The Godly Heresy of Sinless Perfectionism

[Bible Highlighter]

No, though informed by his own experience, the "I" is Paul speaking in character for any Christian (especially the Gentile Christians in Rome) being asked to take on Torah. The key is verse 9, I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin came to life, and I died. Paul was born a Jew; when was he EVER alive apart from Torah? Only a Christian can be said to be alive apart from the Law.

Sorry. That doesn’t make any sense to me. Paul would not take on the whole of the Old Law after being a Christian. Romans 6:14 says we are not under the law.

In Romans 7:7-13, Paul is recounting Israelite history and speaking as a Jew throughout time with the coming in of the Law of Moses and what that was like.

In Romans 7:14-24, Paul is recounting his experience as a Pharisee before he became a Christian. Paul (Saul) is describing his experience of what it is like to struggle in keeping the Old Covenant Law that did not include Jesus Christ.

Romans 8 is the Christian new way of life.

So it’s a progression of history or time.

 

[Lambano]

In Romans 7:7-13, Paul is recounting Israelite history and speaking as a Jew throughout time with the coming in of the Law of Moses and what that was like.

In Romans 7:14-24, Paul is recounting his experience as a Pharisee before he became a Christian. Paul (Saul) is describing his experience of what it is like to struggle in keeping the Old Covenant Law that did not include Jesus Christ.

If you are saying the "I" in verses 7-13 is Paul speaking as Israel, when could Israel be considered "alive apart from the Law"? When they were slaves in Egypt?

As for Paul struggling to keep Torah as a Jew, I have to point out Philippians 3:5-6, where Paul says he was a "Hebrew of Hebrews" and "as to the righteousness that comes from the Law, blameless". And Galatians 1:16, where Paul notes that he had advanced in Judaism far beyond most of his contemporaries. No, Paul's struggles only became apparent to him after Jesus asked, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?"

 

[Lambano]

Sorry. That doesn’t make any sense to me. Paul would not take on the whole of the Old Law after being a Christian. Romans 6:14 says we are not under the law.

Exactly. Paul's audience at this point in the letter is the Jewish-Christians in Rome (Romans 7:1). Paul's point here is that taking on Torah, the thing that historically defined who is and who isn't part the People of God, taking on the Law would take a Christian who is alive and "kill" them. Remember, the "I" is Paul speaking as a Christian character taking on the Law, not as a historical person.

Notice also which commandment Paul uses as his example of sin in verse 7: ἐπιθυμία, epithumia, translated variously as Coveting or Lusting. This is a sin that takes place inside a man's heart. Sins of the heart are notoriously hard to eradicate.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

If you are saying the "I" in verses 7-13 is Paul speaking as Israel, when could Israel be considered "alive apart from the Law"? When they were slaves in Egypt?

Yes, Israel was alive without the Law of Moses before it was given because sin was not imputed where there is no law. In other words, we see that sin reigned from Adam to Moses despite the fact that sin is not imputed where there is no Law (i.e. the written law - like the 613 Laws of Moses). Israel was not held to obey all 613 Laws of Moses until Mount Sinai (By the receiving of the 10 commandments tablets and the Torah).

Romans 5:12-14​

12 “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:​

13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.​

14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.”​

The gospel was preached to Abraham and we Christians are under the promise of Abraham (By an initial belief in coming to Jesus Christ that accounts for righteousness - Romans 4), and not the many Laws that came through Moses.

Galatians 3:7-9​

7 “Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.​

8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.​

9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.”​

​

Galatians 3:14​

”That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.”​

The Law of Moses that came 430 years after the Promise made to Abraham (Which is the same promise we are under in that we are justified by faith) cannot nullify the promise made to Abraham.

Galatians 3:17​

17 “And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect.​

18 For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise.”​

The Law was added because of transgressions.

Galatians 3:19​

”What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator.”​

As for Paul struggling to keep Torah as a Jew, I have to point out Philippians 3:5-6, where Paul says he was a "Hebrew of Hebrews" and "as to the righteousness that comes from the Law, blameless".

