Go, And Sin No More?

[CadyandZoe]

Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me. (Psalms 51:10)

I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. (John 15:5)

Even unconverted people cannot overcome sin without Christ. He is the Source of every right impulse.

Of course. But let's be clear about what we mean by "overcome." David recognized that the source of his sinful behavior was deeply inward, which is why he mourns his behavior and asks God to great in him a clean heart etc.

Paul also recognized this and wrote about it in his epistle to the Romans, chapter 7. And while it remains true that God has granted the believer an earnest on his or her inheritance in the form of the Holy Spirit within them, sanctification is taking place at the penultimate level of their being. At the ultimate level believers remain "wretched" men and women waiting for that day when corruption will put on incorruption. For why would a man hope for what he sees? We hope for what we don't see . . . yet.

Nevertheless, Paul also understood that folks are fully capable of doing the right thing and serving righteousness, even in this lifetime. As John the Apostle once wrote, "Sin is the transgression of the law." In other words, sin is accounted as an act of disobedience. Even Paul, before his conversion experience was blameless with regard to the law. Philippians 3:5-6 Obedience to the law requires dedication, commitment, and internal fortitude but it isn't impossible. Doing the right thing is not out of anyone's reach.

I maintain that Jesus would never command someone to do something that was impossible. He fully expected the woman caught in adultery to "go and sin no more." We have no indication that SHE was being led by the Spirit or that she was a believer. The woman was fully capable, apart from divine aid, of remaining faithful to one man.

The Pharisees were men who dedicated themselves to walking blamelessly. Some of them were successful. Paul testified that he was righteous with respect to God's law, found blameless. The fatal error of the Pharisee was his attitude toward others, thinking themselves to be different than other men who were not found blameless. [In a sense they were.]

Christians err with regard to the process of sanctification, which has more to do with the inwardness of the believer, rather than the behavior of the believer. Sanctification is the fulfillment of David's prayer for a clean heart and a right spirit within himself.

 

[justbyfaith]

Paul testified that he was righteous with respect to God's law, found blameless.

Not to argue with you but to add to your points, allow me to say that inwardly Paul did not keep the law blamelessly (Romans 7:7-25). He found that when it came to the sin of covetousness, the law produced in him all manner of it, before he was saved.

I believe that when Paul was saved, he received the righteousness which is of God by faith; and even his covetousness was dealt with at that point. He forsook the righteousness which was of the law and received the righteousness which is of God by faith (Philippians 3:9).

What that looked like I don't know.

I do know that Jesus exemplified this (at the risk of getting into the same old argument) when He healed on the sabbath day; thus violating the letter of the sabbath day law (but not the spirit of the law).

I think that Paul also probably violated the letter of certain laws in order to better obey the spirit of what the law is all about. For in Philippians 3:6-8, he tells us that even though he was blameless according to the law, that he counted all of it as dung in order that he might win Christ. And in Philippians 3:9, it becomes clear that the righteousness of the law is what he counted as dung in order that he might obtain the righteousness which is of God by faith.

Again, I don't know what this looked like. Perhaps he stopped obeying the Jewish food laws and/or didn't let anyone judge him in regard to a sabbath or a new moon. It would seem that there is scripture to support the idea that this was his behaviour, if he practiced what he preached. And I believe that he did indeed practice what he preached.

 

[Earburner]

You're free to rationalize your views any way you like.

I see that you found the back door.

 

[Earburner]

Of course. But let's be clear about what we mean by "overcome." David recognized that the source of his sinful behavior was deeply inward, which is why he mourns his behavior and asks God to great in him a clean heart etc.

Paul also recognized this and wrote about it in his epistle to the Romans, chapter 7. And while it remains true that God has granted the believer an earnest on his or her inheritance in the form of the Holy Spirit within them, sanctification is taking place at the penultimate level of their being. At the ultimate level believers remain "wretched" men and women waiting for that day when corruption will put on incorruption. For why would a man hope for what he sees? We hope for what we don't see . . . yet.

Nevertheless, Paul also understood that folks are fully capable of doing the right thing and serving righteousness, even in this lifetime. As John the Apostle once wrote, "Sin is the transgression of the law." In other words, sin is accounted as an act of disobedience. Even Paul, before his conversion experience was blameless with regard to the law. Philippians 3:5-6 Obedience to the law requires dedication, commitment, and internal fortitude but it isn't impossible. Doing the right thing is not out of anyone's reach.

I maintain that Jesus would never command someone to do something that was impossible. He fully expected the woman caught in adultery to "go and sin no more." We have no indication that SHE was being led by the Spirit or that she was a believer. The woman was fully capable, apart from divine aid, of remaining faithful to one man.

The Pharisees were men who dedicated themselves to walking blamelessly. Some of them were successful. Paul testified that he was righteous with respect to God's law, found blameless. The fatal error of the Pharisee was his attitude toward others, thinking themselves to be different than other men who were not found blameless. [In a sense they were.]

Christians err with regard to the process of sanctification, which has more to do with the inwardness of the believer, rather than the behavior of the believer. Sanctification is the fulfillment of David's prayer for a clean heart and a right spirit within himself.

Of which by the way, is fully explained in Romans 8:8-9.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Andy and I are inseparable. Your contrived Systematic Theology is flawed.

Barney never gets anything in depth ... Andy is always shaking his head.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Where in the story is it called legalism? Self-righteousness and condescension are attitudes. Legalism is described by Paul in Galations as believing or living like one can earn the favor or justification of men or God by performing the works of the law. It is a belief system, thus, the -ism. Self-righteousness or hypocrisy are symptoms of legalism--the disease.

