Did John the Baptist sin?

[1stcenturylady]

I have studied Romans 7 (and in fact the entire book) in context.

You should do the same.

Exactly.

Romans 7 says that we are dead to the law and it has no more power over us because of the work of Christ and the fact that we are raised with Him in victory over death.

"But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter." Romans 7:6

But what you have done with your theology which claims that sin (breaking the law - whether written on tablets of stone, as it was for the Jews, or on the conscience of the gentiles - and in fact all men) has the power to kill believers.

It does not.

"...apart from the Law sin is dead. I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died; and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me; for sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me." Romans 7:8-11

Paul writes about his current struggles with sin. He is writing in the present tense and it simply is not true, as you claim, that he is referring only to sins committed before his salvation. You can read it again yourself if you wish. I can lead you to the water - but I can't make you drink.

"For we know that the Law is spiritual, but I am of flesh, sold into bondage to sin. For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good. So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want. But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good. For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members."
Romans 7:14-23

"Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin. Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh" Romans 7:24 thru 8:3

It is utterly amazing to me that Paul could have spelled out so clearly for us the accomplishment we have witnessed in the work of Christ - namely our release from the power of the law and the sin which results from our inability to keep it - only to have you resurrect the law and it's power to kill.

You say that the one overcoming the law's power is Christ in us and I certainly agree.

But by saying that our salvation is dependent on His defeating again and again the law's power to kill us - you have resurrected the law which we are dead to in Christ and (Dare I tell it like it is?) crucify again the Lord who bought us by the shedding of His blood once for all.

You see in Romans pretty much the opposite of what it teaches.

How someone of your obvious experience in the Word of God can have missed the entire point of Romans and turned the gospel on it's head the way you have is almost beyond me.

I say "almost" because I do understand very well that you view all scripture through the lens of the false gospel of works you have fallen into.

I have said before that two of the dangers of the charismatic movement are:

1. That it tends to either make the Church a "two tiered" structure of haves and have nots regarding the gifts.

OR, as in your case

2. A single tiered structure made up only of those who have the Spirit in the way you supposedly do - while those who do not have the Spirit in the way you claim to are not even saved and part of the Church at all.

We could agree to disagree I suppose. But in this case your view of salvation is so diametrically opposed to what Romans teaches that it is difficult just to let you go on as you are.

I do hope you are saved - really I do.

But many will point to good works as their hope of salvation when they meet Him face to face. I suppose they may even add the caveat that they thought it to me Him who was working in them.

But they will still be lost because what they believed and taught was different gospel than the gospel of grace we are supposed to rest in.

Again - I hope to see you on the other side of this life. Time will tell I suppose.

I see you used the modern version of Romans 8:1 "There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus." Period. That is foundational to your error. You believe just because you call Jesus, "Lord, Lord" that is enough. NO! You must actually obey Him. How? By walking in the Spirit. Then the part of the verse you left off applies, "who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit."

Another evidence that you don't know what you are talking about. You quote, "Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!" You emphasize "I am" showing present tense. Again, your knowledge of Semitic writing styles is sorely lacking, and even without that knowledge of writing in present tense, common sense should show you. Romans 7 shows a problem, a struggle. If Jesus is the answer to the problem, then why didn't he take away the problem??? You believe we still have the problem and have Jesus too? NO! Jesus takes away the problem of sin once and for all. No more problem.

You believe you are only free from the law. The law wasn't the problem. It is holy. The only way to be free from the law is to no longer need it. That is what Jesus provided - FREEDOM FROM SIN. That is what you can't grasp.

I'm not the one preaching we are still under the law. Just the opposite. We don't need it in the Spirit. The righteous requirements of the law are fulfilled when we walk in the Spirit. But you, on the other hand, preach we still willfully sin, the whole reason for having the law in the first place. So if Jesus didn't take away our sin as you preach, then you believe we still have our sin, it is just not imputed to us as we keep committing it. That is so lame, but used by the devil. