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

[Ronald Nolette]

If you will look back at post #112 you will realize that I was speaking of Luther's "Bondage of the Will." I disagree with his near-fatalistic view of man's free-will. I do agree with him that when we choose to live by the sinful flesh we *cannot* do good. We need Christ's grace, whether we are conscious of it or not, to do good.

But I fully believe that *all men,* Christian or not, have free will and can choose to do good, as well as choose to be saved, given that the Gospel has been preached to them. We are all, however, in bondage to the Sin Nature. As Christians we have power to overcome sin in our lives, as we resist our tendency towards sin, and choose to obey God instead.

Good by whose standards? Certainly not Gods

Romans 8:

4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

An unsaved man is dead spiritually as Paul wrote and is incapable of doing things that please God. but you already admitted Paul is in error andthus not inspired in passages. but why should I believe you more than what Paul wrote? I know where Paul go t his authority, where do you get yours so that you can overrule what Paul wrote to the churches?

So unsaved people can do "good things" on a human level but they are not "good things" from gods perspective as is written in Gods word.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Good by whose standards? Certainly not Gods

Yes, good by God's standards. He is the one who made Man in the beginning to be able to choose to live in His image and likeness, which means to be able to do good.

Romans 8:

4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

An unsaved man is dead spiritually as Paul wrote and is incapable of doing things that please God. but you already admitted Paul is in error andthus not inspired in passages. but why should I believe you more than what Paul wrote? I know where Paul go t his authority, where do you get yours so that you can overrule what Paul wrote to the churches?

So unsaved people can do "good things" on a human level but they are not "good things" from gods perspective as is written in Gods word.

Well, now you've been a bit of a different twist on it, which means we can at least agree in part. They are indeed good things, but certainly not up to God's standards *with respect to receiving eternal life.*

Again, Man can do good, but it is not just in doing good that Salvation comes. We must embrace *all* of God's good, which by that I mean that Christ, God's Son, is accepted.

In accepting God's Son, we displace our own carnal choices for everything that God considered "good" for eternal life. Choosing righteousness in the face of our inward spiritual Sin Nature is very pleasing to God, and does merit eternal life, through the grace of Christ that comes with his gift of eternal righteousness.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Yes, good by God's standards. He is the one who made Man in the beginning to be able to choose to live in His image and likeness, which means to be able to do good.

But you forget that man fell and became dead spiritually and Romans 8 applies! as well as Romans 3:

12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

Well, now you've been a bit of a different twist on it, which means we can at least agree in part. They are indeed good things, but certainly not up to God's standards *with respect to receiving eternal life.*

Again, Man can do good, but it is not just in doing good that Salvation comes. We must embrace *all* of God's good, which by that I mean that Christ, God's Son, is accepted.

In accepting God's Son, we displace our own carnal choices for everything that God considered "good" for eternal life. Choosing righteousness in the face of our inward spiritual Sin Nature is very pleasing to God, and does merit eternal life, through the grace of Christ that comes with his gift of eternal righteousness.

Randy I do not know how long you have been a believer, but this is radically wrong.

There is only on ething reqquired for eternal life- believe on the Lord jesus Christ and believe He physically rose from teh dead and thou shalt be saved! Period!

Our sin nature has been reckoned dead by God. The blood of Jesus wiped oout the old nature and replaced it with teh new nature which God is conforming to the image of Jesus! Our part is study to show ourselves approved. IN doing so we replace the old lines of thinking for the eternal thinking. It is not displacing the old nature- it is learning to live and understand and grow in the new.

The only good a man can do is the deeds motivated by the Holy Spirit.

Once again the bible is clear- an unsaved man cannot please God! Nor do they even want to as it says in Romans 8 and in Corinth. the unsaved man thinks the things of God are foolishness.

Do not confuse religiousness with doing good. Unsaved people canpractrice a very strong form fo Christianity. But God judges the heart and if they have never trusted in christ- Jesus rejects them and says "I never knew you" no matter how many prayers, how many "good deeds", aqnd how many church services they attended and people they helped.

