule someone else because of their beliefs not deal with the arguments.
When you sit on the throne of GOD that will mean something. Do we have a STRAT ALMIGHTY movie coming out?
You need to calm down before you respond. You are hateful and snotty in this post.
Ahh...yeah....that's what the bible teaches. It's not talking about...going out and stealing something then saying 'sorry God'...then verbally abusing someone and saying afterwards 'sorry God'...then going home to your live in girlfriend/boyfriend, whom you are not married to, sleeping with them, and saying 'sorry God'. Your very actions show that you are not, in fact sorry, and that you fully intend on continuing on in whatever behaviour you choose.
This is not repenting, as biblical repenting involves feeling a heart grief at your behaviour and how it offends God..and a true intent to stop that behaviour.
When the bible talks about a Christian sinning and repenting, it's talking about true repentance, which follows sin unlike the above sinning with intent. A Christian is not perfect...the bible teaches us that we will only reach perfection once we are dead and are given a new body. So even if we love Jesus and are pursuing him with the power of the Holy Spirit, we are still very likely to stumble...several times a day! A stray thought or comment, the anger or impatience we show others, the curse that slips out when some idiot cuts us off in traffic dangerously, the Sunday morning we stay in bed because we'd rather sleep than worship Jesus with others. We don't look down the barrel of these things and do them even though we know them to be sin....they bubble to the surface, an indication of how essentially broken we are as people. It's these things that remind us every single day how much we need Jesus and his gift of grace, of how lost we would be without him.
This is why we do repent...because we love him, need him and don't want to sin. It's our very saved nature that allows us to repent...to see the need of it. It's the Holy Spirit who guides us to repent, and gives us the ability to not turn back to that behaviour. So I cannot agree, scripturally, with the idea that when we sin, we are dead...but somehow while we are dead, we manage to come alive...which makes us perfect....and yet somehow, while we are perfect, we suddenly manage to die again. Thats not biblical...it's doesn't even make sense. Sorry.
<< MODERATION NOTE >>
Quotes and replies addressing a moderated post have been removed. The remainder is left intact. Thanks. - HammerStone
<< MODERATION NOTE >>
If you slept with them, you ARE married to them. There is no sin there, until you sleep with another. You lack a formality, not a marriage. Col 2 would be a good read about those making up rules rather than the substance of what was taught.
If you repented, you never commit that sin again. If you repented from sins, you never sin again.
Paul said himself and others were. He taught different things to the perfect believers, and he wrote that he was to present those people to Christ at his return as perfect, and that was apparently when they thought to see His return in their lives. For you to come down so hard on someone, it would be less distracting if your claims held up to scripture.
THAT IS NO WHERE IN THE BIBLE. I will buy you an amazon gift card fo r20 bucks if you can find it.
Most of those things wouldn't be sins. Anger isn't a sin. Not going to church isn't a sin. Sin is not the purpose of Christ. He came for much more than salvation. His arrival wasn't only about sins. The GOSPEL does not deal with sin but with love. I would REALLY encourage you to study more and listen less to those teaching this stuff.... it's shallow and disruptive to scripture's claims.
YOu don't do repent, HE repents you. HE does the changing not you. HOWEVER it's done through what you do. Who parted the red sea, God or Moses. But MOSES did all the work, held the stick, etc...
This is NOT the words to say someone else isn't biblical.
Perhaps if there was less accusing and more discussing this would go along better.
I'm seeing and mostly getting NOT DISCUSSIONS but people trying to tell the world HOW IT IS BY GAWD! Can we stop that and stick to the arguments and make positions you support with context and scripture? Rather than make "NU UHS!" but never back them up?
Quotes and replies addressing a moderated post have been removed. The remainder is left intact. Thanks. - HammerStone
<< MODERATION NOTE >>
If you slept with them, you ARE married to them. There is no sin there, until you sleep with another. You lack a formality, not a marriage. Col 2 would be a good read about those making up rules rather than the substance of what was taught.
Before repentance you have confession. You describe confession above and mention repentance here... why are you mixing the two and interchanging them as if they were synonyms?
If you repented, you never commit that sin again. If you repented from sins, you never sin again.
Paul said himself and others were. He taught different things to the perfect believers, and he wrote that he was to present those people to Christ at his return as perfect, and that was apparently when they thought to see His return in their lives. For you to come down so hard on someone, it would be less distracting if your claims held up to scripture.
THAT IS NO WHERE IN THE BIBLE. I will buy you an amazon gift card fo r20 bucks if you can find it.
Most of those things wouldn't be sins. Anger isn't a sin. Not going to church isn't a sin. Sin is not the purpose of Christ. He came for much more than salvation. His arrival wasn't only about sins. The GOSPEL does not deal with sin but with love. I would REALLY encourage you to study more and listen less to those teaching this stuff.... it's shallow and disruptive to scripture's claims.
