No Condemnation For Those In Christ, But... Sinning Believers Are Condemned Ro 14:23?

[mailmandan]

those who want to earn their salvation. because they think they are special and so good;.

Romans 14:22-23 is certainly not the unpardonable sin. Other translations (vs 22) say - Blessed is the one who does not judge himself by what he approves/doesn’t feel guilty for what they do. Condemn here means condemns or judges themselves. Not condemned by God in hell. It's disturbing to see certain people take pleasure in the idea of born again Christians being condemned in hell.

 

[GracePeace]

Romans 14:22-23 is certainly not the unpardonable sin.

Never said it was.

Other translations (vs 22) say - Blessed is the one who does not judge himself by what he approves/doesn’t feel guilty for what they do. Condemn here means condemns or judges themselves.

Already showed you context does not allow for that.

Not condemned by God in hell.

1. So, you deny that we abide by obeying--a doctrine taught by Apostle John (1 Jn 3:23,24)--I can't help that.
2. I never said the guy goes straight to hell, I merely asked why he was experiencing condemnation. I merely stated that he was not remaining in Christ, where there was no condemnation, and that he needed to remain in Christ.

It's disturbing to see certain people take pleasure in the idea of born again Christians being condemned in hell.

Rather, the pleasure is in the Bible being coherent.

1 Corinthians 13
6Love takes no pleasure in evil, but rejoices in the truth.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Also the epistle of 1 John--and without which concept Paul's writings make no sense, as I've been proving.

Are you suggesting that Paul's readers couldn't understand Paul's epistles unless they had John's epistles in hand? That doesn't seem likely.

No, God being savior doesn't completely remove man from the equation--that sounds logical, but it doesn't regard Scriptural precedent (Judges 7:2).

I didn't say that man is removed from the equation as such. My discussion centered on contingency and God's removal of all contingencies regarding the salvation of the elect.

Earlier you mentioned the OSAS doctrine. The Once Saved, Always Saved (OSAS) doctrine asserts that once a person believes in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, they cannot lose their salvation.

I reject the OSAS doctrine for obvious reasons.

• Luke 8:13: Some believers fall away during testing.
• Galatians 5:4: Falling away from grace is possible.
• Hebrews 6:4-6: If believers fall away, it’s hard to restore them.

The Bible doesn't teach OSAS. Rather it teaches that God saves those whom he has sanctified. And those whom he has sanctified will never, ever fall. The Bible teaches that, although salvation is conditional, it is not contingent for those whom God has sanctified. Those whom God has sanctified will not fall away during testing; they will not fall away from grace. When tested they persevere.

Those whom God has sanctified have the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ. John the Apostle refers to such people as "those who were born of the will of God." Jesus refers to them as "born again" or "born of the Spirit." Paul refers to them as "those who are according to the Spirit."

John 1:11-13 He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.​

In the passage, John asserts a causal connection between embracing Christ and being born of God's will. Being born of God is essential and necessary, and apart from an act of God, no man can receive him.

John 3:3-6 Jesus answered and said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born, can he?” Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. ​

In this passage, Jesus our Lord explains that only those who are "born again" or "born of the Spirit" will see the Kingdom of God. When something is born of the Spirit, it is spiritual. This means that the new birth brings forth a new spirit within those whom God has sanctified. Jesus draws a direct link between salvation and the new birth, indicating that they are closely connected. Those who are born again will receive eternal life, and everyone who is born again will receive this gift of eternal life without exception.

Romans 8:9-11 However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.​

In this passage, Paul identifies a one-for-one association between those who have the spirit of Christ and those whom the Spirit will give life to their mortal bodies. Again, those who are sanctified in this way will never fail to be raised from the dead to new life. Those who are sanctified in this way will never, ever fall.

 

[GracePeace]

Are you suggesting that Paul's readers couldn't understand Paul's epistles unless they had John's epistles in hand? That doesn't seem likely.

