“Sanctify Them”

Bible Highlighter · Feb 25, 2020

frumanchu said:
No, you don't get off that easy. Either you actually SPECIFICALLY obey them or you don't. If you say you obey X by doing Y then you have no real argument against the Scriptural truth that we are justified and saved by the imputed righteousness of Christ and not by our obedience.

If you say you have no sin, you are deceiving yourself. 1 John 1:8

Rom 7, 1 John 1:8 for starters. Rebirth is not something we constantly lose and regain. Show me in Scripture where men are reborn multiple times.

Free FROM sin, not free OF sin. We are freed from the bondage to sin whereby we could do nothing righteous. We are freed FROM sin TO a pursuit of righteousness in Christ. Neither of those verses say that sin is fully and completely eradicated in us this side of glory.

In terms of our justification in God's sight, yes. In terms of our actual thoughts and actions...no, and you deceive yourself to think otherwise. You either have to so lower the bar as to be able to think yourself achieving perfect sinlessness, or you simply turn a blind eye to the reality of the ongoing effect of the sin nature. In thinking you are completely free of it, you are actually resisting the Spirit which works through the course of our lives to continually convict us of sin and bring us into conformity with Christ.

I'm not the one here burdening men with the weight of being actually sinless in your thoughts and actions, telling them if they have sinned that they cannot possibly be reborn because succumbing to any temptation proves it.

Again, I leave it to the rest of you to judge according to the Scriptures and the Spirit. This man says your salvation in Christ is ripped from you at even the slightest sin.

Lest I not be clear, I am by no means advocating anti-nomianism or a passive, carefree attitude towards sin. As Dr. Michael Horton put it, "Faith is not merely a passive clinging to our justification (a one-time event), but rather a militant faith that acts, that seeks sanctification—becoming more like Christ." I struggle daily against sin because I know it grieves God and I seek to be more like His Son. But I also take comfort in times of difficulty knowing that I am saved purely and solely on the basis of the work of Christ and not on my own merit or obedience.

Taking leave of this thread now as I cannot abide such a destructive teaching.

As for 1 John 1:8:

What is helpful in understanding 1 John 1:8 is looking at its immediate context. 1 John 1:10 says if we say we have not sinned. 1 John 1:10 switches gears from 1 John 1:8 in regards to time; John talks about the declaration on committing sin in verse 8 (which is present tense) to a declaration on committing sin being a past declaration (with verse 10). Verse 10 is saying there are people who said they have not sinned (past tense). This is clearly a gnostic belief. Why? Well, most believers today hold to the idea that they have sinned as a part of their old life before coming to Christ (Regardless of whether they are “OSAS,” a “Sin and still be saved” type believer, or a “Conditional Salvationist”). So this clearly is a “gnostic belief” that John was warning the brethren about (See 1 John 2:26). 1 John 1:8 is a present declaration of sin. It is saying if we say we have no sin when we do sin (present tense). This has to be the interpretative understanding of this verse because 1 John 2:4 says if we say we know Him and do not keep His commandments we are a liar and the truth is not in us. The OSAS's interpretation on 1 John 1:8 does not work because it conflicts with a normal reading on 1 John 2:3-4. You cannot always be in sin (breaking God's commands) as a part of 1 John 1:8 and yet also fulfill 1 John 2:3 that says we can have an assurance of knowing Him if we keep His commandments. Especially when 1 John 2:4 says we are a liar and the truth is not in us if we break his commandments. In other words, if the OSAS interpretation on 1 John 1:8 was true, then I would be damned if I do by obeying God's commands (1 John 1:8) and yet I would be damned if I don't by not obeying God's commands (1 John 2:4).

In fact, the New English Translation says this for 1 John 1:8,

"If we say we do not bear the guilt of sin,
we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us."
(1 John 1:8 NET).

In other words, this verse is saying that if a person sins and says they do not bear the guilt of sin (in the sense that they will not have to face any wrath or Judgment from God over their sin) then they would be deceiving themselves and the truth would not be in them. This is exactly what the Eternal Security proposes. They are saying that they do not bear the guilt of any sin (destruction of their soul and body in hell fire) if they do sin because they believe their future sins are paid for by Jesus. They are saying, they do not bear the guilt or the punishment of sin at the final Judgment because of their belief on Jesus. In short, 1 John 1:8 is a denial of the existence of sin on some level. “If we say we have no sin (in the sense that it does not exist) we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.” (1 John 1:8). Christian Scientists think sin is an illusion and does not exist at all. So this verse would apply to them. Eternal Security Proponents and those who deny that “Sin Can Separate a Believer from God” deny the existence of sin partially. They believe sin exists physically but they do not believe sin exists for them on a spiritual level because Jesus has forgiven them of all their sin by their belief on Jesus. In fact, to see just how silly your argument actually is for 1 John 1:8, you would have to believe that you are sinning right now at this very moment in order for such a verse to be true because 1 John 1:8 is speaking in the present tense.

John prescribes that we do not think that sin is an illusion, and we are automatically saved, but John is telling us to "sin not" and go to our advocate Jesus Christ (1 John 2:1), and confess our sins so as to be forgiven of sin and to be cleansed of all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9). How can you confess and be forgiven of sin if all your future sin is paid for? It makes no sense.

You can say that John is talking about a break of fellowship by one's sins and not a loss of salvation, but that would not be consistent with Scripture. 1 John 5:12 says he that has the Son has life, and he that does not have the Son does not have life.

Bible Highlighter · Feb 25, 2020

frumanchu said:
No, you don't get off that easy. Either you actually SPECIFICALLY obey them or you don't. If you say you obey X by doing Y then you have no real argument against the Scriptural truth that we are justified and saved by the imputed righteousness of Christ and not by our obedience.

If you say you have no sin, you are deceiving yourself. 1 John 1:8

Rom 7, 1 John 1:8 for starters. Rebirth is not something we constantly lose and regain. Show me in Scripture where men are reborn multiple times.

Free FROM sin, not free OF sin. We are freed from the bondage to sin whereby we could do nothing righteous. We are freed FROM sin TO a pursuit of righteousness in Christ. Neither of those verses say that sin is fully and completely eradicated in us this side of glory.

In terms of our justification in God's sight, yes. In terms of our actual thoughts and actions...no, and you deceive yourself to think otherwise. You either have to so lower the bar as to be able to think yourself achieving perfect sinlessness, or you simply turn a blind eye to the reality of the ongoing effect of the sin nature. In thinking you are completely free of it, you are actually resisting the Spirit which works through the course of our lives to continually convict us of sin and bring us into conformity with Christ.

I'm not the one here burdening men with the weight of being actually sinless in your thoughts and actions, telling them if they have sinned that they cannot possibly be reborn because succumbing to any temptation proves it.

Again, I leave it to the rest of you to judge according to the Scriptures and the Spirit. This man says your salvation in Christ is ripped from you at even the slightest sin.

Lest I not be clear, I am by no means advocating anti-nomianism or a passive, carefree attitude towards sin. As Dr. Michael Horton put it, "Faith is not merely a passive clinging to our justification (a one-time event), but rather a militant faith that acts, that seeks sanctification—becoming more like Christ." I struggle daily against sin because I know it grieves God and I seek to be more like His Son. But I also take comfort in times of difficulty knowing that I am saved purely and solely on the basis of the work of Christ and not on my own merit or obedience.

Taking leave of this thread now as I cannot abide such a destructive teaching.

As for your reference to Romans 7:

Paul is not justifying that he can sin and still be saved in Romans 7.

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

It is true that the use of first-person present verbs in the passage (“I am” “I practice” “I want” “I hate” “I do”) sounds like Paul is talking about his present experience. But Paul sometimes uses “I” in a rhetorical sense to describe generic experience rather than his own present experience (1 Corinthians 10:30; 1 Corinthians 13:2-3, 1 Corinthians 13:11). In at least one other place, Paul uses a first-person present verb to describe his opponents’ experience (Galatians 2:18).

Romans 7:25 is a verse that transitions back to the present day reality as Paul being a Christian. He is thankful that he now has victory in Jesus Christ His Lord who can deliver him from his body of death (Which was a problem before). Otherwise why is Paul thanking Jesus?

Romans 13:14 says,
"But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof."

However, if you are still in doubt, there are 8 reasons in Scripture that show us that Paul is indeed talking as a Pharisee (recounting his past experience) and he is not talking in the present tense as a Christian in Romans 7:14-24.

#1. In Romans 7:6, Paul says we should serve in newness of the spirit and not the oldness of the letter (Which is the Old Law and not the New Testament Scriptures that were still being formed). We are told to SERVE. How do we serve? Do we just do our own thing? No. We follow God's commands in the New Testament. This talk of the Old Law is the context of verses 14-24.

#2. We are dead to the Law by the body of Jesus Christ (Romans 7:4). Would this be the Old Law or ALL law? 1 John 3:23 is a commandment that says we are to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. This is a New Covenant Law. So obviously we are not dead to this Law or Command. The Scriptures also say, "but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent." (Acts 17:30). Are we dead to this Law? Surely not. Jesus said "repent or perish." (Luke 13:3). Peter told Simon to repent (by way of prayer to God) of his wickedness of trying to pay for the gifts of the Holy Spirit so that he may be forgiven (Acts 8:22). Sin is merely transgression of the Law (1 John 3:4). All this lets us know that men of God can break God's laws and they can be separated from GOD because of it. So surely some kind of Law of God is still in effect and has dire consequences for any person's soul who commits them. For Jesus said that if we do not forgive, we will not be forgiven by the Father (Matthew 6:15). If Jesus was talking to unbelievers, this would not make any sense. They would first need to accept Christ. So the only logical conclusion is that Jesus is talking to believers in Matthew 6:15. You do not forgive (i.e. you sin or break this law of God) and you will not be forgiven or saved. 1 John 3:15 says if you hate your brother you are like a murderer and no murderer has eternal life abiding in them. Again, you hate your brother (which can be a one time act) and you do not have eternal life. It's that simple. Also, Paul condemns circumcision several times. Galatians 5:2 is the biggest verse that condemns circumcision salvationism. Circumcision is an Old Covenant Law and it is not a New Covenant Law. Paul uses the word "law" when he speaks against circumcision. So we have to conclude that Paul is saying we are dead to the Old Covenant Law and not all Law. So again, this talk of the Old Law plays into verses 14-24.

#3. Paul says, "For without the law sin was dead." (Romans 7:8). He also says, "I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." (Romans 7:9). This type of saying is nonsensical from a present tense reading as an adult Christian. The only way it sort of works is if Paul is referring to himself as a baby who had no knowledge of God's laws yet. But there are two problem with even that interpretation. One, this view does not seem as consistent with the phrase, "For without the law sin was dead" because even though Paul as a baby did not have any knowledge of the Law yet, the rest of the adult world would have the Law and sin would still be alive to them. Second, Paul says, "And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me." (Romans 7:10-11). Okay, so if Paul grew up and became aware of the Law one day, how could the commandment be ordained to life at this point in his life? The commandment was ordained for life back in the time of the Law of Moses. Also, Paul found that "the commandment" was death unto him and that it slew him. There are no death penalties attached to the commands given to us under the New Testament. Death penalties are only associated with the Laws given to us in the Old Covenant. This is how the Law slew him. For breaking the Old Law could be a loss of his own physical life. So this is talking about the Old Law (and not all Law). So again, this talk of the Old Law plays into verses 14-24.

#4. Paul says, "But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful." (Romans 7:13). Okay. Let's break this down. Paul says, "But sin, that it MIGHT APPEAR SIN, works death in me." (Romans 7:13). Now, how can sin make it appear like it may not be sin? Well, if Jesus was raised and Saul (Paul) was still a Pharisee striving to obey the Old Law when the New Covenant Law was still in effect, the sin that Saul (Paul) was struggling with as a pharisee during that time would not really technically be sin in every case. For if Paul disobeyed certain Old Covenant laws while the New Covenant and it's laws were in effect, then Saul (Paul) is not really breaking any real commandments from God in every case. Hence, why Paul said, "...sin, that it MIGHT APPEAR (as) SIN." (Romans 7:13). The beginning of verse 13 is a foreshadow of what is to come in verses 14-24. Paul is stepping out for a brief moment as speaking as an Israelite living throughout history to speak of his condition as a Pharisee when he says, "...sin, that it might appear sin." In the second half of verse 13, Paul says, that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful." (Romans 7:13). This is saying that when God provided the written Law of Moses to his people, there would be a double accountability to keeping God's laws because they are written for all to see now. So an Old Testament saint would feel exceedingly sinful or guilty for breaking God's law back in the Old Testament times because he had in his possession a written down visual law clearly telling him what is right and wrong. So again, Paul is referring to the Old Law here and not all law. This talk of the Old Law plays into verses 14-24.

#5. Paul says in Romans 7:14 that he is carnal and is sold under sin; And yet in Romans 8:2, Pauls says he is free from sin. So unless Paul is contradicting himself, he is talking from two different perspectives.

#6. In Romans 7:25, Paul asks the question: "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" Asking this kind of question as a Christian does not seem consistent with Paul's following statement if he is already delivered thru Jesus Christ as a Christian. If a believer is delivered by Jesus, and is thankful of that fact, there would be no cry to ask any question that says, "Who shall deliver me from this body of death?"

#7. Here is the final nail in the coffin for this argument. Romans 8:3-4 says,
3 "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." (Romans 8:3-4).

So which Law did God send His Son for so as to condemn sin in the flesh?
It was the Old Covenant Law.
For when Jesus died on the cross, the temple veil was ripped from top to bottom letting us know that the Old Testament laws were no longer valid because the Old Laws on the animal sacrifices and the priesthood were no longer acceptable.
Jesus Christ was now our Passover Lamb.
Jesus Christ was soon be our Heavenly High Priest (after He ascended to His father after His resurrection 3 days later) so He can be our mediator between God the Father and man.

