Romans 6-8/ What did Paul mean by the word "sin?"

[Enoch111]

I think Mr. Wuest did just that. Do you see where he didn't?

I do not trust Kenneth Wuest, since he went along with the Westcott-Hort hoax instead of exposing it. Nestle's critical text is warmed over Westcott and Hort, and Wuest should have had the discernment to expose this.

"Wuest is credited as one of the translators of the original New American Standard Bible (NASB). He later went on to produce his own English translation of the New Testament (the Wuest Expanded Translation – abbreviated WET) based on Nestle's critical text. In his translation of the New Testament, Wuest attempts to make the original Greek more accessible to the lay reader by drawing out (in translation) the full variety of possible meanings and translations of the underlying Greek words."
Kenneth Wuest - Textus Receptus

Actually the Lord Jesus Christ gave us the best description of "the flesh" or the sin nature, but he called it "the heart" of man (which would mean the heart of unregenerated mankind): 18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. 19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: 20 These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man. (Mt 15:18-20)

When a sinner is born again, he or she receives a new nature governed by the Holy Spirit. But the flesh is not eradicated, therefore it must be crucified or mortified. Therefore we have many exhortations to "walk in the Spirit" and not fulfil the lusts of the flesh.

There are three primary lusts of the flesh or "the heart": (1)the lust of the eyes, (2) the lust of the flesh (bodily appetites) and (3) the pride of life (1 John 2:16). We see that all three were present in Eve, the first woman who was deceived by Satan.

And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food [the lust of the flesh], and that it was pleasant to the eyes [the lust of the eyes], and a tree to be desired to make one wise [the pride of life], she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. (Gen 3:6).

These are the exact same lusts which Satan presented to Christ in the wilderness when tempting Him. And Jesus of Nazareth rejected them all. Then sent Satan packing. Which is also what Christians can do by the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit.

 

[Charlie24]

I do not trust Kenneth Wuest, since he went along with the Westcott-Hort hoax instead of exposing it. Nestle's critical text is warmed over Westcott and Hort, and Wuest should have had the discernment to expose this.

"Wuest is credited as one of the translators of the original New American Standard Bible (NASB). He later went on to produce his own English translation of the New Testament (the Wuest Expanded Translation – abbreviated WET) based on Nestle's critical text. In his translation of the New Testament, Wuest attempts to make the original Greek more accessible to the lay reader by drawing out (in translation) the full variety of possible meanings and translations of the underlying Greek words."
Kenneth Wuest - Textus Receptus

Actually the Lord Jesus Christ gave us the best description of "the flesh" or the sin nature, but he called it "the heart" of man (which would mean the heart of unregenerated mankind): 18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. 19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: 20 These are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man. (Mt 15:18-20)

When a sinner is born again, he or she receives a new nature governed by the Holy Spirit. But the flesh is not eradicated, therefore it must be crucified or mortified. Therefore we have many exhortations to "walk in the Spirit" and not fulfil the lusts of the flesh.

There are three primary lusts of the flesh or "the heart": (1)the lust of the eyes, (2) the lust of the flesh (bodily appetites) and (3) the pride of life (1 John 2:16). We see that all three were present in Eve, the first woman who was deceived by Satan.

And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food [the lust of the flesh], and that it was pleasant to the eyes [the lust of the eyes], and a tree to be desired to make one wise [the pride of life], she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. (Gen 3:6).

These are the exact same lusts which Satan presented to Christ in the wilderness when tempting Him. And Jesus of Nazareth rejected them all. Then sent Satan packing. Which is also what Christians can do by the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit.

I don't think there is a theologian or scholar that I agree with across the board. Maybe a few are close.

Wuest I chose for this thread because I really like his take on Romans. He's not the only one with this view, but I think he explains it the best, in my opinion.

 

[robert derrick]

I agree. We can try to tip the scales towards the good, but that doesn't make us acceptable in the eyes of God. We can spend our lives doing good, but it can all be to prove we're good enough when in reality we may be doing it for ourselves, following our own interests, and not following the Lord.

I prefer to describe the "true good" like this. True good for God is in pursuing a relationship with God as a servant to a Lord, as a child to his Father, as a believer in Christ to the One who gave us Christ. When we choose this kind of good, we are actually receiving Christ's good, and not our own good. We are choosing not only to have God's good, but along with it we choose to receive His grace and forgiveness.

Choosing to live this way is giving up our own ways, and in effect becoming born again. We enter into a new life, as opposed to the way Man lives for himself, pursuing his own interests, and not including God in all of his choices.

Thanks for some good input on this!

We are born again the moment we receive and obey the Spirit of Christ. We are becoming sons of God with pure hearts and clean hands. Being born again is the the instant we believe Jesus for forgiveness of all past sinning. Becoming sons of God is working out our own salvation with a clean new beginning.

Only when we first believe Jesus, do we than receive power to choose to love and obey Him.

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Being newborn babes again is entering into the new and living way of Christ.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

@robert derrick, before we begin to study the power of sin over man according to Paul, we must first define what Paul meant in Rom. 6-8 by the word "sin."

But first let's define the sin nature according to the Greek scholar Kenneth Wuest.

"The sin or evil nature is actually the Adamic nature which imprisoned man at the fall. It has poisoned the entirety of the human race and for all time. It is the nature which encourages sin and which against, man is powerless.
At Calvary Jesus broke the hold of this deadly yoke. However, He did allow it to remain, but powerless. Its remaining is a disciplinary measure. If the believer correctly follows Christ, there is no problem; however, if we yield to temptation and sin, and then try to overcome in the flesh, the sin nature comes alive with serious consequences.
So, in this chapter (Rom. 6) we will study this all-important subject of sin in the life of the Christian, why it is there, and the victory afforded by Christ."

Let's look now at Rom. 6:1, where Paul begins with this subject, to see what he meant by the word "sin."

"What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?"

In the original Greek text, Kenneth Wuest points out that "sin" in this verse has the Greek definite article attached which reads "the sin."

What we have is,

"What shall we say then? Shall we continue in "the sin," that grace may abound?"

The Greek definite article "the" is making "sin" a noun, instead of a verb. Paul is not defining sin here as the acts of sin, but "the sin" as a noun.

It is the original sin of Adam and Eve in the Garden "the sin." Which was the fall of man completely changing his innocent nature to the fallen state of a sin nature. It is the sin nature that Paul is referring when using the word "sin." And he does so throughout Rom. 6-8.

Rom. 5:21

"That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord."

As righteousness can reign as king, so can the nature of sin reign as a king, the nature of sin still in the believer.

Actually Paul is referring to disbelief or unbelief. That is the one sin that keeps people from fellowship with God and having a relationship with God.
We are dead and our life is hid. So we need not live in unbelief anymore!