No,
i. Romans was written mostly to the Jewish Christians in Rome (a. Ro 2:17 "you call yourself a Jew", b. "Abraham our forefather according to the flesh" Ro 4:1, "Brothers (for I speak to those who know the Law)," (Ro 7:1))--the Gentile Christians didn't possess (Ro 2:14) or know (Ro 7:1) the Scriptures, and would not have been able to formulate the objections Paul was preemptively responding to, and, to this day, the Gentiles, handling material that didn't even address them, butcher Paul's meanings,
ii. What Paul says is easily misunderstood, irrespectively (says Peter).

I didn't say that man is removed from the equation as such. My discussion centered on contingency and God's removal of all contingencies regarding the salvation of the elect.

Earlier you mentioned the OSAS doctrine. The Once Saved, Always Saved (OSAS) doctrine asserts that once a person believes in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, they cannot lose their salvation.

I reject the OSAS doctrine for obvious reasons.

• Luke 8:13: Some believers fall away during testing.
• Galatians 5:4: Falling away from grace is possible.
• Hebrews 6:4-6: If believers fall away, it’s hard to restore them.

The Bible doesn't teach OSAS. Rather it teaches that God saves those whom he has sanctified. And those whom he has sanctified will never, ever fall. The Bible teaches that, although salvation is conditional, it is not contingent for those whom God has sanctified. Those whom God has sanctified will not fall away during testing; they will not fall away from grace. When tested they persevere.

Those whom God has sanctified have the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ. John the Apostle refers to such people as "those who were born of the will of God." Jesus refers to them as "born again" or "born of the Spirit." Paul refers to them as "those who are according to the Spirit."

John 1:11-13 He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.​

In the passage, John asserts a causal connection between embracing Christ and being born of God's will. Being born of God is essential and necessary, and apart from an act of God, no man can receive him.

John 3:3-6 Jesus answered and said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born, can he?” Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. ​

In this passage, Jesus our Lord explains that only those who are "born again" or "born of the Spirit" will see the Kingdom of God. When something is born of the Spirit, it is spiritual. This means that the new birth brings forth a new spirit within those whom God has sanctified. Jesus draws a direct link between salvation and the new birth, indicating that they are closely connected. Those who are born again will receive eternal life, and everyone who is born again will receive this gift of eternal life without exception.

Romans 8:9-11 However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.​

In this passage, Paul identifies a one-for-one association between those who have the spirit of Christ and those whom the Spirit will give life to their mortal bodies. Again, those who are sanctified in this way will never fail to be raised from the dead to new life. Those who are sanctified in this way will never, ever fall.

1. I don't want to get in to OSAS on this thread.
2. You accept OSAS, because you merely say the "believers" who fall away weren't really "true believers". Is this wrong?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

No, we're saved as a gift,

Your right, salvation is a gift.

and its not psuedo salvation, we are not saved today and lost tomorrow.

and walking after the spirit, which justifies at the Day of Judgment (Ro 2:6-16, 8:4), is a gift, which is, categorically not our own "works", because that term corresponds to "our own righteousness", but "God's righteousness is revealed from faith to faith" (Ro 1:17)--which is why the rule is "each man is to be fully convinced in his own mind" (Ro 14:5), and why breaking that rule is "sin" (Ro 14:23)--so, when we walk after the spirit, that doesn't count as our own works earning us salvation, that counts as God's righteousness justifying us as a gift ("I was abundant in labors above us all, yet not I but the grace with me", "Christ came and preached to you", "I have been crucified and it is no longer I who live but Christ"), just as God alone was Savior, and no flesh would boast, when Gideon and his army obeyed God by whittling his army down to 300, etc (Judges 7:2+) (man was NOT removed entirely from the equation in order for God to alone be praised as the Savior).

Yet here you make it not a gift. but earned through your own merit.

Good luck trying to earn a Gift. God will nto be mocked

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Romans 14:22-23 is certainly not the unpardonable sin. Other translations (vs 22) say - Blessed is the one who does not judge himself by what he approves/doesn’t feel guilty for what they do. Condemn here means condemns or judges themselves. Not condemned by God in hell. It's disturbing to see certain people take pleasure in the idea of born again Christians being condemned in hell.

yes. But people have to force the bible to fit their belief system.. so they get confused..

 

[GracePeace]

Your right, salvation is a gift.

and its not psuedo salvation, we are not saved today and lost tomorrow.

Well, that's what this discussion is about--why the guy is condemned when there's no condemnation in Christ. Obviously, he's not remaining in Christ. Then we see that, yes, indeed, remaining in Christ is by obedience (Jn 15; 1 Jn 3:23,24).

Yet here you make it not a gift. but earned through your own merit.

Good luck trying to earn a Gift. God will nto be mocked

Nope, when I walk after the spirit--being fully persuaded in my own mind, not with a yes and a no, not wavering, not being forced to act against my will, but acting in concert with God's working in me--that is God's righteousness revealed from faith to faith, not my own righteousness from knowing good and evil, so it's a gift and not a payment.

 

[CadyandZoe]

What is objectionable about the flesh is the flesh's desires that war against the soul and kill it.

Maybe. But we want to know what Paul meant to say in the passage under consideration. He does not mention sin, or a war against the soul in that context.

I realize that many Christians hear Paul talk about sin and carnality in that passage. This is because we have inherited the spirit/flesh duality from the pagan philosophers. In Romans 8, when Paul talks about the flesh, he isn't talking about the sin nature. That interpretation is superimposed on the passage, not derived from the passage. The phrase "according to the flesh" has nothing to do with our sin nature or our moral failings. Walking in the flesh is not walking in sin as many suppose.

No, actually, you agree with me, though obliquely, that what is objectionable is their boasting.

The passage doesn't mention boasting. Try to resist adding meaning to a passage that isn't there.

It does.

I already pointed out how Paul uses the phrase "according to the flesh" at the beginning of Romans. He says that Jesus is a son of David according to the flesh. And neither one of us wants to argue that Jesus engaged in carnal acts and neither did he have a sin nature.

Don't you understand what I am telling you? Come to terms with Paul's expressions and allow him to define them.

It's an understandable error on your part

It's not an error to point out Paul's own words is it? No. Not at all. In Romans 2, Paul is discussing Teachers of the Law.

1. Those who walk after the flesh follow its desires--one of those desires is trusting and boasting in self rather than trusting and boasting in God.

Again, walking after the flesh has nothing to do with desires or sinning.

No, Paul's main point isn't contrasting inner and outer man, it's about humbling the Jewish Christians who were looking down on their Gentile Christian brothers

No mention of humility or looking down on anyone.

I understand what Paul is saying.

No you don't.

So, then, don't raise that as if it countered my claim about "those who walk after the flesh will die" (Ro 8:12,13) referring to sin.

It doesn't refer to sin. It refers to relying on the flesh, i.e., circumcision and pedigree.

Nope, he broke God's rule, and God condemns him, proving hes not remaining in Christ, because remaining is by obeying (1 Jn 5:23,24), but he's sinning.

Where does Paul mention breaking a rule?

 

[CadyandZoe]

Actually, he does : "if by the Spirit you mortify the deeds of the flesh". What deeds of the flesh? Sins. Where do sins come from? Desires. The things the flesh desires. They are contrary to the spirit.

Where did you get the idea that the deeds of the flesh were sins? Paul never said that. You are reading that into the text.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Well, that's what this discussion is about--why the guy is condemned when there's no condemnation in Christ. Obviously, he's not remaining in Christ. Then we see that, yes, indeed, remaining in Christ is by obedience (Jn 15; 1 Jn 3:23,24).

But he is not condemned

It says he condemns himself It does not say God condemned him.

Its called condemning ourself in our mind..

If we think drinking is a sin, and we drink, we condemn our self. because we put ourselves under law and not under grace.

Nope, when I walk after the spirit--being fully persuaded in my own mind, not with a yes and a no, not wavering, not being forced to act against my will--that is God's righteousness revealed from faith to faith, not my own righteousness from knowing good and evil, so it's a gift and not a payment.

You say salvation can be lost. hence it must be earned. hence you make salvation a reward for good behavor. not a gift because you are lost with no hope..

one day I pray you see the difference

 

[GracePeace]

Maybe. But we want to know what Paul meant to say in the passage under consideration. He does not mention sin, or a war against the soul in that context.

