Saying you are without sin verses in 1 John

[Michiah-Imla]

806

Gal 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

Do this (below) to prevent that (above).

“This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.” (Galatians 5:16)

 

[Johann]

Looks like you went back to Calvinism.

And you to Wesley-anism...you have reached entire sanctification, no need for progression, perfect holiness in this life.
This is how subtle and dangerous Internet platforms can be.
Please do not waste my time anymore sinless one.
J.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

In his book Almighty Over All, Sproul expands on this point, writing, “I am suggesting that he [God] created sin … Where, I must ask, does the law of God forbid the creation of evil? I would suggest that it just isn’t there.”

Looks like your drinking from the wrong well again.

 

[Johann]

Not sure what you are trying to say here. Are you supporting MacArthur (A Calvinist), or are you disagreeing with him?

MacArthur pretends to teach holy living as a requirement for salvation, but he really does not believe that way according to the Bible. The Lordship Salvation doctrine he popularized is a Trojan horse.

How so?

Well, Kenneth Nally committed suicide as per his influence of John MacArthur's ministry and MacArthur said that he was still saved.

Here is a quote from an article:

"At the trial, MacArthur, 45, is seeking to clarify his church’s teaching on suicide. “It’s not only a sin, it’s illegal,” he says. “But we teach that even if a believer takes his own life, the Lord will still receive him into His presence.”​

Article Source:
Fundamentalist Clergymen Face Charges of 'Malpractice' When a Parishioner Turns to Suicide

John MacArthur says that a person can take the mark of the beast and they can still be saved afterwards. Listen to this audio clip by him here:

https://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/audio/macarthur-take-mark.mp3​

John MacArthur says,

".. sin does not result in spiritual death for the believer ...
(The MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1927, comment on James 1:15)"​

John MacArthur confirms how one can sin and still be saved here in this video:

Like I've have said, don't waste my time, you have veered off the truth with your Wesleyan perfectionism, you even decide who can be saved and who not, playing a dangerous game here.
J.

 

[Jim B]

Do try and contemplate on what is written:
What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. Rom7:7

Thou shalt not covet, thou shalt not desire what is not yours to desire, thou shalt not have impure thoughts, thou shalt not lust

This may come as a real shock to you: nobody writes (or speaks) in 17th Century (archaic) Englyshe any more, including yourself. Do you know why? Because the meaning of words have changed in 400 years!

Your posts are a typical example of this. Here is Romans 7:7 in contemporary English: "What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Absolutely not! Certainly, I would not have known sin except through the law. For indeed I would not have known what it means to desire something belonging to someone else if the law had not said, “Do not covet.” (NET) or "What shall we say, then? Is the law sinful? Certainly not! Nevertheless, I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”

I already showed you what lust means in 2022; it is strong sexual desire. You sound stupid by misinterpreting what the Bible says!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

By definition doing the same thing daily ( checking in on a forum ) makes on a " junkie " , an "addict" so to speak.

If one is preaching the Word of God, I don’t see the problem. But it should not be to the neglect of your family or loved ones or the real brethren in your life.

 

[savedbygrace1]

This may come as a real shock to you: nobody writes (or speaks) in 17th Century (archaic) Englyshe any more, including yourself. Do you know why? Because the meaning of words have changed in 400 years!

Your posts are a typical example of this. Here is Romans 7:7 in contemporary English: "What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Absolutely not! Certainly, I would not have known sin except through the law. For indeed I would not have known what it means to desire something belonging to someone else if the law had not said, “Do not covet.” (NET) or "What shall we say, then? Is the law sinful? Certainly not! Nevertheless, I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”

I already showed you what lust means in 2022; it is strong sexual desire. You sound stupid by misinterpreting what the Bible says!

It isn't me being stupid here:
What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
You may have later english translations water down the meaning somewhat, but it is very plainly written in the reputable KJV
Check out the word concupiscence in a dictionary
In verses 14-24 Paul goes into detail concerning what he wrote in 7-11. What do you think those verses relate to? What goes on, on the inside of man, it regards the law no one but you and God need know you break, coveting!
Still, if you want to refuse to accept the truth sobeit.
Coveting covers everything you should not desire!!!
Strong sexual desire isn't lust eh?? Lust isn't coveting??

 

[Taken]

My question was;
You have heard, seen people saying they are without sin on this forum?
Can you quote them?

Your response to my question does not quote one person saying they are without sin.

Just today this was posted to me Taken:

Michiah-Imla Well-Known Member
Messages:
2,203
Likes Received:
1,243
Faith:
Christian
Country:
United States
Robert Gwin said: ↑
Puzzles the heck out of me, I sin every single day
Why? You obey the lusts of the flesh everyday?

“Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.” (John 8:34)

“Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.” (Romans 6:12)

Obey the scriptures!

 

[ChristisGod]

If one is preaching the Word of God, I don’t see the problem. But it should not be to the neglect of your family or loved ones or the real brethren in your life.

I agree I was just making a point regarding frequency.

 

[Johann]

I already showed you what lust means in 2022; it is strong sexual desire. You sound stupid by misinterpreting what the Bible says!

Listen friend, don't call anyone a moron here, defamation of character is the normal norm and acceptable, not so with the scriptures but then, you are above the scriptures.
J.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You must be from a Nazarene Church, you and bible highlighter, having received ENTIRED sanctification.
Are you immature yet entirely sanctified?
Reminds me of Wesley.
J.

First, I don’t know how the Nazarene church started out, but the one I attended was very worldly focused and ecumenical (Not having a problem with one of it’s members saying that they fellowship with Catholics and Mormons). Just Googling the current spiritual state of various Nazarene churches (or it’s current false beliefs), and the spiritual standing lately also is not promising, as well. So the holy living of the Nazarene churches I am aware of is just a sham. Now, are all Nazarene churches that way? I don’t know. But the one I visited and the ones I read about are not good.

Second, I tried to explain to you before (But it seemed to go in one ear and out the other) that I don’t believe that Entire Sanctification or Sinless Perfection is a salvation issue (Even though I believe that such a thing is possible based on what Scripture says). Believers must meet the bare minimum requirements for holy living according to the New Testament to enter the Kingdom. I believe Sinless Perfection is going beyond the bare minimum level requirements of living holy to enter the Kingdom. So again, I don’t believe Sinless Perfection is a salvation issue. I don’t see all sin as the same in the Bible. Not all sin (or transgressions) condemns. You would know that if you studied the Bible more with God’s help.

Three, I am not so sure Wesley would agree with me on my view of Soteriology. He did not see salvation in two aspects like I do. The 1st aspect of salvation is Ephesians 2:8-9 (In being saved by God’s grace). The second aspect of salvation is God has chosen you to salvation through Sanctification of the Spirit and a belief of the truth (2 Thessalonians 2:13).

 

[Johann]

I agree I was just making a point regarding frequency.

Eph 5:16 Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.
J.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Like I've have said, don't waste my time,

So you are better than me?

you have veered off the truth with your Wesleyan perfectionism,

Nope. Not what I believe. Try again.

you even decide who can be saved and who not, playing a dangerous game here.
J.

I don’t decide anything. The Bible does. The Bible says who is saved or not saved based on what it says.
Again, do you believe a person can worship false gods and be saved?
Do you believe a person can deny the bodily resurrection of Christ and be saved?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Eph 5:16 Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.
J.

Sorry, this verse does not apply to you under your current belief system because you have to uphold a standard of morality in order to redeem the time amongst a world that is evil. To join in with the world and it’s evil means one has not truly joined with GOD and His good ways. For you believe that a Christian can sin and still be saved (Which is no real salvation at all).

 

[Jim B]

Listen friend, don't call anyone a moron here, defamation of character is the normal norm and acceptable, not so with the scriptures but then, you are above the scriptures.
J.

a) I'm not your friend. I don't even know you.
b) If you're referring to my reply to savedbygrace1, he misinterpreted the use of the word "lust". The meaning of the word has changed in 400 years. Today it means strong sexual desire.
c) Saying that I am "above the scriptures" is absurd. I believe in and trust the Bible, so your comment is ridiculous.

 

[savedbygrace1]

a) I'm not your friend. I don't even know you.
b) If you're referring to my reply to savedbygrace1, he misinterpreted the use of the word "lust". The meaning of the word has changed in 400 years. Today it means strong sexual desire.
c) Saying that I am "above the scriptures" is absurd. I believe in and trust the Bible, so your comment is ridiculous.

So strong sexual desire is not lust?
Lust is not coveting?
Whos being ridiculous?

 

[Jim B]

It isn't me being stupid here:
What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
You may have later english translations water down the meaning somewhat, but it is very plainly written in the reputable KJV
Check out the word concupiscence in a dictionary
In verses 14-24 Paul goes into detail concerning what he wrote in 7-11. What do you think those verses relate to? What goes on, on the inside of man, it regards the law no one but you and God need know you break, coveting!
Still, if you want to refuse to accept the truth sobeit.
Coveting covers everything you should not desire!!!
Strong sexual desire isn't lust eh?? Lust isn't coveting??

"You may have later english translations water down the meaning somewhat, but it is very plainly written in the reputable KJV" is nonsense. Why don't you communicate in 17th Century Englyshe if it's so much better than modern English? Modern English translations are excellent in several areas, including being based on the best sources. Most importantly, they are meant to be understood by those of us alive today.

I won't reply to the rest of your post because it is both nonsensical and stupid!

 

[savedbygrace1]

"You may have later english translations water down the meaning somewhat, but it is very plainly written in the reputable KJV" is nonsense. Why don't you communicate in 17th Century Englyshe if it's so much better than modern English? Modern English translations are excellent in several areas, including being based on the best sources. Most importantly, they are meant to be understood by those of us alive today.

I won't reply to the rest of your post because it is both nonsensical and stupid!

strong sexual desire is not lust?
Lust is not coveting?
Who is being ridiculous?

I don't mind you being rude to me. I have read many of your comments being rude to others also. So now do you understand why you are on the internet debating the bible?

 

[Johann]

"You may have later english translations water down the meaning somewhat, but it is very plainly written in the reputable KJV" is nonsense. Why don't you communicate in 17th Century Englyshe if it's so much better than modern English? Modern English translations are excellent in several areas, including being based on the best sources. Most importantly, they are meant to be understood by those of us alive today.

I won't reply to the rest of your post because it is both nonsensical and stupid!

On ignore you go.
J.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

@Johann

Maybe I missed your post, but you still have not explained to me what you think the words of Jesus mean in Matthew 5:28-30.
Was Jesus talking to believers or unbelievers?
Does Jesus’ words still apply today in this passage?
If not, what specific passage or verse gives you this clue?