YOu don't do repent, HE repents you. HE does the changing not you. HOWEVER it's done through what you do. Who parted the red sea, God or Moses. But MOSES did all the work, held the stick, etc...
This is NOT the words to say someone else isn't biblical.
Perhaps if there was less accusing and more discussing this would go along better.
I'm seeing and mostly getting NOT DISCUSSIONS but people trying to tell the world HOW IT IS BY GAWD! Can we stop that and stick to the arguments and make positions you support with context and scripture? Rather than make "NU UHS!" but never back them up?
You know....I find that strangely picky. Clearly you missed my point...which was that people can say they're saved for all their worth, but if they consciously and deliberate sin, they are showing their fruit.
Now, if you want to get picky....sure...maybe (and that's a really big maybe) you could argue that if 2 people sleep together they are 'married' in God's eyes, but I think that's a seriously faulty premise. But fine, say you want to argue that...how many people today do you know of, who don't get married, but then go on to be faithful to the single person for the remainder of their days?
In fact, how many people in scripture shack up together without marriage...and receive blessing?
If you want to point me towards Col 2 to try and take away scriptural basis for the marriage covenant that God himself instituted and Jesus and Paul reiterated...go ahead, but your missing the mark by quite a distance....
Peas and carrots. I'm not mixing them up, they go together if a Christian is genuine. Anyone can admit that they've done something wrong, even unsaved people. They might even say 'sorry'...but confession means nothing unless it comes hand in hand with biblical repentance.
Really? Wow...that means you're perfect? I wonder if the people in your life think that?
Riiight. So, that's why Paul and the other authors of the NT spend so much time telling us to repent if and when we sin, move forward towards Christ, grow away from our old selves. It would also explain how Peter and Barnabas were found in sin by Paul (in Galatians), and how Paul himself claims to still sin:
For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. (Romans 7:15-18 ESV)
The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost. (1 Timothy 1:15 ESV)
Note the present tense....not "did not" or "dwelt" or "had" or "was"....but "do not", "dwells", "have" and "am". Paul is talking about himself in the present, when he had the Holy Spirit residing within and guiding him.
Brothers I tell you this: Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, and corruption cannot inherit incorruption. Listen! I am telling you a mystery: We will not all fall asleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the blink of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and will will be changed. For this corruptible must be clothed with incorruptibility and this mortal must be clothed with immortality, then the saying that is written will take place:
Death has been swallowed up in victory.
Death, where is your victory?
Death where is your sting?
(1 Corinthians 15:50-55)
It's fairly simple. Sin=death. Death will be triumphed over for good...we will be given sinless forms. Not in this life, the next, where death is no longer present.
Let me know if you want my address for that gift card.
Actually yes, anger is a sin.
“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire. (Matthew 5:21-22 ESV)
Later is scripture it is revealed to us that not ALL anger is sinful. Jesus anger towards sin (as shown when he tipped the money sellers tables over) is to be our example. When we see sin or the effects of sin, it is righteous to become angry...to see a small child beaten, for example. To feel anger because a child is interrupting you, however, is not righteous. It is not Christ like, and is, therefore, a sin.
All of the things I mentioned are, in fact, sins. Will saved people be held accountable for them? No, not under Christ...but it all comes back to repentance and the life time of sanctification. Are we working with the Holy Spirit to put such things to death? It's not graded....if that person is doing better than me, they are no more saved than I am, but your growth and fruit reflect where your heart is at...do you belong to Jesus, or are you just playing at it?
I agree that God comes to us first, calls us to him and changes us with regeneration. He continues with us...the author and perfecter of our faith. But the process of sanctification is one where we work in conjunction with the Spirit. Certainly not under our own power, but we do play a part. If we did not, why on earth so many instructions and recommendations for us in the NT? Why not just say 'sit back and enjoy the ride?'
I'm sorry...is English a second language, because honestly, I didn't understand most of that. I'm gathering that you feel I was accusing someone and wasn't 'discussing' it properly. Let me just recap what I was responding to...
Mark s said on the 25 August, in post number 180:
On the 25 Aug, post number 181, Epi responded:
I replied with my opinion (which is allowed here) and what I believe the bible says about it. I did not quote scripture as my time this morning was short.
I also pointed out the sheer absurdity in the idea that a 'Christian' is saved, then is not, then is saved again, then is not, for the remainder of their life. If, as you say and I agree with, God comes to man and saves him, then to go along with Epi, we would have to say that he then leaves us, comes back, leaves us and comes back. And we'd better hope that he's with us on the occasion we die.