Paul made this clear here:

1 Corinthians 13
King James Version

13 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

 

[Randy Kluth]

But you forget that man fell and became dead spiritually and Romans 8 applies! as well as Romans 3:

12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

Your answer in post #127 regarding Cornelius is ridiculous!

I quoted:
Acts 10.1 At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion in what was known as the Italian Regiment. 2 He and all his family were devout and God-fearing; he gave generously to those in need and prayed to God regularly.

Your answer: The book of Acts is a book of transition. ;)

So until you can answer this point, you're just spinning your wheels. We can argue all day long about whether the good in man achieves Salvation or not. But the point is, unsaved people can freely choose to do good. And obviously, they are free to choose for Salvation as well, which is about as good as or better than any other form of good.

I haven't forgotten Romans 3. It's indelibly impressed upon my mind. Paul was making the point about Man's Sin Nature by pointing out God's view of mankind, generally, at a time when what they were on the inside came out in vulgar display. That doesn't mean that all men always walk in that sin--only that sin is inside all of us. Nor does it mean we can't deny sin its wish to display itself. We can indeed deny it, even as God told Cain he could achieve that.

Our sin nature has been reckoned dead by God. The blood of Jesus wiped oout the old nature and replaced it with teh new nature which God is conforming to the image of Jesus! Our part is study to show ourselves approved. IN doing so we replace the old lines of thinking for the eternal thinking. It is not displacing the old nature- it is learning to live and understand and grow in the new.

The blood of Jesus has not "wiped out" the old sin nature. We still have a Sin Nature. We are to reckon ourselves "dead to sin" as far as its legal claim upon our lives. Our "death sentence" has been removed, and we can now ignore it, since we've chosen Christ as our life. The life of Christ is eternal, and has already overcome death for us, legally.

I'm just trying to put the language right so that there is no misunderstanding. Obviously, you don't recognize that I know the Bible.

The only good a man can do is the deeds motivated by the Holy Spirit.

I've already showed you that isn't true with Cornelius. But it's obviously true because you can simply look anywhere and see that all of mankind can do good deeds. Man was created to do good deeds. The Fall of Man did not end how we were created to do good. We can still do good after the Fall.

Man sinned by choosing to do the evil together with the good, to choose a false knowledge of the good over a true knowledge of the good. All men can choose the true good, whether they are conscious of where it comes from or not. Christ's revelation of "the good" is available to all men, whether they are saved or not. It's just that "the good" alone does not get people saved.

Once again the bible is clear- an unsaved man cannot please God! Nor do they even want to as it says in Romans 8 and in Corinth. the unsaved man thinks the things of God are foolishness.

Do not confuse religiousness with doing good. Unsaved people canpractrice a very strong form fo Christianity. But God judges the heart and if they have never trusted in christ- Jesus rejects them and says "I never knew you" no matter how many prayers, how many "good deeds", aqnd how many church services they attended and people they helped.

Formula Salvation messages cannot replace good theology. If you treat people like there is no good in them, you will likely not bring them to Christ. People don't do good because it's a "form of Christianity." They simply at times follow their conscience, perhaps for less than pure motives. But unquestionably, they do obey God at times. I give the example of King Abimelech (Gen 20).

When you talk about men "pleasing God" you are conflating pleasing God by accepting Christ with pleasing God simply by doing good works without a full commitment to Christ. Consider the Rich Young Ruler story (Mark 10). Jesus loved him for his commitment to the good, and yet the man still turned away!

Doing good isn't always about getting saved. And if it isn't about getting saved, that doesn't mean it still doesn't have some good in it. This is the problem with your theology about free will and the ubiquity of "doing good." Obviously, the most important "good" is accepting Christ for Salvation. But that was not my point.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Your answer in post #127 regarding Cornelius is ridiculous!

I quoted:
Acts 10.1 At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion in what was known as the Italian Regiment. 2 He and all his family were devout and God-fearing; he gave generously to those in need and prayed to God regularly.

Your answer: The book of Acts is a book of transition. ;)

So until you can answer this point, you're just spinning your wheels. We can argue all day long about whether the good in man achieves Salvation or not. But the point is, unsaved people can freely choose to do good. And obviously, they are free to choose for Salvation as well, which is about as good as or better than any other form of good.

I haven't forgotten Romans 3. It's indelibly impressed upon my mind. Paul was making the point about Man's Sin Nature by pointing out God's view of mankind, generally, at a time when what they were on the inside came out in vulgar display. That doesn't mean that all men always walk in that sin--only that sin is inside all of us. Nor does it mean we can't deny sin its wish to display itself. We can indeed deny it, even as God told Cain he could achieve that.



The blood of Jesus has not "wiped out" the old sin nature. We still have a Sin Nature. We are to reckon ourselves "dead to sin" as far as its legal claim upon our lives. Our "death sentence" has been removed, and we can now ignore it, since we've chosen Christ as our life. The life of Christ is eternal, and has already overcome death for us, legally.

I'm just trying to put the language right so that there is no misunderstanding. Obviously, you don't recognize that I know the Bible.



I've already showed you that isn't true with Cornelius. But it's obviously true because you can simply look anywhere and see that all of mankind can do good deeds. Man was created to do good deeds. The Fall of Man did not end how we were created to do good. We can still do good after the Fall.

Man sinned by choosing to do the evil together with the good, to choose a false knowledge of the good over a true knowledge of the good. All men can choose the true good, whether they are conscious of where it comes from or not. Christ's revelation of "the good" is available to all men, whether they are saved or not. It's just that "the good" alone does not get people saved.



Formula Salvation messages cannot replace good theology. If you treat people like there is no good in them, you will likely not bring them to Christ. People don't do good because it's a "form of Christianity." They simply at times follow their conscience, perhaps for less than pure motives. But unquestionably, they do obey God at times. I give the example of King Abimelech (Gen 20).

When you talk about men "pleasing God" you are conflating pleasing God by accepting Christ with pleasing God simply by doing good works without a full commitment to Christ. Consider the Rich Young Ruler story (Mark 10). Jesus loved him for his commitment to the good, and yet the man still turned away!

Doing good isn't always about getting saved. And if it isn't about getting saved, that doesn't mean it still doesn't have some good in it. This is the problem with your theology about free will and the ubiquity of "doing good." Obviously, the most important "good" is accepting Christ for Salvation. But that was not my point.

So you believe Cornelius possessed innate righteousness iin his own human nature?

Unsaved can do good to you? then you disagree with the bible. I already posted the verse. but it is from Paul swo maybe you think He was in error there as well?

Romans 3. Once again you are subtly reinterpreting Paul's Words. It is not that sin dwells in us- it is that we have a nature that is opposed to God! That is explicitly clear from the bible as written. We sin because it is our nature to sin.

The sin nature has been positionally rendered dead and gone. We have been given a new nature. But yet we still wrestle with the old man. so while out sin nature still screams for ascendancy We are a new creature in gods eyes. We were made children of God at our new birth.

Well as for knowing Scripture- you are more bent on subtly interjecting your opinion on what is written than actually abidsing by what is written. You may know it very well, but you like your take on it more than what it simply says.

Of cornelius and mankind doing "true good", once again you are at odds with what Scripture says is the nature of man.

Not knowing what you mean by formula salvation, I can't answer to that. but I do not treat people like they are no good, I treat them as the objects of Jesus' love they are! KNowing that all of us are hopelessly lost does not change that fact.

Men are not as bad as they can be, but they are as bad off as they can be. Your problem is that we are talking theology about harmartiology, soteriology and anthropology and you think that equates to feelings or how we act. That is wrong.

No but getting saved is a good deed! Mankind cannot do that on hisw own. We need God changing a heart to do that. That is step one.

And I have defined good for you. NOthing an unsaved person does is considered good by god. Me helping a poor person, feeding them, clothing them,, giving them shelter and money for a new day is a good thing, but if it is not done for the glory of God then though on th esurface it is a good thing, in eternity it profits nothing to me.