Philippians 3:2-6 says,
2 Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision.
3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:
5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

Paul says beware of The concision in verse 2.
The Aramaic in Plain English Bible says, “beware of the circumcisers.”
Why? See: Acts 15:1, Acts 15:5, and Acts 15:24.
In Acts 15, we learn that there was a sect of Jews who sought to get Gentile Christians to be circumcised in order to be saved (Which was false). The Jerusalem council concluded that to be circumcised initially to be saved was wrong. Paul says in Galatians 5:2 that if you seek to be circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. This is why Paul says beware of the circumcisers (or concision). So Paul was not blameless.

In verse 3, Paul points out how we Christians are the circumcision (i.e. the spiritually circumcised people) and we place no confidence in the flesh like those under the Laws of Moses.

In verse 4, Paul talks about how he trusted the flesh all the more.
Paul says in Romans 8:13, “For if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.” This means when a person seeks to be under the Laws of Moses (Under the New Covenant), they will be a slave to sin. Believers need to obey the doctrine in no longer being a slave to sin but being a slave to righteousness (See: Romans 6:17-18). For we are to consider ourselves dead unto sin (Romans 6:11).

Verse 6, Paul says he persecuted the church. So he cannot be blameless before God by hurting God’s people. So Paul was ONLY blameless in the eyes of the false Pharisee religion that rejected Jesus as their Messiah (at that time).

And Galatians 1:16, where Paul notes that he had advanced in Judaism far beyond most of his contemporaries. No, Paul's struggles only became apparent to him after Jesus asked, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?"

It’s actually Galatians 1:14, my friend.

It says,

”And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.” (Galatians 1:14).

It says that Paul advanced in the Jew’s religion, and not in God’s ways.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Exactly. Paul's audience at this point in the letter is the Jewish-Christians in Rome (Romans 7:1). Paul's point here is that taking on Torah, the thing that historically defined who is and who isn't part the People of God, taking on the Law would take a Christian who is alive and "kill" them. Remember, the "I" is Paul speaking as a Christian character taking on the Law, not as a historical person.

Notice also which commandment Paul uses as his example of sin in verse 7: ἐπιθυμία, epithumia, translated variously as Coveting or Lusting. This is a sin that takes place inside a man's heart. Sins of the heart are notoriously hard to eradicate.

Not so. But Paul sometimes uses “I” in a rhetorical sense to describe generic experience rather than his own present experience (1 Corinthians 10:30; 1 Corinthians 13:2-3, 1 Corinthians 13:11). In at least one other place, Paul uses a first-person present verb to describe his opponents’ experience (Galatians 2:18).

This is the only way to make sense of the text in Romans 7.
If Paul sought to take on the Law, then he would be justified by it, and that’s not possible.
For Acts 13:39 says you cannot be justified by the Law of Moses. Galatians 5:4 says if you seek to be justified by the Law, you have fallen from grace. No Christian would ask, ”Who shall deliver me from this body of death?”
Only a person under the 613 laws of Moses and who is clueless about Jesus being their Messiah would ask such a question.
Christians already know who will deliver them.

 

[Adam]

I was reading on Confucius and one thing he said really stuck with me. (Paraphrasing heavily): Men often say that they are wise and virtuous, but I have not seen one who could go even a single month without erring.

So far, I have not been able to go that month, or even a week, without lapsing for at least a moment and thinking, saying or doing something wrongful.

 

[marks]

I was reading on Confucius and one thing he said really stuck with me. (Paraphrasing heavily): Men often say that they are wise and virtuous, but I have not seen one who could go even a single month without erring.

So far, I have not been able to go that month, or even a week, without lapsing for at least a moment and thinking, saying or doing something wrongful.

I think that anyone who is honest and self-aware will say the same thing. I think some people have this idea of sorting our behaviors and ticking the boxes "right" "wrong", but that the reality is we are operating out of our spirit, which is what God wants, or from our flesh, which God does not want.

I've not ever had an online discussion with someone who claims to always always live from their spirit that they don't demonstrate to me that's not true. I can see it but either they cannot, or they choose to lie about it. Or some who will give their redefinitions of what sin is, as if some sin is not really sin.

Much love!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I was reading on Confucius and one thing he said really stuck with me. (Paraphrasing heavily): Men often say that they are wise and virtuous, but I have not seen one who could go even a single month without erring.

So far, I have not been able to go that month, or even a week, without lapsing for at least a moment and thinking, saying or doing something wrongful.

This is because they need to have GOD in their life to be able to overcome. Confucius was not a Christian. So he does not count. Nor do unbelievers in Christ count. If a person does not believe 1 Peter 4:1-2, Galatians 5:24, 2 Corinthians 7:1 that Is their problem in not having faith in God’s Word. These verses mean what they say. One is either a believer in God’s Word, or they are not. We cannot cherry pick what parts of the Bible we want to believe in. With God, all things are possible.

Most people today do not even believe the Bible. 20% of Americans believe the Bible is the literal Word of God. Even amongst this 20%, I would say that there is a good percentage out of this 20% who do not believe certain verses in the Bible (Like the ones I mentioned).

 

[marks]

In Romans 7:14-24, Paul is recounting his experience as a Pharisee before he became a Christian. Paul (Saul) is describing his experience of what it is like to struggle in keeping the Old Covenant Law that did not include Jesus Christ.

What about the verb tenses that say otherwise?

Romans 7:14-25 KJV
14) For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15) For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16) If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
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.
21) I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22) For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23) But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24) O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25) I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

He speaks of this all "now". But he clearly shows a fundamental change had taken place. He is "no more", no longer the sinner, however, the sin that used to be his now lives in his flesh.

O wretched man that I was! Was? No. O wretched man that I am! With the mind I serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin. How is that so? Because I have been born of God, a new creation, not the Adamic man of flesh, though I remain in this fleshy body continuing my same though now redeemed life.

Much love!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

What about the verb tenses that say otherwise?

Romans 7:14-25 KJV
14) For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15) For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16) If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
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.
21) I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22) For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23) But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24) O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25) I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

He speaks of this all "now". But he clearly shows a fundamental change had taken place. He is "no more", no longer the sinner, however, the sin that used to be his now lives in his flesh.

O wretched man that I was! Was? No. O wretched man that I am! With the mind I serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin. How is that so? Because I have been born of God, a new creation, not the Adamic man of flesh, though I remain in this fleshy body continuing my same though now redeemed life.

Much love!

That does not mean anything. People in our world today speak of past experiences in the present tense all the time to make the event sound more vivid. So you cannot use that argument. The other alternative is the Bible contradicts itself and that is not possible. The explanation I gave fits the context and the rest of the Bible just fine.

 

[marks]

That does not mean anything. People in our world today speak of past experiences in the present tense all the time

Imprecise speech today does not make the Bible inaccurate.

How can you say that the wording of the Bible is insignificant? How is it we are to know what parts do mean something? What words to accept as is, and what words to find some other meaning then what they normally say?

When I read it as is, I find it to harmonize fully with all the other passages that speak of similar things.

In speaking of the validity of arguments, how valid is it to say, "While it says THIS, it really means THAT"?


Much love!

 

[-Phil]

The Godly Heresy of Sinless Perfectionism




How can a heresy be ‘godly’? In short, it can’t. Godliness is about conformity to sound doctrine (Titus 2:1). However, most cases of (reasonably convincing) false teaching will consist of biblical truths that have been skewed in some way. The ingredients are good, but the recipe is incomplete or else has had unwelcome things added, and the result is a theological and practical mess.

Sinless Perfectionism is a doctrine like that. In short, it holds that it is possible for Christians to completely defeat sin in the present life and to live holy lives like Jesus did. At a glance, it makes a lot of sense. Jesus came to save us from sin. He died for our sins on the cross and he sent his Holy Spirit to empower his people to overcome sin and to live obedient, righteous lives in the present (Titus 2:11-14). Christians should have the highest aspirations for living holy lives and rejecting all sin.

Sinless Perfectionism is Unbiblical
However, the Bible also says that ‘If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us’ (1 John 1:8). It speaks of the fact that until the resurrection we must be at war with sinful desires (Galatians 5:16-17). Sin is not an enemy ‘out there’. It’s an enemy within that lives and feeds off our fallen human desires and weaknesses (James 1:13-15). That is why sinless perfectionism is not only untrue but also dangerous. People don’t tend to win battles that they don’t even realise they are supposed to be fighting.

Sinless perfectionism is not only untrue but also dangerous. People don’t tend to win battles that they don’t even realise they are supposed to be fighting.


There is a much-repeated (but possibly untrue) story about the 19th century Baptist preacher C.H. Spurgeon in which he debunked perfectionism in a memorable way.[1]

Spurgeon was at a conference where a preacher taught perfectionism in an outspoken manner and even claimed to have reached a state of sinless perfection himself. Spurgeon didn’t challenge him on the spot. Instead, the next morning he poured a pitcher of milk over the man’s head, to which the ‘perfectionist’ responded with the kind of rage and hostility that you’d expect from any sinner. Perfectionism debunked.

We like this story. It’s funny to hear of false teaching being exposed in an amusing way. But I suspect that our reaction is far too smug. It betrays an attitude of self-assurance at precisely the point where we should feel our greatest need. It demonstrates a disturbing lack of concern about the fact that we sin and that our sin is deeply offensive to God. When we remember this then it’s impossible to gleefully say in our hearts: “you stupid perfectionists—of course we all sin!” Are we pleased with the situation? Have we forgotten what sin is? Even though we know that it’s false, shouldn’t we wish that sinless perfectionism were true? Don’t you long to be free of sin?

Spiritual Complacency is Unbiblical Too
If there is an equal and opposite error to sinless perfectionism then it is the sin of spiritual complacency. It’s shrugging your shoulders at sin’s inevitability. It’s acceptance that sin is just part of life, and I’m OK with that. It’s responding to occasions of sin by almost justifying it with glib lines like: “we know that we all sin.” That is a ghastly attitude for a Christian to have and it needs to be challenged.

If there is an equal and opposite error to sinless perfectionism then it’s shrugging your shoulders at sin’s inevitability—sin is just part of life, and I’m OK with that.


It is easy for me to criticise sinless perfectionism because I don’t personally know any Christians who struggle with this doctrine. However, I dare say that I know an entire evangelical culture that is complacent about sin. We’ve forgotten that sin is ugly and grotesque; the complete opposite to righteousness. We’ve forgotten that God’s will for our lives is that we be holy (1 Thessalonians 4:3). We’ve forgotten that what Christians look forward to above all else is Jesus returning to take away our sin completely. We’ve forgotten that anyone who truly desires that day to come will be obsessed with living a holy life now (1 John 3:2-3).

Jesus taught that Christians would ‘hunger and thirst’ after righteousness (Matthew 5:6). Imagine a man who has been deprived of food and water for far too long. Hunger and thirst are not just a thought in his head, but all-encompassing desires that cannot be ignored. His whole body cries out for sustenance! He will never – can never – be satisfied until his desire is satiated. Is our hunger for righteousness like that? That’s what perfectionism (at its best) gets right. It desires to be without sin. That is a profoundly godly ambition, and one that all Christians should share. We recognise that we will inevitably fall short. But we are not happy about it.

Come Lord Jesus!

The Godly Heresy of Sinless Perfectionism - The Gospel Coalition | Australia

How can a heresy be ‘godly’? In short, it can’t. Godliness is about conformity to sound doctrine (Titus 2:1). However, most cases of (reasonably convincing) false teaching will consist of...

au.thegospelcoalition.org

I have tried this myself with these "sinless perfection giants"...just say anything untoward, and a reaction you'll get, maybe we should, like Spurgeon, pour milk on their heads.

J.

Perfection is infinite. Similar to magic, this is why finite perfection or magic is never actually experienced. Precisely because it’s infinite. You might think of perfection as an infinite substrate of which arises all thoughts and isms, such as perfectionism.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Imprecise speech today does not make the Bible inaccurate.

It’s not imprecise speech today.

According to a basic internet search:

How can you say that the wording of the Bible is insignificant? How is it we are to know what parts do mean something? What words to accept as is, and what words to find some other meaning then what they normally say?

When I read it as is, I find it to harmonize fully with all the other passages that speak of similar things.

In speaking of the validity of arguments, how valid is it to say, "While it says THIS, it really means THAT"?


Much love!

There are some Christians today who think God literally created evil based on Isaiah 45:7 that says,

”I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.“ (Isaiah 45:7).

But this word “evil” is an archaic word meaning calamity or misfortune. It does not mean God creates evil by our modern understanding on that world.

I mean, do you believe Jesus when He said, “You are gods”? (See: John 10:34). That does not mean we are literally divine all powerful beings like God is. It means ”kings” in context to the Bible. So the Bible is a deep book and it’s sayings are not always what we think. We need to ask God for the understanding and compare Scripture with Scripture. Our understanding cannot be selfish or sinful when we read the Bible. That’s exactly what many Christians do with 1 John 1:8, and Romans 7:14-24. They turn these portions of the Bible as an excuse to sin when that is not what they are teaching. God cannot agree with anyone’s sin. That should be like Christianity 101. But most in the Christian camp just don’t get it or see it. Why? Because we are living in the last days (See: 2 Timothy 3:1-9).

 

[marks]

It’s not imprecise speech today.

According to a basic internet search:

You're talking about American English, and you would need to demonstrate that this literary device was being employed by Paul in Koine Greek.

Didactic Passages of Scripture, at least what I think, are in fact very precise. If the trumpet doesn't make a clear sound, who can know what is trumpeted?

If I read that passage as though Paul were speaking of the past, it makes no sense, as he speaks of the transition he experienced, and the resultant dual laws at work in him.

"It is no more I, but sin that lives in me." What changed?

Much love!

 

[marks]

There are some Christians today who think God literally created evil based on Isaiah 45:7 that says,

Off topic . . . but to answer, God is not the Author of "moral evil", but does create calamity.

Much love!

 

[marks]

I mean, do you believe Jesus when He said, “You are gods”? (See: John 10:34). That does not mean we are literally divine all powerful beings like God is.

Off topic . . . but to answer, Elohim means "mighty ones", and God's declaration that there are elohim - mighty ones - among men is true, though they do not have God's might.

Much love!

 

[marks]

So the Bible is a deep book and it’s sayings are not always what we think. We need to ask God for the understanding and compare Scripture with Scripture.

Yes, and when we discover the Words of Truth, we should receive them, believe them. Let us all ask for understanding!

Much love!

 

[marks]

Our understanding cannot be selfish or sinful when we read the Bible. That’s exactly what many Christians do with 1 John 1:8, and Romans 7:14-24. They turn these portions of the Bible as an excuse to sin when that is not what they are teaching. God cannot agree with anyone’s sin. That should be like Christianity 101. But most in the Christian camp just don’t get it or see it. Why? Because we are living in the last days (See: 2 Timothy 3:1-9).

We need to be submitted to the Scriptures as we are to God, because they are God's Word to us. Read them, and believe what you read. Even if it seems strange, all the more reason to ask for understanding.

Much love!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Off topic . . . but to answer, God is not the Author of "moral evil", but does create calamity.

Much love!

Right, which proves my point that you cannot read the Bible always with our modern understanding. Most Christians want to enforce Romans 7:14-24 as an excuse to sin. This is because sin is pleasurable and they don’t want to give it up over serving God. God is not going to agree with anyone’s sin. Christians are to no longer be slaves to sin but they are to obey the doctrine in being a slave to righteousness (Romans 6:17-18). So just one chapter back and most Christians have a contradiction with their excuse to sin view on Romans 7:14-24.

 

[marks]

Right, which proves my point that you cannot read the Bible always with our modern understanding.

It proves the benefit of understanding what the text says, so we can hold to what is true. But alas, not everyone wants to do that, and many are willing to change the meanings of the words of Scripture for their own convenience.

If you won't believe what Paul wrote, what is the purpose in my repeating it?

Much love!