Epi has also said on another occsaion that to be 'completely in Christ' we must be perfect, but that we cannot be perfect 'until we are in Christ'. It's the same contradiction as here. That we are dead (biblically that means we are incapable of seeking God and spiritual things) and yet we manage to come alive (perfect somehow while dead....only to die when we are alive (perfect)...which is ridiculous because by definition if one is perfect they cannot make the sort of mistake that landing oneself back in death would be. So Epi is either talking about a completely unsound pricipal and thought, or he believes that God does indeed save, then unsave, then save people, again and again during their lives. That would mean that God was as capricious as the wind, while we know from the bible that he is constant and dependable.
So, perhaps you feel I'm out of line, but if one cannot call out false ideas that deviate from biblical truth in regards to Gods nature and salvation, then we should just ignore scripture all together.
aspen
“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
hi Rach,
I think it is important to remember what the fruit of the Spirit is ...... none of it is morality.......instead, it is all different aspects of love towards God and others. So, perhaps, personal, chronic sinful behavior may not be the fruit that Paul was talking about when he was pointing out how to tell if someone is not following Christ. It makes more sense to me that bitterness, hateful, fatalism is the fruit of a person living in darkness rather than chronic sin.
I think it is important to remember what the fruit of the Spirit is ...... none of it is morality.......instead, it is all different aspects of love towards God and others. So, perhaps, personal, chronic sinful behavior may not be the fruit that Paul was talking about when he was pointing out how to tell if someone is not following Christ. It makes more sense to me that bitterness, hateful, fatalism is the fruit of a person living in darkness rather than chronic sin.
I think it's a really tough question, with lots of grey area, simply because every single person is different, and their walk with Jesus is in different places.
All I can definitively give you, is what the bible talks about, and my own personal experience. Despite what Xian said above, Christians are NOT perfect, and anyone in touch with reality and being honest, will admit this. People can wave the flag of being under Christ's blood...and yes...in God's eyes now and at judgement time, we will be judged by Christ's behaviour, not our own...that's the assurance we have. So in that regard we could perhaps label ourselves 'sinless', but in day to day life? Interacting with others? The thoughts we have? No way do we get it all right all the time.
So as far as what you're talking about...Christians in chronic sin...can it happen? Every day, I would say. I'm so darn impatient...with everyone. I curse way more than I should, I struggle with my thoughts...unkind thoughts, spiteful thoughts. I don't set out to think or do these things, but they are there; and while I am aware of them and genuinely want rid of them, I just keep falling on my face.
Some would say that means I'm not a true or real Christian...but to that I would show them pretty much every bible verse on grace and the human need for Jesus. I would say that despite my faults, the very fact I want them gone shows my regeneration, my love of Jesus. I would say that every time I stumble and feel conviction, shame and sorrow over my behaviour, it just renews for me the wonder that Jesus would die for me, of how much I needed him to, and how no matter my struggles in this life, I will NEVER look away from the only hope and joy in this world.
So yes, I sin, badly some days. But the point I was trying to make above, and what I strongly believe the bible talks about when it says that Christians will not continue to sin (after it says that if they say their perfect they are liars!!) it means that we are not in that state we were when we rebelled against God. Do you remember those days before he saved you? I was raised in a Christian home, so I knew very well what was sinful behaviour and what was not. But knowing was not enough...not only was I not capable of following godly behaviour, I didn't want to and I didn't see the need. I remember setting my sights on things and stepping into them, even knowing I shouldn't. I remember stubbornly persisting even though I knew it was wrong....I felt it to be wrong...I believe it was God, even then, wooing me, reaching for me. And yet before actual regeneration I steadfastly and resolutely lived for me, not him.
So I believe that any person who says "listen up God...you may say this is wrong, and that by doing it I will hurt my relationship with you, which will actually be detrimental to my happiness and well-being, but I feel like doing it, so I will...I may say 'sorry' even now and then, just so you know that I know you're around, but I'm going to keep doing it anyway"....they still serve themselves and are enslaved to sin, rather than serving God and being enslaved to grace. People who truly love Jesus, who really have the Holy Spirit...they may be stuck in chronic sin...I know of many, probably myself too, to be honest...but they have no joy in it. They pray to escape it, to kill it, to move forward and be closer to Jesus, more like him.
People are so intent on 'if Christians sin' or 'if they don't'....the actual behaviours, that they take the focus off Jesus and onto actions. I'm not saying that behaviours aren't important...but they are definitely secondary issues, as they show and reveal the heart. If a person is looking at Jesus and only Jesus as they walk, their behaviours are going to become more and more like him. If they are too busy looking in a mirror or at others, then how on earth can they be looking at Jesus????
Ok....that ended up being longer and more ramblythan I had planned, but I hope it got my point across??
Similar threads