A preacher could lead tens of thousands to jesus, train missionaries who do the same! That is a good thing. Open soup kitchens and food pantires as well. But if He was called to simply raise upi a godly family and work and be a faithful church memeber, all those "good deeds" count fo rnothing for him. Because they were done in disobedience to Gods call for His life. That is the reality of the bible.

Remember this verse:

Matthew 7:21-23
King James Version

21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

 

[Randy Kluth]

So you believe Cornelius possessed innate righteousness iin his own human nature?

Yes, God created man in His own image and likeness. That meant that by nature all men can do good. It doesn't mean that men can get saved on their own, but it does mean that they can respond to God within them in the command to do good.

Unsaved can do good to you? then you disagree with the bible. I already posted the verse. but it is from Paul swo maybe you think He was in error there as well?

Didn't you get the memo? You completely misread my post. I was saying that Luther was in error--not Paul! So now maybe you should apologize for misrepresenting me publicly?

Romans 3. Once again you are subtly reinterpreting Paul's Words. It is not that sin dwells in us- it is that we have a nature that is opposed to God! That is explicitly clear from the bible as written. We sin because it is our nature to sin.

And? I never said otherwise.

The sin nature has been positionally rendered dead and gone. We have been given a new nature. But yet we still wrestle with the old man. so while out sin nature still screams for ascendancy We are a new creature in gods eyes. We were made children of God at our new birth.

And? I never said otherwise.

Not knowing what you mean by formula salvation, I can't answer to that. but I do not treat people like they are no good, I treat them as the objects of Jesus' love they are!

Then you see some good in them? Good! We are in agreement then?

And I have defined good for you. NOthing an unsaved person does is considered good by god.

So you deny the Bible when it describes people who were outside of God's covenants as doing good? What about the "Good Samaritan?" Do you think he did good or not? Samaritans were not known to be people of God's covenant.

Me helping a poor person, feeding them, clothing them,, giving them shelter and money for a new day is a good thing, but if it is not done for the glory of God then though on th esurface it is a good thing, in eternity it profits nothing to me.

I've been saying something similar, that doing good alone doesn't save. But for the Christian your rewards do follow you.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Yes, God created man in His own image and likeness. That meant that by nature all men can do good. It doesn't mean that men can get saved on their own, but it does mean that they can respond to God within them in the command to do good.

Adam was created in the image and likeness of God! All the rest of us are created in Adams image- dead and trespasses and sins. As I have said often- man can do good deeds liie helping th epoor etc. but they do not count in eternity as Scripture has declared! God has placed all under sin so He may have mercy on whom he will.

You have yet to give a verse that overrides the verses I gave you that shows the natural man on his own nature cannot respond to God. You give philosophy and opinion, but no Scripture.

Didn't you get the memo? You completely misread my post. I was saying that Luther was in error--not Paul! So now maybe you should apologize for misrepresenting me publicly?

YOu publicly declared Paul was in error and I reposted YOUR post saying so!

And? I never said otherwise.

Yes you did several times! YOur quote on this is man has a tendency to sin, that is vastly different from having a sin nature that controls us.
A dog is a dog by nature. Man is a sinner by nature- we cannot be anything else unless someone gives us a new nature. So our good deeds are filth to god before we are saved! That is SCripture as I showed you.

Then you see some good in them? Good! We are in agreement then?

Guilty again of putting words in my mouth. There is nothing good in our human nature! That is scripture. We are loved by god despite nothing good dwelling in us- that is Scripture. Jesus died to redeem us and save us though we are His enemies as it is written in romans 5.

We are savable not becuase of some innate goodness in man, but because God chose to save us! He was under no boligation to save a single soul. we all rebel against Him, and all offend Him, not the other way around.

So you deny the Bible when it describes people who were outside of God's covenants as doing good? What about the "Good Samaritan?" Do you think he did good or not? Samaritans were not known to be people of God's covenant.

Are you playing thick or are you really this thick? I said man can do "good deeds", but they do not matter to god before we are saved! He doesn't look down at say Cornelius and go: "Well look at all the good he has done to my people, so I am going to save him." As Paul wrote again: anything done outside of faith is sin!

Also as written: without faith it is IMPOSSIBLE to please God.
And as also written Faith doesn't come until we hear the word of God!

I've been saying something similar, that doing good alone doesn't save. But for the Christian your rewards do follow you.

Well this is a totally different topic you bring up here. Christians have their rewards follow them. The unbeliever does not have any rewards! Only deeper punishment based on their knowledge of the word and rejection of it.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Adam was created in the image and likeness of God! All the rest of us are created in Adams image- dead and trespasses and sins. As I have said often- man can do good deeds liie helping th epoor etc. but they do not count in eternity as Scripture has declared! God has placed all under sin so He may have mercy on whom he will.

You have yet to give a verse that overrides the verses I gave you that shows the natural man on his own nature cannot respond to God. You give philosophy and opinion, but no Scripture.

I still stand by my quote that we were made in the image and likeness of God. You say or imply that that no longer holds, that now mankind is created in the image of Adam. I think that's false, and you have no leg to stand on with respect to that statement.

YOu publicly declared Paul was in error and I reposted YOUR post saying so!

No, you didn't. I referred you to my representation of Luther's "Bondage of the Will" as the book I felt made Luther field errors in language. I was not talking about Paul. You did not quote anything remotely like I said Paul was in error. That's a lie, as well as a slander. I saw nothing indicating I called Paul a liar. You quoted nothing saying I called Paul a liar. You're a poor excuse of a Christian saying things like that, unless of course by some incredible feat I managed to say something like that completely by mistake. But I doubt it.

Yes you did several times! YOur quote on this is man has a tendency to sin, that is vastly different from having a sin nature that controls us.
A dog is a dog by nature. Man is a sinner by nature- we cannot be anything else unless someone gives us a new nature. So our good deeds are filth to god before we are saved! That is SCripture as I showed you.

You claim I said, several times, that Paul made errors in Scripture. Where? Instead of talking, post the quotes. And I want to see the name *Paul* in the same sentence with the word *error!* You know, you're wasting my time...

 

[Desire Of All Nations]

This is a very deceptive teaching, because it ignores the Bible's definition of sin in 1 Jhn 3:4. This theology of yours' supposes that a person ought to just stay as they are and accept no responsibility whatsoever for Christ having to lay down His life on a wooden stake like a common criminal. The Bible teaches in Eph. 2:1-2 , Rom. 3:23, and Rom. 5:12 that while Adam opened the door to Satan's influence, every last human being(for the obvious exception of Christ) chose to surrender ourselves to Satan's influence, whether we knew it was wrong or not.

No matter how it's packaged, this "comes as you are, stay as you are" garbage is a transparent lie, and frankly, no one will ever convince me that it is biblical on any level. Repentance was a constant theme throughout the NT writings because God demands a Christian to do their part in living according to His commandments upon conversion. That's why James uses the word "synergeō" in Jas. 2:22 to describe how living faith includes obeying God's commandments.

Protestants would have people believe that a Christian is supposed to just kick back and live comfortably while God does all the heavy lifting just because He's omnipotent, and this belief is as ridiculous as it is unbibical. Godly character cannot be formed in a person that way, and you will never find any instance in the Bible where it was ever formed that way. The whole reason why Jesus placed the individual responsibility on the Christian to overcome throughout Rev. 2-3 is because true Christianity is not the passive, feel-good religion that Protestants want to think it is.

 

[Randy Kluth]

This is a very deceptive teaching, because it ignores the Bible's definition of sin in 1 Jhn 3:4. This theology of yours' supposes that a person ought to just stay as they are and accept no responsibility whatsoever for Christ having to lay down His life on a wooden stake like a common criminal. The Bible teaches in Eph. 2:1-2 , Rom. 3:23, and Rom. 5:12 that while Adam opened the door to Satan's influence, every last human being(for the obvious exception of Christ) chose to surrender ourselves to Satan's influence, whether we knew it was wrong or not.

No matter how it's packaged, this "comes as you are, stay as you are" garbage is a transparent lie, and frankly, no one will ever convince me that it is biblical on any level. Repentance was a constant theme throughout the NT writings because God demands a Christian to do their part in living according to His commandments upon conversion. That's why James uses the word "synergeō" in Jas. 2:22 to describe how living faith includes obeying God's commandments.

Protestants would have people believe that a Christian is supposed to just kick back and live comfortably while God does all the heavy lifting just because He's omnipotent, and this belief is as ridiculous as it is unbibical. Godly character cannot be formed in a person that way, and you will never find any instance in the Bible where it was ever formed that way. The whole reason why Jesus placed the individual responsibility on the Christian to overcome throughout Rev. 2-3 is because true Christianity is not the passive, feel-good religion that Protestants want to think it is.

Not sure how many Christians practice this "sloppy agape," as we used to call it? But yes, a rules-less Christianity is near worthless if not counter-productive. Actual Christian law calls upon us to be receptive to God's spiritual input constantly, so that more than obeying rules we are walking in his love, real time. We can describe this in terms of rules, like "loving one another." But in reality, we have to walk in close contact with God to know His heart in every situation.

My problem in my Christian youth was in failing to recognize this "walk with God," in which we make Him Lord of our lives, being willing to give up our own way at any time to follow His path of love and holiness.

To know what holiness is only requires that we look back at the blueprint of the Law of Moses, and discard the part that has already been fulfilled, namely the things that were temporary and the things that spoke of Christ's atonement of our sins. That's been done, and no longer requires play.

But the morality and spirituality of God are eternal, and remain in play so that we fulfill what is said: "Be holy and I am holy." If we don't choose to act like God, in what way are we walking with Him?

 

[robert derrick]

The Bible teaches in Eph. 2:1-2 , Rom. 3:23, and Rom. 5:12 that while Adam opened the door to Satan's influence, every last human being(for the obvious exception of Christ) chose to surrender ourselves to Satan's influence, whether we knew it was wrong or not.

Interesting. Sin enters into the world by sinning, and so the spirit of the world is given free reign to tempt into more and more sinning.

By Jesus Christ we are forgiven of past sinning with desire and power to resist the devil's temptation at every turn, even as Jesus did. As He was in the days of His flesh, so we can become in our own days on earth as His flesh and bones.

Protestants would have people believe that a Christian is supposed to just kick back and live comfortably while God does all the heavy lifting just because He's omnipotent, and this belief is as ridiculous as it is unbibical. Godly character cannot be formed in a person that way, and you will never find any instance in the Bible where it was ever formed that way. The whole reason why Jesus placed the individual responsibility on the Christian to overcome throughout Rev. 2-3 is because true Christianity is not the passive, feel-good religion that Protestants want to think it is.

True. Casual Christianity. Jesus has already done the work, so we don't have to get worked up about anything we may or may not do.

Those who don't do their part in being saved and justified by Christ, by resisting the devil, then they have no part in the body of Christ on earth, nor in the blessed resurrection at His appearing.

 

[Charlie24]

Why do you not seek God for the definition of sin instead of seeking it among vain men who shall soon be cut down like the grass, and wither as the green herb? John wrote as he was moved by the Holy Ghost, saying, whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. It is just that simple.

Not sure why you think my definition of sin is different from, "sin is the transgression of the Law?"

 

[robert derrick]

If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.

Sin is not a nature nor a spirit, but an act alone. There is no sin, where there is no sinning.

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.

The source for sin is lust that brings forth the act of sin called sinning. Lust only enters the heart of them that knowingly rebel against God's word and commandment of life, which began with Lucifer, then was had by Adam and Eve and every man following except Jesus.

There is no sin nature, but the nature of sin is to lust for the things of this life against the rule of Christ. That is why Jesus says to lust from the heart is judged as committing the act of sinning. Lust is committing the spiritual act of sinning, and sinning is committing the physical act itself.

 

[robert derrick]

Not sure how many Christians practice this "sloppy agape," as we used to call it? But yes, a rules-less Christianity is near worthless if not counter-productive. Actual Christian law calls upon us to be receptive to God's spiritual input constantly, so that more than obeying rules we are walking in his love, real time. We can describe this in terms of rules, like "loving one another." But in reality, we have to walk in close contact with God to know His heart in every situation.

My problem in my Christian youth was in failing to recognize this "walk with God," in which we make Him Lord of our lives, being willing to give up our own way at any time to follow His path of love and holiness.

To know what holiness is only requires that we look back at the blueprint of the Law of Moses, and discard the part that has already been fulfilled, namely the things that were temporary and the things that spoke of Christ's atonement of our sins. That's been done, and no longer requires play.

But the morality and spirituality of God are eternal, and remain in play so that we fulfill what is said: "Be holy and I am holy." If we don't choose to act like God, in what way are we walking with Him?

This is true, and I was an outward Pentecostal holiness type like Saul of Tarsus uncompromising in the works of the law, before I ever knew the truth of spiritually cleansing within the platter first, and actively working with Jesus to cast down any unrighteous thoughts and vain imaginations for sinning.

I allowed lusting in the heart, so long as I didn't do it, until Jesus Himselfc ommanded me to stop it and obey His word exactly as written:

Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.

(For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.

Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.

These are the hidden first works of the hidden man in Christ. Love is only what is done, and loving God must begin with the heart and spirit and mind, to keep ourselves spiritually clean, that we may also live clean.

That is why faith in God can never be left alone for the devil to snatch it away from our hearts.

 

[robert derrick]

I still stand by my quote that we were made in the image and likeness of God. You say or imply that that no longer holds, that now mankind is created in the image of Adam. I think that's false, and you have no leg to stand on with respect to that statement.

Exactly. The doctrine of now being made by the devil in his own image and lusting for sin from the womb, is the one of the oldest lies of Christians that give up on doing righteousness, and just say they were born that way. That lie has therefore spread throughout the world, so that even unbelievers cling to it and end up blaming God for the way they act, as though God made them that way at creation.

 

[robert derrick]

Your answer in post #127 regarding Cornelius is ridiculous!

I quoted:
Acts 10.1 At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion in what was known as the Italian Regiment. 2 He and all his family were devout and God-fearing; he gave generously to those in need and prayed to God regularly.

Your answer: The book of Acts is a book of transition. ;)

So until you can answer this point, you're just spinning your wheels. We can argue all day long about whether the good in man achieves Salvation or not. But the point is, unsaved people can freely choose to do good. And obviously, they are free to choose for Salvation as well, which is about as good as or better than any other form of good.

I haven't forgotten Romans 3. It's indelibly impressed upon my mind. Paul was making the point about Man's Sin Nature by pointing out God's view of mankind, generally, at a time when what they were on the inside came out in vulgar display. That doesn't mean that all men always walk in that sin--only that sin is inside all of us. Nor does it mean we can't deny sin its wish to display itself. We can indeed deny it, even as God told Cain he could achieve that.



The blood of Jesus has not "wiped out" the old sin nature. We still have a Sin Nature. We are to reckon ourselves "dead to sin" as far as its legal claim upon our lives. Our "death sentence" has been removed, and we can now ignore it, since we've chosen Christ as our life. The life of Christ is eternal, and has already overcome death for us, legally.

I'm just trying to put the language right so that there is no misunderstanding. Obviously, you don't recognize that I know the Bible.



I've already showed you that isn't true with Cornelius. But it's obviously true because you can simply look anywhere and see that all of mankind can do good deeds. Man was created to do good deeds. The Fall of Man did not end how we were created to do good. We can still do good after the Fall.

Man sinned by choosing to do the evil together with the good, to choose a false knowledge of the good over a true knowledge of the good. All men can choose the true good, whether they are conscious of where it comes from or not. Christ's revelation of "the good" is available to all men, whether they are saved or not. It's just that "the good" alone does not get people saved.



Formula Salvation messages cannot replace good theology. If you treat people like there is no good in them, you will likely not bring them to Christ. People don't do good because it's a "form of Christianity." They simply at times follow their conscience, perhaps for less than pure motives. But unquestionably, they do obey God at times. I give the example of King Abimelech (Gen 20).

When you talk about men "pleasing God" you are conflating pleasing God by accepting Christ with pleasing God simply by doing good works without a full commitment to Christ. Consider the Rich Young Ruler story (Mark 10). Jesus loved him for his commitment to the good, and yet the man still turned away!

Doing good isn't always about getting saved. And if it isn't about getting saved, that doesn't mean it still doesn't have some good in it. This is the problem with your theology about free will and the ubiquity of "doing good." Obviously, the most important "good" is accepting Christ for Salvation. But that was not my point.

I like what you are posting about all men being give power to choose good or evil, because that is what it means to be created in the image of God.

And that power is given to us when Christ makes and shapes us in the womb:

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

The problem with many Christians is that they think being saved is just becoming better neighbors and sinners, trying to do more good than evil.

Being born again is to become as newborn babes from the womb a with pure heart and clean hands, but now we remain that way in the grace and knowing of the Lord, knowing Jesus personally within.

 

[robert derrick]

This is a very deceptive teaching, because it ignores the Bible's definition of sin in 1 Jhn 3:4. This theology of yours' supposes that a person ought to just stay as they are and accept no responsibility whatsoever for Christ having to lay down His life on a wooden stake like a common criminal. The Bible teaches in Eph. 2:1-2 , Rom. 3:23, and Rom. 5:12 that while Adam opened the door to Satan's influence, every last human being(for the obvious exception of Christ) chose to surrender ourselves to Satan's influence, whether we knew it was wrong or not.

No matter how it's packaged, this "comes as you are, stay as you are" garbage is a transparent lie, and frankly, no one will ever convince me that it is biblical on any level. Repentance was a constant theme throughout the NT writings because God demands a Christian to do their part in living according to His commandments upon conversion. That's why James uses the word "synergeō" in Jas. 2:22 to describe how living faith includes obeying God's commandments.

Protestants would have people believe that a Christian is supposed to just kick back and live comfortably while God does all the heavy lifting just because He's omnipotent, and this belief is as ridiculous as it is unbibical. Godly character cannot be formed in a person that way, and you will never find any instance in the Bible where it was ever formed that way. The whole reason why Jesus placed the individual responsibility on the Christian to overcome throughout Rev. 2-3 is because true Christianity is not the passive, feel-good religion that Protestants want to think it is.

They also ride piggy back on Jesus' cross, saying He has accomplished all the work of salvation and justification, rather than taking up their own.

And they really take a nasty turn upon preachers of righteousness, by accusing them of denying Jesus' work on the cross, so that doing righteousness now rejects the cross.

Jesus' died unto sin, so that we don't have to die by sinning, but with our own cross we die to sin as He.

Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

 

[Randy Kluth]

I like what you are posting about all men being give power to choose good or evil, because that is what it means to be created in the image of God.

And that power is given to us when Christ makes and shapes us in the womb:

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

The problem with many Christians is that they think being saved is just becoming better neighbors and sinners, trying to do more good than evil.

Being born again is to become as newborn babes from the womb a with pure heart and clean hands, but now we remain that way in the grace and knowing of the Lord, knowing Jesus personally within.

I agree. We can try to tip the scales towards the good, but that doesn't make us acceptable in the eyes of God. We can spend our lives doing good, but it can all be to prove we're good enough when in reality we may be doing it for ourselves, following our own interests, and not following the Lord.

I prefer to describe the "true good" like this. True good for God is in pursuing a relationship with God as a servant to a Lord, as a child to his Father, as a believer in Christ to the One who gave us Christ. When we choose this kind of good, we are actually receiving Christ's good, and not our own good. We are choosing not only to have God's good, but along with it we choose to receive His grace and forgiveness.

Choosing to live this way is giving up our own ways, and in effect becoming born again. We enter into a new life, as opposed to the way Man lives for himself, pursuing his own interests, and not including God in all of his choices.

Thanks for some good input on this!

 

[Enoch111]

But first let's define the sin nature according to the Greek scholar Kenneth Wuest.

You might be better off defining the sin nature -- the flesh -- according to Scripture.

 

[Charlie24]

You might be better off defining the sin nature -- the flesh -- according to Scripture.

I think Mr. Wuest did just that. Do you see where he didn't?