I realize that many Christians hear Paul talk about sin and carnality in that passage. This is because we have inherited the spirit/flesh duality from the pagan philosophers. In Romans 8, when Paul talks about the flesh, he isn't talking about the sin nature. That interpretation is superimposed on the passage, not derived from the passage. The phrase "according to the flesh" has nothing to do with our sin nature or our moral failings. Walking in the flesh is not walking in sin as many suppose.

"mortify the deeds of the flesh"

The passage doesn't mention boasting. Try to resist adding meaning to a passage that isn't there.

You were the one who said it was about Jews trusting in their pedigree.

I already pointed out how Paul uses the phrase "according to the flesh" at the beginning of Romans. He says that Jesus is a son of David according to the flesh. And neither one of us wants to argue that Jesus engaged in carnal acts and neither did he have a sin nature.

The terms "according to the flesh" and "walking after the flesh" just don't address the same issues.

Don't you understand what I am telling you? Come to terms with Paul's expressions and allow him to define them.

I reject your claims about what Paul is saying.

It's not an error to point out Paul's own words is it? No. Not at all. In Romans 2, Paul is discussing Teachers of the Law.

Paul is mocking their pseudo spiritual authority based not on actual righteousness but on mere knowledge of righteousness.

Again, walking after the flesh has nothing to do with desires or sinning.

Already debunked this.

No mention of humility or looking down on anyone.

Oh, really? "God shows no partiality--he will justify a doer of the law even when they're a Gentile who doesn't have the Law" is not addressing their boasting in their Jewish pedigree, in their possessing the Law, in their being circumcised? Obviously, it is.

No you don't.

Sure do.

It doesn't refer to sin. It refers to relying on the flesh, i.e., circumcision and pedigree.

That's boasting in the flesh.

Where does Paul mention breaking a rule?

Because God's righteousness is revealed from faith to faith (Ro 1:17), the rule is "each man must be fully convinced in his own mind" (Ro 14:5), thus "what ever does not proceed from faith is sin" (Ro 14:23).

 

[GracePeace]

Where did you get the idea that the deeds of the flesh were sins? Paul never said that. You are reading that into the text.

They "just so happen" to lead to death--just as it says in Romans 6.
Based on my interactions with you, I'm not surprised you're going to try to spin this plain truth as well.

 

[GracePeace]

But he is not condemned

It says he condemns himself It does not say God condemned him.

Its called condemning ourself in our mind..

No, the context shows he is harming his brother--and 1 Co 8 (same topic) explicitly states you sin against Christ when you sin against your brother that way. What it is saying is "blessed is the man who does not bring condemnation on himself by harming his brother with his faith he should keep before God".

If we think drinking is a sin, and we drink, we condemn our self. because we put ourselves under law and not under grace.

No, you fail to reveal God's righteousness, and you reveal your own self/sin, so you are condemned.

You say salvation can be lost. hence it must be earned. hence you make salvation a reward for good behavor. not a gift because you are lost with no hope..

one day I pray you see the difference

Again, walking in faith is God's righteousness, not my own, so what results from it is a gift not a payment.

 

[Ritajanice]

Where did you get the idea that the deeds of the flesh were sins? Paul never said that. You are reading that into the text.

What’s this then if it’s not sin?

Galatians 5:19-21

King James Version

​

19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God

 

[Eternally Grateful]

No, the context shows he is harming his brother--and 1 Co 8 (same topic) explicitly states you sin against Christ when you sin against your brother that way. What it is saying is "blessed is the man who does not bring condemnation on himself by harming his brother with his faith he should keep before God".

You will think of every thing you can to remain in your self righteous gospel won’t you?

The context says he condemns himself. Yes for the reason i stated

He can also harm his brother By holding him under the same legalism, and prevent his brother from finding that faith rest.

No, you fail to reveal God's righteousness, and you reveal your own self/sin, so you are condemned.

It does not matter what you reveal.

By your own righteousness you are condemned, Only by the imputed righteousness of Christ can you be saved. You lost the chance to save yourself the first sin you commited.. Now. Think of how many times you have sinned, eac h one carries a death penalty. You think God is just going to let you out of jail (hell) without payment

Again, walking in faith is God's righteousness, not my own, so what results from it is a gift not a payment.