Romans 8:4 says, "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."

This is saying that the righteous part or aspect of the Old Law can be fulfilled in us.

Paul says elsewhere,
8 "Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law."

(Romans 13:8-10).

So loving your neighbor is the righteousness of the Old Law!
We fulfill this law by walking after the Spirit and not after the flesh (i.e. sin).

So we see a consistent theme here. The word "law" used in general (with no actual description attached to it) is in reference to the Old Law in Romans 7 and Romans 8. This helps us to understand that Paul is telling us his past experience or life as a Pharisee in struggling to keep the Old Law unsuccessfully because he did not have Jesus Christ yet (in verses 14-24).

#8. In addition, in Romans 8:2, we see the mention of how there are TWO laws. We also learn from this verse that keeping one of these Laws helps us to be set FREE from the other one.

In Romans 8:2, we see:

Law #1. - Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus.
This is a New Covenant Law that we are still under. What is this Law?
It is fulfilling the righteousness of the Law (i.e. to love your neighbor - Romans 13:8-10) by walking after the Spirit (See Romans 8:3-4).

Law #2. Sin and Death.
This is in reference to the Old Covenant Law as a whole (i.e. the 613 Old Testament Commands within the Torah). It is called the Law of Sin and Death because you could physically be put to death by not obeying this Law.

What is the relationship of these two laws in Romans 8:2?

Keeping the New Law helps us to be free of the Old Law.
For there is no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus who WALK not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (Romans 8:1).

Source used for a small paragraph within this post:
Paul is not Talking about Himself: Why I take the "pre-Christian" Reading of Romans 7:14-25

WordSword · Feb 25, 2020

Phil W said:
It isn't OK if one is searching for a way to please God in every part of his life.
If the old man is, contrary to Rom 6:6 and Gal 5:24, still alive, we have no hope of pleasing God.
We would still be unreborn members of the OT.

Conversely, if the old man were dead in the believer, Paul wouldn't be wrestling with it (Ro 7:14-25) and the Creator of our rebirth would not need to oppose it (Gal 5:17). I imagine at one time or another most if not all believers in their early Christian years (I did in my first 12 years or so) may have thought that being sinless was possible, but all who seek the truth concerning it will find it.

Phil W · Feb 25, 2020

frumanchu said:
No, you don't get off that easy. Either you actually SPECIFICALLY obey them or you don't. If you say you obey X by doing Y then you have no real argument against the Scriptural truth that we are justified and saved by the imputed righteousness of Christ and not by our obedience.

I obey all of them.
His imputed righteousness is manifested every time I do.

If you say you have no sin, you are deceiving yourself. 1 John 1:8

"BUT...if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." (1 John 1:7)
Hmmm.
John is writing about two very different kinds of men and their very different kinds of walk.
Some of the verses of 1 John pertain to those who walk in the light, God, and other verses pertain to those walking in darkness, sin.
Verse 8 is for those in sin...they cant say they have no sin.

Rom 7, 1 John 1:8 for starters. Rebirth is not something we constantly lose and regain. Show me in Scripture where men are reborn multiple times.

I agree with you.
So why do some who SAY they are reborn still manifest the old man/creature?
It is because they weren't reborn at all.

BTW Part of Rom 7 is Paul's remembrance of his time as Pharisee, in the flesh, under the Law, failing to keep it, and doomed.
It is a transition of sorts between Rom 6's death of the flesh, and Rom 8's walk in the Spirit instead of in the flesh.

Free FROM sin, not free OF sin. We are freed from the bondage to sin whereby we could do nothing righteous. We are freed FROM sin TO a pursuit of righteousness in Christ. Neither of those verses say that sin is fully and completely eradicated in us this side of glory.

It sorrows me to think you can't equate "from" and "of".
You have a built is accommodation to commit more sin...to the great displeasure of God.

In terms of our justification in God's sight, yes. In terms of our actual thoughts and actions...no, and you deceive yourself to think otherwise. You either have to so lower the bar as to be able to think yourself achieving perfect sinlessness, or you simply turn a blind eye to the reality of the ongoing effect of the sin nature. In thinking you are completely free of it, you are actually resisting the Spirit which works through the course of our lives to continually convict us of sin and bring us into conformity with Christ.

Your opinion of the righteousness imputed to us by the Lord scares me.

I'm not the one here burdening men with the weight of being actually sinless in your thoughts and actions, telling them if they have sinned that they cannot possibly be reborn because succumbing to any temptation proves it.

