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

[Randy Kluth]

The fruit was not the problem, but disobeying the commandment of the Lord and sinning with the devil is death to any soul, whether naming the name of Christ or not.

All forgiven born again sons of God, have the same commandment like that of Adam and Eve: Go and sin no more.

And if they had confessed and repented, they would not have been driven out of the garden. We know this, because they were given grace of opportunity to do so.

I partly agree with you. Christians can sin. And some Christians, who I call "nominal Christians," can sin unto eternal death. However, I don't believe Christians who listen to the Devil and sin automatically lose their soul. I hope you're not saying that?

All sin can be forgiven. And all Christians sin, and are able to confess their sins, be forgiven, and experience cleansing.

I don't believe Adam could have remained in the Garden, confessing sin or not. I do believe he will be in paradise because the reward of eternal life is by faith, and not strictly by obeying God's word.

We must obey God's word, but we must also embrace Him as the only source of salvation and the only source of cleansing from sin. We must repent not just of individual sins, but more, of all sin.

Sometimes punishments are irrevocable, just as Israel was condemned to remain in the Wilderness 40 years. God refused to listen to their confession and repentance!

So Adam was cast out of the garden, even though I believe God later forgave him for his sin. He was promised, indirectly, the Messiah, who would ultimately defeat Satan.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Yes, I understand your arguments. A long time ago I memorized Romans. However, I look at it differently, though I probably looked at it one time just as you do now.

I see Paul as saying that the "flesh," which represents autonomous Man, cannot do anything worthy of the virtue of God. Since all virtue comes from God, the part of Man that turns away from God cannot produce divine virtue.

So, the "flesh" represents Man's choice, via his Sin Nature, to reject God. But having a Sin Nature does not mean Man must only live by his Sin Nature. He can also live by the goodness by which God created him. He was created in the image and likeness of God. And as God told Cain, "You can and must overcome sin. You don't have to let it master you." (paraphrased)

The disobedience of Adam was not that he completely abandoned the good for the evil. Rather, it was that he mixed evil together with the good. There is no salvation in doing good unless the evil is fully repented of. Mixing evil in with the good will always get Man eliminated from the Tree of Life.

Even James said anything apapret from faith is sin! So even mans "good deeds" are poisoned by his sin nature.

Paukl went on in Corinthians to say the natural man (unsaved) does not even perceive the things of God for they are foolish to HIm. I am not one who easily redefines passages of Scripture. Even if they do paint a bleak picture of man apart from Jesus. If god wanted to say autonomous man ( which I assume you mean simply somebody who just wants to do their own thing as in very selfish) He would have said so. God is far more adept at grammart tthan we are.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

They did believe the word and knew the commandment, but allowed the devil to entice them in finding fault with it as an enemy to disobey, rather than a friend to love to obey:

I hate and abhor lying and vain thoughts: but thy law do I love.


And every son born of God can sin as they, and do so whensoever they disobey God's law on earth:

For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.

And Christians can also repeat their error and making themselves spiritually dead Christ by doing so.

The fruit was not the problem, but disobeying the commandment of the Lord and sinning with the devil is death to any soul, whether naming the name of Christ or not.

All forgiven born again sons of God, have the same commandment like that of Adam and Eve: Go and sin no more.

And if they had confessed and repented, they would not have been driven out of the garden. We know this, because they were given grace of opportunity to do so.

Sorry big bad wolf! but your you can never sin again and be saved is a concrete ship!

 

[robert derrick]

We must obey God's word, but we must also embrace Him as the only source of salvation and the only source of cleansing from sin. We must repent not just of individual sins, but more, of all sin.

Sorry brother, no OSAS for me. Not even a smidgin.

It's simple: no man while sinning with the devil against God, is embracing Jesus at all.

I partly agree with you. Christians can sin. And some Christians, who I call "nominal Christians," can sin unto eternal death. However, I don't believe Christians who listen to the Devil and sin automatically lose their soul. I hope you're not saying that?

Automatically dead and separated from the life of Christ, like any other sinner on earth:

The soul that sinneth, it shall die.

But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

God is not a respecter of persons, nor an unjust judge to convict one sinner and yet excuse his own while doing the same thing.

The LORD is slow to anger, and great in power, and will not at all acquit the wicked: the LORD hath his way in the whirlwind and in the storm, and the clouds are the dust of his feet.

If you want to say that any person can be drunkenly fornicating, and still be embracing God with faith unto salvation, then we doctrinally depart ways. I'm not say you personally do it, or even really believe it, but that such a teaching is destructive to the church.

Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.

All sin can be forgiven. And all Christians sin, and are able to confess their sins, be forgiven, and experience cleansing.

True. Just not while sinning. We can stop and repent in midstream, so to speak, but while we are lusting to do it, there is no being forgiven and so no being saved.

Of course, the best thing is to not tempt the Lord by doing it.

I don't believe Adam could have remained in the Garden, confessing sin or not. I do believe he will be in paradise because the reward of eternal life is by faith, and not strictly by obeying God's word.

So Adam was cast out of the garden, even though I believe God later forgave him for his sin. He was promised, indirectly, the Messiah, who would ultimately defeat Satan.

This is speculation only. However, I believe the Lord would not have driven them out, because He first gave them space to confess and repent.

We must obey God's word, but we must also embrace Him as the only source of salvation and the only source of cleansing from sin. We must repent not just of individual sins, but more, of all sin.

Repenting of being a sinner in general only works once with the Lord, when we first confess with godly sorrow all sinning of the past.

After that, we are held accountable for each sinning we do with the devil, whether in spirit or in deed. If someone needs a sort of sinning-steps counting app to keep track, then their confession was obviously not with godly sorrow unto repentance.

I know the last time I sinned against Jesus, and I confessed and repented by His grace. Right now I'm not, nor do I plan on it tomorrow, if it comes.

Sometimes punishments are irrevocable, just as Israel was condemned to remain in the Wilderness 40 years. God refused to listen to their confession and repentance!

True. Reprobate mind, wehre God is not giving up on drawing us to repent.

However, that isn;t necessarily unto death, because even king Manasseh in 2 Chron 33, was drawn of the Lord to repent in Babylon.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Even James said anything apapret from faith is sin! So even mans "good deeds" are poisoned by his sin nature.

Paukl went on in Corinthians to say the natural man (unsaved) does not even perceive the things of God for they are foolish to HIm. I am not one who easily redefines passages of Scripture. Even if they do paint a bleak picture of man apart from Jesus. If god wanted to say autonomous man ( which I assume you mean simply somebody who just wants to do their own thing as in very selfish) He would have said so. God is far more adept at grammart tthan we are.

Well yes, I wouldn't want you to accept my word for anything. By all means, determine what the Scriptures are saying, and please note if what I say is in the same spirit and intent as that which the Scriptures say! I'm not interested in saying anything else!

But the Scriptures tell stories, and do not always provide a systematic theology. In ancient times all we get are stories and outlines of God's overall intentions with respect to human history. It is for us to look back and figure out how what happened in ancient times relates to what we have today. Today we do have a systematic theology, and that's what God used Paul for.

And so, I'm interested in explaining what Paul is saying, because indeed even Peter explained that Paul is difficult to grasp at times. When Paul uses the word "flesh," he obviously is not referring to our "carcass." ;) So we have to decipher what he means by the choice of that word.

My thought is that it goes back to Eden where Man chose against God's word and against his own created nature to obey his own carnal interests, ie the things he saw and wanted. So for me, the "flesh" does refer to "autonomous man," ie Man doing his own thing, with no regard for God's guidance and virtue.

Since acting apart from the will of God causes us to lose virtue, yes, doing supposedly "good works" is poisoned by our own self-interest. God may use it for good for others, but it is not, in and of itself, "good."

This is very different from Man actually doing good. People who are generally "autonomous," living apart from the will of God, sometimes genuinely choose to do good. They cooperate with God's will and word. Therefore, true virtue is in it. Consider that Jesus "loved" the Rich Young Ruler...

Mark 10.17 As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. “Good teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

18 “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone. 19 You know the commandments: ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, you shall not defraud, honor your father and mother.’”

20 “Teacher,” he declared, “all these I have kept since I was a boy.”

21 Jesus looked at him and loved him.

But this good, being authentic good, cannot achieve eternal life. Goodness alone does not achieve eternal life. Eternal Life comes from embracing all of God, His entire will, rejecting all evil. We submit ourselves and our will to the word of God. Even though we be imperfect, we cast ourselves on God for His help in living a life of dependence upon Him.

So I'm arguing 2 things here. 1) Man may do an artifical "good," by doing what he thinks is good, but is actually self-interest. And 2) Man may do authentic good, without achieving eternal life in doing so.

Man achieves Salvation when he commits his entire life and will to the Lord. In this way he achieves cleansing from sin, by depending on nothing he does in and of himself. He recognizes, rightly, that all true good comes from God, and that to be saved we must commit entirely to Him as the good, rejecting all evil as autonomous living.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Sorry brother, no OSAS for me. Not even a smidgin.

It's simple: no man while sinning with the devil against God, is embracing Jesus at all.

It depends on what you mean by "sinning with the devil?" If people do what the Devil did by completely departing from Christ, then they are eternally lost. But if they simply capitulate to the Devil and sin, without indicating a complete rejection of God as Lord, then they may be forgiven. They may not even realize that the sin they did was by the influence of the Devil!

Don't you believe in forgiveness? If so, then those who sin by the Devil's influence may indeed be forgiven! I didn't introduce the OSAS subject, but I'm not afraid to deal with it. I'm not sure what I'm saying here requires embrace of OSAS or not?

I am an advocate of OSAS, but in being that I simply must provide the necessary caveats. To truly have eternal life, one must commit entirely to Christ, receive a new nature, and then demonstrate that he indeed has that. I don't believe that once having eternal life you can then lose it--otherwise you never had *eternal* life!

Many nominal Christians can receive the experience of new life in Christ without completely embracing Christ. God doesn't deny them power to live a righteous life. But if that life is not fully committed, then the regeneration is incomplete. It is only temporary.

If you want to say that any person can be drunkenly fornicating, and still be embracing God with faith unto salvation, then we doctrinally depart ways. I'm not say you personally do it, or even really believe it, but that such a teaching is destructive to the church.

If you say that some sins cannot be forgiven, we must indeed part ways, doctrinally. But I would agree that in the Kingdom of Heaven there will be no fornicators, no adulterers, no thieves, no murderers, and no idolaters, etc.

If a person who claims to be a Christian does not show his supposed "regeneration" by living a good life, by obeying Christ, then he is a false Christian. Or, he is simply a *temporary* Christian, never having truly obtained "Eternal Life."

Repenting of being a sinner in general only works once with the Lord, when we first confess with godly sorrow all sinning of the past.

Heavens no! While it's true that we are likely to show, at some point in our lives, where we stand eternally with the Lord, that doesn't mean people aren't in many different places throughout their lives, and in many different states of knowledge. People may make commitments to the Lord with all kinds of misconceptions, with a history of all kinds of troubles, and not be able to make a "neat and tidy" commitment a single time in their lives.

But that's not reality, in my estimation. That's judgmentalism. I leave judging others up to God alone.

 

[robert derrick]

It depends on what you mean by "sinning with the devil?"

I give a specific example: drunkenly fornicating. I do so in order to avoid any confusion. Drunkenly fornicating is a complete departure from Christ, while doing so. Even as thieving, robbery, bearing false witness... There is no fellowship with Christ and Belial at the same time.

The point is not so much what, but when: Now. While doing it. In the act.

The adulteress was guilty and dead in the act, though she has mercy of the Lord to confess humbly, be forgiven with opportunity to go and not do being doing it.

All that we have here is a declaration difference between you and I: you know that no person, while drunkenly fornicating, can possibly be a forgiven born son of God at the same time, but rather is a child of the devil, like any other soul on earth doing the same thing.

I do say it, because that is exactly what I John 3:8-10 is declaring: it is all about what a soul is doing now at this time, not yesterday that is past, nor tomorrow that may not come.

If we are given space to confess and repent and be forgiven, good, but it is not at all guaranteed while doing it on earth in the face of the Lord.

You equivocate, not so much because you would ever be found doing so, but because you have that sympathetic feeling for OSAS.

I have none: I preach to anyone hearing in person or in writing: If we are sinning with the devil now, then we are not being forgiven nor saved now, and yesterday's righteousness no longer matters to God, and tomorrow's opportunity by grace to repent is not guaranteed by the Lord.

 

[Randy Kluth]

I give a specific example: drunkenly fornicating. I do so in order to avoid any confusion. Drunkenly fornicating is a complete departure from Christ, while doing so. Even as thieving, robbery, bearing false witness... There is no fellowship with Christ and Belial at the same time.

The point is not so much what, but when: Now. While doing it. In the act.

The adulteress was guilty and dead in the act, though she has mercy of the Lord to confess humbly, be forgiven with opportunity to go and not do being doing it.

All that we have here is a declaration difference between you and I: you know that no person, while drunkenly fornicating, can possibly be a forgiven born son of God at the same time, but rather is a child of the devil, like any other soul on earth doing the same thing.

I do say it, because that is exactly what I John 3:8-10 is declaring: it is all about what a soul is doing now at this time, not yesterday that is past, nor tomorrow that may not come.

If we are given space to confess and repent and be forgiven, good, but it is not at all guaranteed while doing it on earth in the face of the Lord.

You equivocate, not so much because you would ever be found doing so, but because you have that sympathetic feeling for OSAS.

I have none: I preach to anyone hearing in person or in writing: If we are sinning with the devil now, then we are not being forgiven nor saved now, and yesterday's righteousness no longer matters to God, and tomorrow's opportunity by grace to repent is not guaranteed by the Lord.

You know yourself that I did not credit OSAS with my view on this, and yet you want to use that to fight a war over theological systems. If I were you, I'd be more concerned about *you* being forgiven, because Christ said that it will be done to you as you have done to others. If you don't forgive others, you won't be forgiven. Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

David had a man killed to cover up his adultery with the man's wife. And yet, he was forgiven. For you, David followed the Devil and lost his soul. Others say that David was a man after God's heart. Which was it?

After you're done stammering and rationalizing, please come back to your senses and let God be the judge. He knows the circumstances. He knows what can drive a man to temporary insanity, to temporary rebellion, to rage, to foolish behavior.

Have you done this? I should think so. If so, you need to keep your standards, yes. But you need to learn that God's mercy is unfathomable. Thank God for that!

 

[bbyrd009]

man, im glad i dont know anything anymore

 

[Ronald Nolette]

God is not a respecter of persons, nor an unjust judge to convict one sinner and yet excuse his own while doing the same thing.

This tells me you do not even have a clue who God is!

God is perfectly just! He will not let one sin go unpunished. Nor does He wink at His children's sins while punishing the unbeliever!

But what you do not know in your false doctrines is that Every one who is born again has already had all their sins punished- past, present and future when Jesus became our sin on the cross and God the Father punished Him on my behalf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Once again that is not a license to sin. We already do that by nature, but a gift to live holy unto the Lord. But when people fail, that sin was already paid for!

God the Father punished God the Son for all my sins so He is free to love me and conform me to the image of Jesus.

My Pastor just finished a series on Psal,m 23 and I was joyfully reminded of two of the verses:

3 He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.

He leads me in righteousness for His names sake, not because I deserve it or can earn it by good deeds.

6 Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever.

His goodness and mercy pursue me!! How long does it? If you had your way- it would be until your false picture of His patience runs out. But Gods Word says ALL the days of my life.

YOur picture of God is the old pre-Vatican 2 picture the nuns and p[riests taught us and caused me to reject God for years!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

But this good, being authentic good, cannot achieve eternal life. Goodness alone does not achieve eternal life. Eternal Life comes from embracing all of God, His entire will, rejecting all evil. We submit ourselves and our will to the word of God. Even though we be imperfect, we cast ourselves on God for His help in living a life of dependence upon Him.

Sorry Randy but you are wrong! Also you reject in measure the Scriptures for formulating systematic theology, but you have a systematic theology whether you call it that or not and you usewhat you think the writers meant - IOW you are redefining the words on teh page. If this sounds harsh, it is for your benefit.

Paul told Timothy that ALL Scripture is profitable for doctrine, reproof , correction and instruction in righteousness, that we will be complete for all good works.

If you think Paul is telling swtories and one has to discern what he really means, then why should I accept your words as you write them and not redefine them as you are the Word of God?

 

[Ronald Nolette]

So I'm arguing 2 things here. 1) Man may do an artifical "good," by doing what he thinks is good, but is actually self-interest. And 2) Man may do authentic good, without achieving eternal life in doing so.

YOu can argue what you wish, but when you say what is written is not what is meant, you are saying this in a manner: " I know what teh Bible says, but here is what it really means." Why should we believe "your meaning" any more than the millions of others who have made their own opinion the Word of God. This is no small thing you do. YOu quote4 Peter so let me add a quote from Peter.

2 Peter 1:19-21
King James Version

19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Are you willing to say that your redefinition of the simple words of Scripture are just as Holy Spirit Inspired as teh writers of the bible?

 

[robert derrick]

Once again that is not a license to sin. We already do that by nature, but a gift to live holy unto the Lord. But when people fail, that sin was already paid for!

I don't argue with sinners.

But what you do not know in your false doctrines is that Every one who is born again has already had all their sins punished- past, present and future when Jesus became our sin on the cross and God the Father punished Him on my behalf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

However, I do still catalogue your errors for future reference.

I'll be adding all sins already punished to the already forgiven hopper.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

And so, I'm interested in explaining what Paul is saying, because indeed even Peter explained that Paul is difficult to grasp at times. When Paul uses the word "flesh," he obviously is not referring to our "carcass." ;) So we have to decipher what he means by the choice of that word.

First, Paul wrote in Greek and for flesh used the word sarxx instead of soma (body or carcass as you called it) It is our nature.

And Pauls writings were revolutionary in their day which is why it is hard to understand! It is not a license for anybody to go ahead and "discewrn" his real meanings. He wrote what he meant and meant what he wrote.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

I don't argue with sinners.


However, I do still catalogue your errors for future reference.

I'll be adding all sins already punished to the already forgiven hopper.

Wow love does not keep accounts of wrong. god is love! So you have just done what God doesn't do! How does one spell hypocrite????? To me it seems this way----Robert Derrick. YOu have made yourself a god in the place of God! But I will continue to serve the One whose mercies are fresh and new every morning to me!

 

[robert derrick]

Wow love does not keep accounts of wrong. god is love! So you have just done what God doesn't do! How does one spell hypocrite????? To me it seems this way----Robert Derrick. YOu have made yourself a god in the place of God! But I will continue to serve the One whose mercies are fresh and new every morning to me!

Now it's a sin to not argue with sinners.

We see how senseless it is to argue with sinners.

Let them alone.

 

[Taken]

God created Adam and Eve to live forever in the flesh! When sin came into the world it changed all of that, man brought both spiritual death and physical death upon himself. But when God's plan comes full circle, man will live in flesh forever through the resurrection.

Problem is...SIN came into this world...(this world being Earth created expressly for mans habitat)....and SIN came into (or rather was cast down from Heaven into this world,) BEFORE the first mans was Created!

Man was created outside of the Garden.
God Planted a Garden and Put man IN the Garden.
IN the Garden was where the Woman was taken out from the mans rib.
IN the Garden was planted....The Tree of Life...ie the Word of God of Truth and righteousness. The Tree of Life presence, denoting, that Place, that Garden was at that time Paradise.

The Tree of Life, has and will move about. Wherever that Tree IS, IS thus called Paradise...(after the garden, was in the side of Hell with Abraham, currently in Heaven, shall again be on Earth...full circle.)

In the Garden man was Put, and there also existed the Tree of Good and Evil...
A mix. The Evil was Satan, in the body of a Serpent, whose full intent is to get the Attention of the weak, primarily, children, then women, then men....(Order of weakest humans).... and with success, getting their attention can and does cunningly deceives, by trickery and lies. Cunning because the Lies sound so Tempting as a good thing, but actually intended to destroy and sway one away from Gods Truth and Righteousness.

So yes and no. Man was created to Live forever, WITH God...
But Yet Because Man IS mortal, in order to Life forever, WITH God...
That mortal BODY MUST DIE, and become IMMORTAL, to SEE God, and Be in Gods body Likeness...

But God created a plan before he created man to get us out of this mess we created! Praise God!

True that!

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Taken]

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

Rom 6; 6-8 ? Speaking of sin in Rom 6: 6, 7

[6] 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.
[7] For he that is dead is freed from sin.
[8] Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:

Killing the body of sin, via crucifixion death with Christ Jesus.

That SIN, is the whole of any man, (body, soul, natural spirit) Having been AGAINST Belief IN God “and” the one God Sent, ie. Jesus, the Word of God in the flesh.

 

[robert derrick]

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

Rom 6; 6-8 ? Speaking of sin in Rom 6: 6, 7

[6] 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.
[7] For he that is dead is freed from sin.
[8] Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:

Killing the body of sin, via crucifixion death with Christ Jesus.

That SIN, is the whole of any man, (body, soul, natural spirit) Having been AGAINST Belief IN God “and” the one God Sent, ie. Jesus, the Word of God in the flesh.

Close.

That sin is the whole body of life sinning against God.

It is that body of sinful living that we crucify on our own cross for Jesus' sake: that is the old man of sin.

Our soul and spirit is changed from sinful to righteous by the Spirit of Christ within.

Our bodies remain the same: mortal. We just don't use our bodies for the same things anymore.

Jesus' physical body was crucified, not ours, unless we indeed die by crucifixion in this life.

 

[Randy Kluth]

First, Paul wrote in Greek and for flesh used the word sarxx instead of soma (body or carcass as you called it) It is our nature.

And Pauls writings were revolutionary in their day which is why it is hard to understand! It is not a license for anybody to go ahead and "discewrn" his real meanings. He wrote what he meant and meant what he wrote.

Yes, that's why I distinguished between "carcass" and "nature" in English, because the English word "flesh" does not convey the full reality of what Paul was saying.