Again, this is wrong

walking in faith will allow us to walk in righteousness, because wre not walking in the flesh.

it is not walking to pay for our own sin debt.

Nothing results in it. The gift of salvation is not give because we walk in or out of faith

the gift of salvation is given to those who recieve it.

You do not earn a gift your father gave you because you walk in your fathers steps in faith and trust of him.. That would be earning the gift..

 

[GracePeace]

You will think of every thing you can

Scripture speaks for itself. I'm glad you recognize that.

to remain in your self righteous gospel won’t you?

Again, walking in faith is God's righteousness not my own (Ro 1:17, 14:5, 23).

The context says he condemns himself. Yes for the reason i stated

He can also harm his brother By holding him under the same legalism, and prevent his brother from finding that faith rest.

OK You think your way, I stand by my view of the context.

By your own righteousness you are condemned, Only by the imputed righteousness of Christ can you be saved. You lost the chance to save yourself the first sin you commited.. Now. Think of how many times you have sinned, eac h one carries a death penalty. You think God is just going to let you out of jail (hell) without payment

Walking in faith is God's righteousness, as stated, and when we do so we fulfill the Law (Ro 8:4) by which we are justified in the future (Ro 2:6-16).

Again, this is wrong

It's correct.

walking in faith will allow us to walk in righteousness, because wre not walking in the flesh.

Yep.

it is not walking to pay for our own sin debt.

OK but it's paying the debt we owe God for His kindness (Ro 8:12,13).

Nothing results in it. The gift of salvation is not give because we walk in or out of faith

We disagree.

the gift of salvation is given to those who recieve it.

OK

You do not earn a gift your father gave you because you walk in your fathers steps in faith and trust of him.. That would be earning the gift..

Walking in faith is God's gift, and those who don't do it--who, instead, walk after the flesh--are condemned (Ro 14:23), not justified, and will die (Ro 8:12,13).

 

[CadyandZoe]

1. No, and, likewise (because it's the same issue) the one who goes against what he believes in 1 Co 8 is condemned for sin. He did the same act as those other Christians did, but he could not do it with faith, so he sinned and was condemned because anything that does not come from faith is sin.

I want to remind you of the previous verse where Paul announces, "The faith you have, keep to yourself before God. Blessed is the one who does not judge himself by what he approves."

Coming to terms with Paul, we understand two things from the verse above. First, what does Paul mean by "faith" in this context? He would never command us to avoid sharing the gospel, so he isn't talking about keeping the Gospel faith to ourselves. Rather, since the issue centers around religious beliefs associated with eating meat, his command is to keep our convictions to ourselves, so as to avoid passing judgment on the opinions of others.

Secondly, the Apostle explicitly narrows his focus to those who judge themselves. "Blessed is the one who does not judge himself by what he approves." From this we understand that the discussion isn't about God's judgment of the man who eats apart from conviction. The discussion is about a man who judges himself by what he approves.

2. Separately, you had denied that a Christian would do something they didn't believe in...

...but we see that this (doing what one doubts) actually describes someone walking after the flesh.

I don't agree with your interpretation. I realize that we tend to associate the word "sin" with evil intent, but the Greek word can also refer to someone who misses the mark. Here, Paul describes a man who is unsure whether eating the meat is blameworthy or not. If that man eats, he says, he is condemned.

The question remains, who is doing the convicting? How is this related to judging oneself by what he approves?

It's possible that Paul is talking about an error of judgment. If a man eats the meat, not being fully convinced in his own mind, then he commits an error of judgment, not an act of evil intent. Right?

 

[GracePeace]

I want to remind you of the previous verse where Paul announces, "The faith you have, keep to yourself before God. Blessed is the one who does not judge himself by what he approves."

Coming to terms with Paul, we understand two things from the verse above. First, what does Paul mean by "faith" in this context? He would never command us to avoid sharing the gospel, so he isn't talking about keeping the Gospel faith to ourselves. Rather, since the issue centers around religious beliefs associated with eating meat, his command is to keep our convictions to ourselves, so as to avoid passing judgment on the opinions of others.

No,
1. The context shows v22 is one condemnation (of the one who practices his faith in a harmful way instead of keeping it to himself), and v23 is a different condemnation (of the one who does not eat with faith, bc whatever does not proceed from faith is sin).
2. The general problem is differences in convictions on how God is to be served/how to behave/what the rules are, and Paul deals with that general issue by using a few particular examples.

Secondly, the Apostle explicitly narrows his focus to those who judge themselves. "Blessed is the one who does not judge himself by what he approves." From this we understand that the discussion isn't about God's judgment of the man who eats apart from conviction. The discussion is about a man who judges himself by what he approves.

The prevening discussion doesn't permit this conclusion.

I don't agree with your interpretation. I realize that we tend to associate the word "sin" with evil intent, but the Greek word can also refer to someone who misses the mark. Here, Paul describes a man who is unsure whether eating the meat is blameworthy or not. If that man eats, he says, he is condemned.

He sinned and is condemned because God's righteousness is revealed from faith to faith, so he's not remaining in God's righteousness.

The question remains, who is doing the convicting? How is this related to judging oneself by what he approves?

It's possible that Paul is talking about an error of judgment. If a man eats the meat, not being fully convinced in his own mind, then he commits an error of judgment, not an act of evil intent. Right?

No. I explained my view earlier.

 

[CadyandZoe]

@CadyandZoe You claimed Romans 8:1 is "definitional", and that, as such, it "defines" those "in Christ" as those who do not walk after the flesh but after the Spirit, yet you also claim Romans 7 is an accurate depiction of a Christian's life.

That's right. If a man claims to be a Christian, a follower of Christ, and he does not come to terms with the depth and profundity of his sin, then his claim is suspect. But if a man is able and willing to admit the truth about himself, as Paul did, that he is an evil sinner at the very core of his being, that man is walking according to the Spirit.

You realize Romans 7 describes sin "killing" Paul, right?

Yes, in that context, being "dead" or "alive" refers to his status before God. When he was a Pharisee, walking according to the works of the Law, he thought he was "alive" -- that is, "in God's favor." But, he admits, he found that he could not gain God's favor through the law because the law says, "do not covet." In other words, not only does the Law command that I not sleep with my neighbor's wife, the Law commands that I not WANT to sleep with my neighbor's wife. As a Pharisee, Paul was able to avoid adultery, but he was not able to avoid lust, which is a fundamental aspect of his being. Not only did God demand that Paul act righteously, he wanted Paul to BE a righteous person on the inside.

He found that he wasn't that person. Thus, regarding whether or not he had God's favor and approval, he "died" during a moment of self-realization. Even so, Paul describes the process of walking according to the Spirit because enlightenment is one of the Spirit's job, and those who are walking by the Spirit are learning the hard truth about themselves and have the inner courage to admit it.

"Walking after the flesh" is a way of describing the type of life lived by someone who is sinning--"If you live after the flesh, you will die, but if, by the spirit, you mortify the deeds of the flesh [sin], you will live."

Paul is not talking about sin in that context. Let me give you an example of "mortifying the deeds of the flesh" the way Paul means it.

Notice how Paul defines "flesh" in the following passage.

Philippians 3:3-6 for we are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh, although I myself might have confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more: circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the Law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless. ​

Obviously Paul didn't place confidence in his moral depravity, carnality, sinful nature or anything of the sort. He placed confidence in the circumcision of his flesh, his nationality, his tribal affiliation, his ethnicity, and his blamelessness before the Law. This is what Paul means by "the flesh" and so "walking according to the flesh" is walking as if physical circumcision, nationality, tribe, ethnicity and blamelessness mattered to God. In the following passage, Paul describes the way in which he mortified the deeds of the body.

Philippians 3:7-11 But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ. More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ, and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith, that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death; in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.​

Paul once put confidence in his "flesh" i.e. his lineage, nationality, ethnicity, and devote religious devotion. But since then he considers it all rubbish so that he might gain Christ. That is how Paul, mortified the deeds of his flesh.

 

[CadyandZoe]

In case you're going to say that when Christians sin (as you insist Romans 7 depicts) it's just their outward man sinning, but, inwardly, they're still undefiled:

No, I wouldn't say that at all.