In spite of the Lord's saying His yoke was light, you have determined otherwise?
All I can say is what Paul wrote to the Corinthians..."Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame." (1 Cor 15:34)

Again, I leave it to the rest of you to judge according to the Scriptures and the Spirit. This man says your salvation in Christ is ripped from you at even the slightest sin.

Kinda like Adam's, huh?
Or the escaping Jews from Egypt?
Or Moses' allowance to enter the promised land?
We manifest from which seed we are gendered.
That which is born of God cannot bring forth the fruit of the devil.
Or can grape vines now bear figs?

Lest I not be clear, I am by no means advocating anti-nomianism or a passive, carefree attitude towards sin. As Dr. Michael Horton put it, "Faith is not merely a passive clinging to our justification (a one-time event), but rather a militant faith that acts, that seeks sanctification—becoming more like Christ." I struggle daily against sin because I know it grieves God and I seek to be more like His Son. But I also take comfort in times of difficulty knowing that I am saved purely and solely on the basis of the work of Christ and not on my own merit or obedience.

That is labeled "easy greasy salvation" by some.
It is just another in a long list of supposed Christian teachings that accommodate wickedness.
Freedom is out there.
Christ conquered sin while in the flesh.
Those now in Christ partake in that victory.

Taking leave of this thread now as I cannot abide such a destructive teaching.

Even though you "know sin grieves God", you call a teaching advocating freedom from sin "destructive"?
Is that the double-mindedness we are warned against in James 1:8 and 4:8?

Phil W · Feb 25, 2020

Bible Highlighter said:
What verse or passage tells you that?

Jesus said "...unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." in Matt 22:37-40.

Phil W · Feb 25, 2020

Bible Highlighter said:
As for your reference to Romans 7:
Paul is not justifying that he can sin and still be saved in Romans 7.
In Romans 7:14-24, Paul is recounting his experience as a Pharisee before he became a Christian. Paul (Saul) is describing his experience of what it is like to struggle in keeping the Old Covenant Law that did not include Jesus Christ.

It is true that the use of first-person present verbs in the passage (“I am” “I practice” “I want” “I hate” “I do”) sounds like Paul is talking about his present experience. But Paul sometimes uses “I” in a rhetorical sense to describe generic experience rather than his own present experience (1 Corinthians 10:30; 1 Corinthians 13:2-3, 1 Corinthians 13:11). In at least one other place, Paul uses a first-person present verb to describe his opponents’ experience (Galatians 2:18).

Paul is using the "present-narrative" tense.
Also called "present-historical" tense.
He is indeed speaking from a former perspective.

Bible Highlighter · Feb 25, 2020

Phil W said:
Jesus said "...unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." in Matt 22:37-40.

While the two greatest commandments still apply in the New Covenant, "the Law" is in reference to the 613 laws of Moses, and "the prophets" is in reference to the prophetic books. We are not under the whole of the Law of Moses anymore (the 613). While certain laws have been repeated into the New Covenant, we are technically under a New Covenant with New Commands. To love God, and love your neighbor continues on into the New Covenant and we love God, and love our neighbor by following the commands of the New Covenant (New Testament). Also, just because the OT saint had the two greatest commandments (like loving God, and loving your neighbor), that does not mean they ignored the other laws under the Old Covenant (When it was in effect before the cross). The Law hung on the two greatest commands. It was not eliminated at the expense of the two.

Phil W · Feb 25, 2020

WordSword said:
Conversely, if the old man were dead in the believer, Paul wouldn't be wrestling with it (Ro 7:14-25) and the Creator of our rebirth would not need to oppose it (Gal 5:17). I imagine at one time or another most if not all believers in their early Christian years (I did in my first 12 years or so) may have thought that being sinless was possible, but all who seek the truth concerning it will find it.

I guess you have found a "truth" that will not free you from sin like the truth Jesus spoke of in John 8:31-34.
What a pity.
Bible Highlighter does a pretty good job explaining Rom 7 in post #62.

Bible Highlighter · Feb 25, 2020

Phil W said:
Paul is using the "present-narrative" tense.
Also called "present-historical" tense.
He is indeed speaking from a former perspective.

Yes, he is talking from his experience as a Pharisee before he became a Christian.

Phil W · Feb 25, 2020

Bible Highlighter said:
While the two greatest commandments still apply in the New Covenant, "the Law" is in reference to the 613 laws of Moses, and "the prophets" is in reference to the prophetic books. We are not under the whole of the Law of Moses anymore (the 613). While certain laws have been repeated into the New Covenant, we are technically under a New Covenant with New Commands. To love God, and love your neighbor continues on into the New Covenant and we love God, and love our neighbor by following the commands of the New Covenant (New Testament). Also, just because the OT saint had the two greatest commandments (like loving God, and loving your neighbor), that does not mean they ignored the other laws under the Old Covenant (When it was in effect before the cross). The Law hung on the two greatest commands. It was not eliminated at the expense of the two.

Agreed.
The law is now written in our hearts, with all the relevant updates. ie...no more dietary laws, circumcision, temple worship or priesthood. etc

WordSword · Feb 25, 2020

Phil W said:
I guess you have found a "truth" that will not free you from sin like the truth Jesus spoke of in John 8:31-34.
What a pity.
Bible Highlighter does a pretty good job explaining Rom 7 in post #62.

I see it that continuing (never ceasing) in the doing of God's Word is an evidence that one is reborn, for those who are not regenerated will not be able to continue in their false profession, being destitute of the Spirit. God desires us to know the genuineness of one's profession by his fruit (perseverance or apostatize).

God bless!

Bible Highlighter · Feb 25, 2020

WordSword said:
I see it that continuing (never ceasing) in the doing of God's Word is an evidence that one is reborn, for those who are not regenerated will not be able to continue in their false profession, being destitute of the Spirit. God desires us to know the genuineness of one's profession by his fruit (perseverance or apostatize).

God bless!

If that is so, then you would not make contradictory statements like this in your OP.

"The work of God imputing godliness within is manifested by the walk of the believer without! NC" ~ WordSword.

These kinds of statements can lead a person to think they do not have to live godly and yet they can have God's imputed righteousness anyways no matter how they live (regardless if they sin, etc.).

WordSword · Feb 25, 2020

Bible Highlighter said:
If that is so, then you would not make contradictory statements like this in your OP.

"The work of God imputing godliness within is manifested by the walk of the believer without! NC" ~ WordSword.

These kinds of statements can lead a person to think they do not have to live godly and yet they can have God's imputed righteousness anyways no matter how they live (regardless if they sin, etc.).

Not sure I understand what you mean, but the statement means that those who walk or live godly lives are those who have been imputed righteousness. It's the walk of the believer that manifests God's fruit. If one is not truly a believer he will not be able to live a godly life, since it requires rebirth of the Spirit.

God's work (Phil 2:13) within believers will without fail result in permanently manifesting Him in their lives.

Bible Highlighter · Feb 25, 2020

WordSword said:
Not sure I understand what you mean, but the statement means that those who walk or live godly lives are those who have been imputed righteousness. It's the walk of the believer that manifests God's fruit. If one is not truly a believer he will not be able to live a godly life, since it requires rebirth of the Spirit.

God's work (Phil 2:13) within believers will without fail result in permanently manifesting Him in their lives.

Test question 1:

If a believer generally lived a holy life and they had full and complete trust in Jesus as their Savior, and they accidently stumbled into the sin of lusting after a woman or inappropriate content, etc. and they got hit by a bus and died before seeking forgiveness with the Lord, are they saved?

Test question 2:

Was King David saved while he was committing his sins of adultery and murder?

Test question 3:

Was the prodigal son saved while has living his prodigal life?

Test question 4:

Was Ananias and Sapphira saved?

Test question 5:

Do you believe 1 John 1:9 is dealing with salvation for the believer (who has been follower of Christ for a while)?

Phil W · Feb 25, 2020

WordSword said:
I see it that continuing (never ceasing) in the doing of God's Word is an evidence that one is reborn, for those who are not regenerated will not be able to continue in their false profession, being destitute of the Spirit. God desires us to know the genuineness of one's profession by his fruit (perseverance or apostatize).

God bless!

Agreed.

Phil W · Feb 25, 2020

Bible Highlighter said:
Test question 1:

If a believer generally lived a holy life and they had full and complete trust in Jesus as their Savior, and they accidently stumbled into the sin of lusting after a woman or inappropriate content, etc. and they got hit by a bus and died before seeking forgiveness with the Lord, are they saved?

No, as manifesting the fruit of the devil has shown from whom they are born.

Test question 2:

Click to expand...

Was King David saved while he was committing his sins of adultery and murder?

OT situation with Mosaic Law atonements for sin.

Test question 3:

Click to expand...

Was the prodigal son saved while has living his prodigal life?

No.
OT, parable, different times, different atonements.

Test question 4:

Click to expand...

Was Ananias and Sapphira saved?

No.

Test question 5:

Click to expand...

Do you believe 1 John 1:9 is dealing with salvation for the believer (who has been follower of Christ for a while)?

No.
Confession is one of the first step to salvation. (Matt 3:6, Mark 1:5)

Bible Highlighter · Feb 25, 2020

Phil W said:
No, as manifesting the fruit of the devil has shown from whom they are born.

So you don't believe a Christian can fall away from the faith?
I have a ton of verses that so otherwise.

You said:
OT situation with Mosaic Law atonements for sin.

While atonement was different back then (in the fact that they had to keep revisiting the same past sins every year), sin did cause a separation from God, and could be forgiven by calling out to God. Even according to Old Covenant Theology, it says this:

"But whoso committeth adultery with a woman lacketh understanding: he that doeth it destroyeth his own soul" (Proverbs 6:32).

In Psalms 51, David cried out for forgiveness over his sins and he asked for the joy of his salvation to return to him. He asked for a new and right heart and spirit within him. So something was wrong inside David. He needed to be saved again. If God forgave David by him calling out to him in prayer, he could be forgiven (saved) so as to make atonement with animals later on with the priests.

You said:
No.
OT, parable, different times, different atonements.

No. When the son came back home to his father, and sought forgiveness with him, his father said that his son was "dead" and he is "alive again." His father said that he was "lost" and now he is "found." The parable here is speaking in spiritual terms. The son was "spiritually dead" when he was spending his inheritance money on prostitutes. The son became "spiritually alive again" when he came back home to his father and he sought forgiveness of his sins with him. Meaning: The son was saved before going prodigal, and he became lost spiritually by going prodigal, and he became alive again (saved again) when he sought forgiveness with his father. The analogy here is that Jesus (Who is our everlasting Father because of the resurrection) can forgive us. For we were all saved when we were babies, and when we received the knowledge of good and evil in growing up, we fell into sin and needed a Savior from our prodigal life. If that is not enough to convince you, the same truth is expressed in James 5:19-20.

You said:
No.

Ah, so if Ananias and Sapphira were unbelievers and just fakes, then why didn't Peter attempt to retry and preach the gospel to them again? Why didn't Peter just call them out as fakes? Also, why was there a great fear that fell upon the church when they heard about this? Why should the church fear greatly over the death of some unbelievers? What difference does that make to them? I will tell you why they were in great fear. It was because Ananias and Sapphira lost their salvation via by their sin, and the church feared that they could be killed instantly by God by committing a similar sin (if they were not careful, too). This is the only reason why a great fear by the church makes any sense.

You said:
No.
Confession is one of the first step to salvation. (Matt 3:6, Mark 1:5)

John is writing to believers and not unbelievers in 1 John 1:9. He is addressing them. He tells them to "sin not" (1 John 2:1), but if they do, they have an advocate (Jesus Christ). For Jesus is not only the atoning sacrifice for their sins, but for the sins of the entire world (1 John 2:2). Meaning: Jesus is our high priest.

"Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need" (Hebrews 4:16).

In 2 Corinthians 12, Paul says this to the Corinthians.

"For I fear, lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults: And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed." (2 Corinthians 12:20-21).

Paul was initially concerned that the Corinthians would not "repent" (i.e. to seek forgiveness with the Lord), but they did (See the end of Corinthians 7, starting with verse 9).

Phil W · Feb 26, 2020

Bible Highlighter said:
So you don't believe a Christian can fall away from the faith?
I have a ton of verses that so otherwise.

If a man repents of sin, but sins again, did he ever really repent?
I think not.
1 John 3:9 says those born of God CANNOT commit sin.
Therefor, No sinner is born of God.

While atonement was different back then (in the fact that they had to keep revisiting the same past sins every year), sin did cause a separation from God, and could be forgiven by calling out to God. Even according to Old Covenant Theology, it says this:
"But whoso committeth adultery with a woman lacketh understanding: he that doeth it destroyeth his own soul" (Proverbs 6:32).
In Psalms 51, David cried out for forgiveness over his sins and he asked for the joy of his salvation to return to him. He asked for a new and right heart and spirit within him. So something was wrong inside David. He needed to be saved again. If God forgave David by him calling out to him in prayer, he could be forgiven (saved) so as to make atonement with animals later on with the priests.

OT men couldn't be made perfect, as rebirth was not yet available.
They had no way to "kill the flesh" and be raised as Spiritual men...walking in the Spirit instead of in the flesh.

No. When the son came back home to his father, and sought forgiveness with him, his father said that his son was "dead" and he is "alive again." His father said that he was "lost" and now he is "found." The parable here is speaking in spiritual terms. The son was "spiritually dead" when he was spending his inheritance money on prostitutes. The son became "spiritually alive again" when he came back home to his father and he sought forgiveness of his sins with him. Meaning: The son was saved before going prodigal, and he became lost spiritually by going prodigal, and he became alive again (saved again) when he sought forgiveness with his father. The analogy here is that Jesus (Who is our everlasting Father because of the resurrection) can forgive us. For we were all saved when we were babies, and when we received the knowledge of good and evil in growing up, we fell into sin and needed a Savior from our prodigal life. If that is not enough to convince you, the same truth is expressed in James 5:19-20.

Please remember that you qualified your "test 3" with "while he walked a prodigal life".
He was not saved in that condition.

Ah, so if Ananias and Sapphira were unbelievers and just fakes, then why didn't Peter attempt to retry and preach the gospel to them again? Why didn't Peter just call them out as fakes? Also, why was there a great fear that fell upon the church when they heard about this? Why should the church fear greatly over the death of some unbelievers? What difference does that make to them?
I will tell you why they were in great fear. It was because Ananias and Sapphira lost their salvation via by their sin, and the church feared that they could be killed instantly by God by committing a similar sin (if they were not careful, too). This is the only reason why a great fear by the church makes any sense.

I can't disagree with that.
Had Ananias and wife really been faithful...till they were called home by God...they would have been saved.
But their faith wasn't real, or it would have lasted longer than a few days.

John is writing to believers and not unbelievers in 1 John 1:9. He is addressing them. He tells them to "sin not" (1 John 2:1), but if they do, they have an advocate (Jesus Christ). For Jesus is not only the atoning sacrifice for their sins, but for the sins of the entire world (1 John 2:2). Meaning: Jesus is our high priest.

He was indeed writing to the church, but about both folks who walked in darkness as well as those who walked in the light.
We can't walk in both.
As for 1 John 2:1...he writes "...but if any man sin...".
This indicates to me he is referencing the whole unsaved world; those who have not yet heard of the Advocate we used at the beginning of our own walk in the light.
It isn't a remedy for sinners who call themselves Christians.
It is step one; not steps 7, 15, 23, 45, 49, 61, 79, etc.

"Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need" (Hebrews 4:16).
In 2 Corinthians 12, Paul says this to the Corinthians.
"For I fear, lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults: And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed." (2 Corinthians 12:20-21).

Paul was initially concerned that the Corinthians would not "repent" (i.e. to seek forgiveness with the Lord), but they did (See the end of Corinthians 7, starting with verse 9).

Praise and glory to the God of the converted.
I just hope they remained faithful until their ends.

ICONO'CLAST · Feb 26, 2020

Chapter 13: Of Sanctification
1._____ They who are united to Christ, effectually called, and regenerated, having a new heart and a new spirit created in them through the virtue of Christ's death and resurrection, are also farther sanctified, really and personally, through the same virtue, by His Word and Spirit dwelling in them; the dominion of the whole body of sin is destroyed, and the several lusts thereof are more and more weakened and mortified, and they more and more quickened and strengthened in all saving graces, to the practice of all true holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord.
( Acts 20:32; Romans 6:5, 6; John 17:17; Ephesians 3:16-19; 1 Thessalonians 5:21-23; Romans 6:14; Galatians 5:24; Colossians 1:11; 2 Corinthians 7:1; Hebrews 12:14 )
2._____This sanctification is throughout the whole man, yet imperfect in this life; there abideth still some remnants of corruption in every part, whence ariseth a continual and irreconcilable war; the flesh lusting against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh.
( 1 Thessalonians 5:23; Romans 7:18, 23; Galatians 5:17; 1 Peter 2:11 )

3._____ In which war, although the remaining corruption for a time may much prevail, yet through the continual supply of strength from the sanctifying Spirit of Christ, the regenerate part doth overcome; and so the saints grow in grace, perfecting holiness in the fear of God, pressing after an heavenly life, in evangelical obedience to all the commands which Christ as Head and King, in His Word hath prescribed them.
( Romans 7:23; Romans 6:14; Ephesians 4:15, 16; 2 Corinthians 3:18; 2 Corinthians 7:1 )

Phil W · Feb 26, 2020

ICONO'CLAST said:
Chapter 13: Of Sanctification
1._____ They who are united to Christ, effectually called, and regenerated, having a new heart and a new spirit created in them through the virtue of Christ's death and resurrection, are also farther sanctified, really and personally, through the same virtue, by His Word and Spirit dwelling in them; the dominion of the whole body of sin is destroyed, and the several lusts thereof are more and more weakened and mortified, and they more and more quickened and strengthened in all saving graces, to the practice of all true holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord.

Chapter 13 of what?
What rubs my spirit the wrong way about this is that it says the "the lusts thereof are more and more weakened", indicating something other than Gal 5:24; wherein it says..."And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts."
Your source doesn't agree with scripture.

“Sanctify Them”

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Well-Known Member

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Well-Known Member

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads