Sinless Perfection. Why do so many teach against what Jesus taught?
- Thread starter 1stCenturyLady
- 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!
They may have been born of the Spirit but they have realized that they need to be filled with the Spirit (extra oil for their lamp) in order to DISPLACE the sin nature in them....rendering it ineffective.
Which verse(s) did you have in mind?
Here's one example of the use of "aphesis".
Mark 3:29 (N.I.V.) but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; they are guilty of an eternal sin.”
Here are Strong's and Thayer's Lexicon's (an electronic version, keyed to Strong's numbers) entries for "aphesis" .
[*Thayer*]
859 aphesis {af'-es-is} from 863 1) release from bondage or imprisonment 2) forgiveness or pardon, of sins (letting them go as if they had never been committed), remission of the penalty
[*StrongsGreek*]
859 aphesis af'-es-is from 863; freedom; (figuratively) pardon:--deliverance, forgiveness, liberty, remission. see GREEK for 863
In my view, "forgiveness" is correct here, and "freedom" would be obscure.
This is refuted by 3 words, which Paul repeats. When the Bible repeats something we should listen, should we not? Even if only once, yes?
Romans 7:17
Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Romans 7:20
Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Until you understand the sayings of these verses you will not understand about sin in the redeemed.
Paul claims that he was the sinner, but now is not, while sin still lives in his flesh. Not some ephemeral "sin nature", no, his body of flesh. That is the way the Bible speaks.
Much love!
In your opinion? Do you realize that the bible goes back farther than you? Do you realize that the Hebrew scriptures predate the New Testament? Do you realize that Jesus came to fulfill the scriptures and actually quotes them? Do you realize that we get the word "aphesis" from the Septuagint? Do you realize that the gospel is stated in Is 61:1 and that the New testament account of Jesus reading it is in the context of setting the prisoners FREE. The Hebrew is DEROR which ONLY means freedom, because the Jews had no need to add in another definition.
So then your opinion based on one verse does not negate the WHOLE bible and the words of Jesus. I am thinking that your whole walk is just like the other pretenders here.
Why are you so obstinate in your lack of understanding? What does it give you? Affirmation? Certainly not any contact with God.
Yikes! Overreacting much?
The New Testament was inspired in Koine Greek, not Hebrew; but, the reason why I asked you which verse(s) you had in mind, is precisely because you might have been thinking about a context in which "freedom" is correct, and I didn't want to pre-judge. I gave one example of where I believe that "forgiven" is correct, but that was not intended as proof that all examples mean "forgiven".
Yes, Jesus came to set the captives free. I know that, so show some verses where "aphesis" definitely means "freedom", rather than ranting for no good reason.
You know nothing about my walk with Jesus, just as I know nothing about yours (and a few Internet posts are not very reliable evidence, especially since the likelihood of some misunderstanding is quite high).
I’m not sure I understand what you mean by saying this is “before God.” Are you referring to the Corinthians being brought before God to recognize Christ revealed in Paul, whose strength is made perfect in weakness?
The Corinthians wanted proof that Christ was speaking through Paul. Yet Paul expresses confidence that they will come to recognize the truth, even though they may not yet see it.
2 Corinthians 13:6–7:
“But I trust that ye shall know that we are not reprobates. Now I pray to God that ye do no evil; not that we should appear approved, but that ye should do that which is honest, though we be as reprobates.”
Notice Paul’s heart here. He is not primarily concerned with proving himself approved in their eyes. He prays that they will do what is right and honest, even if that means he himself appears to be disapproved.
This is where I see the mind of Christ being revealed in Paul. He is not seeking his own vindication but their spiritual good. He trusts God to work in them, leading them toward what is right.
This also brings Romans 1:28 to mind, where Paul speaks of those who refused to retain God in their knowledge and were given over to a reprobate mind, to do things that are not convenient.
The contrast is important. Paul is not encouraging the Corinthians to justify themselves or follow what is convenient to them. He is urging them toward what is right and honest.
So, when you say “before God,” I wonder whether you mean that the Corinthians must come to see Christ revealed in their brother, whose weakness becomes the occasion for God's strength to be made manifest. If so, I can see that connection. But I would also emphasize that God is already at work, drawing them toward what is right and honest.
I think much depends on how we perceive Paul and the heart behind his words.
For example, when Paul says that the Corinthians still need milk and are not yet ready for meat, many people can read that as a reason to consider themselves superior because they believe they can handle the meat.
But I see Paul's heart differently. Christ lives in him, and he longs for them to mature so that they, too, can receive and endure the deeper things of God.
Paul is not speaking from a position of superiority but from a heart that cares for their spiritual growth. He speaks as one who has tenderly cared for them, like a nurse caring for her children.
That, to me, is strength in the Spirit: the humility to correct others, not to exalt oneself, but because one longs for them to grow in Christ.
His words are strong, but the heart behind them is love. He wants them to be strengthened in the inner man, not merely to become more confident in themselves.
That is why I believe we must discern the difference between human strength and the strength of Christ working in us.
When Paul speaks of being willing to be weak so that they may be strong, what kind of strength is he talking about?
I
Let the dead burying the dead?
The rebel was once us all.
What is truth. Men have differing things they proclaim as, the God’s Honest Truth.
Is Paul willing to be weak so that the Corinthians can become stronger in their own opinions and pride? I don't believe so.
Paul understands that they need the strength that comes from God. He is not seeking to establish his own strength over them, nor does he want them to become strong in themselves.
Rather, God's strength is made perfect in weakness.
I believe Paul's desire is for them to be strengthened in Christ, and that includes learning to love those they may think do not measure up.
It is one thing to appear strong in knowledge or to believe we have reached spiritual maturity. It is another thing to have the strength of Christ formed in us, so that we can walk in humility, bear with one another, and love those whom we might otherwise look down upon.
That is the strength Paul desires for them: not the strengthening of pride, but the strengthening of the inner man through Christ.
Last edited:
Where did the subject I just raised go, Epi? You quickly moved off topic again and back to your comfort zone (basics - 101). Are you now writing to me or yourself, to an audience? You are now doing your usual empty grandstanding act in an attempt to teach me something that does not really apply to me, or is not about my two recent posts to you in the subject of "human righteousness" that must be defined in a wide audience.
And then out of nowhere, you have the gall to accuse me of "...seeing righteousness through my indoctrination." and then adding your catch phrase "righteousness is what we do." And you can drive a semi through this vague statement of course.
I will just finish with the my current topic that entailed "Human," "Self," and "in Christ" righteousness.
- The Bible states that "there is none righteous, no not one" (Romans 3:10). Human attempts at righteousness are described as "filthy rags" to God and cannot justify a person before Him.
- Alien Righteousness: The "righteousness of God" is not a quality believers, alone, achieve but a gift imputed to them through faith in Jesus Christ (Romans 3:21-22; 2 Corinthians 5:21).
- Source of Righteousness: True righteousness is "alien" to believers because it is based on Christ’s death and resurrection, not on human works or behavior. It is granted solely by God’s grace and received through faith, not earned by merit.
--------entertaining your strange post here of it contents I've know for many years now---------
And of course believers always must only be righteous in God and not of ourselves. And of course that means doing, and not just believing. How else can you mature and grow? And these works are not performed on our own, as in self, only in cooperation with the Spirit of God via the planted spirit of his Son, who dwells within every believer!
----------------------on your typical responses from other posts---------------
You know there are words appropriate for your habitual dramatic non-substantial hifalutin responses to many of your posts, in your usual style and attempts to belittle others. I don't buy into any of it, and it can be amusing. I only respond to a mature and honest post of those of a sincere heart and not one that is viewed as written in a mode of insecurity and even desperation.
Let me sum up what your empty ridiculous grandstanding means to me with these words you can easy search for: airy, bloated, flatulent, gaseous/gassy, blustering/blustery, gusty, inflated, overblown, puffy, and swollen.
Airy: Definition: affected or proud
The noun air and the derivative airy are both regularly exhaled in reference to things insubstantial or immaterial. They descend from Greek aēr.
Bloated: Definition: overfilled and extended with liquid, gas, food, etc. — often used figuratively to describe something as having grown excessively large.
Blustering/Blustery:
Definition (blustering): speaking loudly and aggressively
Definition (blustery): noisily self-assertive
Blustering: used as an adjectival present participle becomes established during the 16th century—need we say the verb form was already blowing around. It is of Germanic origin.
Blustery: begins making noise in the 18th century and is formed from the noun bluster, which can refer to a violent, boisterous blowing or commotion or to a loud, boastful or threatening speech.
Flatulent:
Definition: pompously or portentously overblown
The adjective It begins being expelled during the late 16th century as a word describing literal and metaphorical gaseous phenomena. It blows in from Middle French, but its ultimate source words are Latin flatus, used to refer to an act of blowing or wind, and flare, a Latin verb meaning "to blow."
Gaseous/Gassy:
Definition (gaseous, gassy): characterized by many words but little content; emptily verbose
Both gaseous and gassy ripen during the 18th century. Their source is gas, which is believed to be an alteration of Latin chaos, meaning "space" and (yes) "chaos"
Gusty:
Definition: marked by outbursts of empty bombastic talk
The related noun gust blasts into 16th-century English with the meaning "a sudden brief rush of wind" and is swiftly picked up by the Bard; it is believed to be of Old Norse ancestry.
Inflated"
Definition: elaborated or heightened by artificial or empty means
Inflated blew up as an adjective past participle in the 17th century. The verb inflate was formed in the 15th century when the Latin prefix in-was coupled to the verb flare, meaning "to blow."
Overblown:
Definition: inflated or pretentious
It's difficult to puff up the history of overblown. The prefix over- is joined to the adjective blown, meaning "swollen" and deriving from the Middle English past participle of the verb blowen (blow, in modern day).
Puffed/Puffy:
Definition (puffed): exhibiting or expressive of vanity or conceit; pretentious or arrogant
Definition (puffy): characterized by vanity or ostentation
The adjectives puffed (also puffed-up) and puffy start being emitted in 16th-century English. The verb and noun puff are centuries older, dating to Old English and originating from onomatopoeia.
Swelling/Swollen:
Definition (swelling, swollen): inflated in style or manner; bombastic or pompous
Both adjectives are participles of swell, an ancient verb originally meaning "to expand" and expanding outward in meaning over many years. The older of the two adjectives is swollen.
----------------------------------------------------------------
I don't believe righteousness is only what we do, it is also what one is inwardly, the heart. In fact true righteousness begins there doesn't it...the heart?
Last edited:
MostlyConfused
Well-Known Member
I don’t even go to Strongs any more. It is based off OF translation errors, due to a preconceived bent. Isn’t that just so weird…?
I cannot agree. Born of the Spirit has to do with taking sin away from the nature which Romans 7:14-25 still has the flesh intact, therefore before being in Christ. Filled has to do with boldness for ministry, Acts 4:
1 John 3:5-9 "5 And you know that He was manifested to take away our sins, and in Him there is no sin. 6 Whoever abides in Him does not sin. Whoever sins has neither seen Him nor known Him. 7 Little children, let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous. 8 He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil. 9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.
Romans 7:5-6 are the only verses in Romans 7 that are about Christians. 5 For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused by the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death. 6 But now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter.
Unfortunately, there are many people in the church that still struggle with sin because they've never been born again of the Spirit. Even though it was 30 years before I was finally born again of the Spirit, at least, I know the difference the Spirit makes, and can teach the truth that sets man free. John 8:32, 34-36
Strong's is really a concordance, but it does have some useful basic meanings for Greek/Hebrew. I wouldn't rely on it, but for quick reference it's handy.
It sounds as though you do not know what is the significance of those 3 words.
Paul wrote that he was the sinner, but now "it is no more I", but is instead "the sin that lives in me". He goes on to give an important detail, that there is nothing good living in him, that is, in his flesh. That is a very significant teaching, and it refutes your assertions.
Much love!
You do realize that Paul was talking of his spiritual journey from having a live sinful nature to being crucified with Christ so that he went from...no longer I but sin in me....to...no longer I but Christ lives in me. That is the conversion....the 2nd conversion...of Paul. I know that 1st century lady differs on this...because she was more advanced in years and wasn't in need of another conversion. But a younger man needs to be more gradually converted away from his flesh.
Romans 6 initial conversion with grace sample.....a new heart
Romans 7 a realization that the old sin nature is still alive and in need of the cross. No longer I but sin in me.
Romans 8 a full entrance into Christ with the victory He provides over the power of the flesh...by the power of the Spirit. No longer I but Christ.
If people don't see that progression, they may be stuck in Romans 7.
You are close, but your timeline is off.
In Romans 7, Paul wrote, speaking in the present, well, you just read it . . .
Roman 7:17-20 KJV
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
You are conflating this with the Galatians passage.
This is how we overcome our flesh, by remaining in the Spirit. Even so, as Paul clearly teaches, our corrupted body of flesh remains for now (the body of this death).
You need to be able to understand where Paul says that it's no more him, indicating transformation ( it was him, but is no longer), while still professing that sin remains in his body.
Keep this in context, which comes after chapter 6, where Paul explains that transformation in much detail. You are taking what Paul squarely places within regeneration and making it as it were not.
Much love!
Or more simply stated,
Romans 6:3-11
Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
For he that is dead is freed from sin.
Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Romans 6 is baptized into Christ. Romans 7 is results.
Much love!
Sin does NOT live in a born again Christian, that is why a born again Christian cannot commit lawless sin. The sin nature has been crucified and we are free from sin.
If that were so you wouldn't have to parse sin into groups, you could recognize that all that is not of faith is sin, no exceptions. This is a major inconsistency in your assertions, that some sins are "OK" and some are not. Rather, as Romans 5 expresses, even when they are not imputed with sin, they still die because of their sin. You can add to that passage "sins unto death" to make it conform to your view, but that's what you would have to do.
Much love!
Similar threads