That is correct ... Andy will be proud of you for that one - I can see him smiling.

 

[farouk]

IMHO I think we should differentiate between eternal punishment which applies to those with an uncircumcised heart (non believers)
And the chastisement or rebuke of the Father...which is temporal...and this chapter in Hebrews just absolutely explains chastening in an easy to comprehend way.
Heb 12 (NKJV)
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
³ For consider Him who endured such hostility from sinners against Himself, lest you become weary and discouraged in your souls.
⁴ You have not yet resisted to bloodshed, striving against sin.
⁵ And you have forgotten the exhortation which speaks to you as to sons: "My son, do not despise the chastening of the Lord, Nor be discouraged when you are rebuked by Him;
⁶ For whom the Lord loves He chastens, And scourges every son whom He receives."
⁷ If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten?
⁸ But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons.
⁹ Furthermore, we have had human fathers who corrected us, and we paid them respect. Shall we not much more readily be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live?
¹⁰ For they indeed for a few days chastened us as seemed best to them, but He for our profit, that we may be partakers of His holiness.
¹¹ Now no chastening seems to be joyful for the present, but painful; nevertheless, afterward it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.
¹² Therefore strengthen the hands which hang down, and the feeble knees,

@Heart2Soul Clearly the passage is speaking about the refining of believers. John 15 has a similar idea, as does Malachi 3.

 

[BarneyFife]

I see that you found the back door.

No. I'm just over Peter Ruckman Syndrome.

 

[BarneyFife]

Barney never gets anything in depth ... Andy is always shaking his head.

And proud of it. If I'm known for anything, it's my incredibly shallow thought process. All of that deep stuff just hampers the ability to nip it in the bud.

 

[BarneyFife]

The Lords Prayer is perfect, but is a template. Prayer is talking to God and if that is all you ever prayed, you haven't communicated with God in any kind if detail.

Shucks. I thought I was on top of the prayer thing.

Context is crucial in understanding this scripture, you can't just pull out one verse and think it applies to everyone.

How about John 3:16? You do know that Scripture originally had no verses, right? So a key thought could be as short or as long as the writer or God Himself intended. Hermeneutics is just as much art as science.

 

[BarneyFife]

How are they different, according to the Bible?

If I remember correctly, "atonement" was a word John Wycliffe made up because he felt "reconcile" was inadequate to express the idea of the atonement process.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Shucks. I thought I was on top of the prayer thing.

I was just referring to the use of the Lord's Prayer. Catholics will recite it over and over in repetition as if that is magnifying their communication to God. I'm suspect you don't do that.

How about John 3:16? You do know that Scripture originally had no verses, right? So a key thought could be as short or as long as the writer or God Himself intended. Hermeneutics is just as much art as science.

Many verses stand on their own on fullness of meaning, otherwise we could not quote them. With all scripture, it is good to examine the context. That is fundamental hermeneutics.

 

[BarneyFife]

Prayer is talking to God and if that is all you ever prayed, you haven't communicated with God in any kind if detail.

I'm suspect you don't do that.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Context is crucial in understanding this scripture, you can't just pull out one verse and think it applies to everyone.

Many verses stand on their own on fullness of meaning, otherwise we could not quote them.

Backpeddle much?​

 

[ChristisGod]

Shucks. I thought I was on top of the prayer thing.

How about John 3:16? You do know that Scripture originally had no verses, right? So a key thought could be as short or as long as the writer or God Himself intended. Hermeneutics is just as much art as science.

That is something most forget about when "quoting" a specific passage is that there are no chapters/verses in the original text.

A good example of this is we have a certain poster who often quotes Jesus is John 16 where He promises His disciples that when the Holy Spirit comes that He will guide them into all truth, then goes on to say that the Holy Spirit will bring to remembrance everything I have told/taught you.

This poster takes the liberty with the passage and applies it to himself and thinking he has all the truth lol. That was a specific promise to a specific group of people who actually wrote our bible under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. We are reading all their truth Jesus taught them in our bibles.

Another misapplied one is where 2 or 3 are gathered together in My name I am in their midst. People recite this all the time in prayer groups, church, small groups, bible studies etc.......... Truth be told that is a promise for 2 or 3 witnesses bringing a charge against a brother for them to repent and turn away from their sin and Jesus promised to be with them in that specific situation.

There are a ton of such examples where scripture gets removed from its original context and gets misapplied all the time in Christendom.

 

[justbyfaith]

John 16:13 speaks of the function of the Holy Spirit in the lives of all who have Him.

 

[ChristisGod]

as usual you make things up..................

next..................................................

 

[justbyfaith]

as usual you make things up..................

next..................................................

Reject the truth if you so desire...it just means that you yourself won't be able to lay hold of the promise that the Holy Spirit can guide you into all truth.

Because promises are only received when believed.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Backpeddle much?​

I dont have patience like Andy to spoon feed. MERRY CHRISTMAS and maybe specifically pray for the Holy Spirit for discernment.

 

[BarneyFife]

I dont have patience like Andy to spoon feed. MERRY CHRISTMAS and maybe specifically pray for the Holy Spirit for discernment.

You seem to have it all figured out. Why bother praying? I could just follow you on the forum.

 

[jaybird]

Do we believe these words of Christ as much as we believe words such as . . .

when Jesus says things like sin no more or the laws not abolished or feed the hungry, the faith / grace people will always ignore these things and go with Paul and claim all those things got nailed to the cross. another thing they like to do is call the law "Legalism" people not murdering one another is legalism.
i guess i am crazy but i dont want to live in a world where if i dont like my neighbor i can just go out and murder his entire family.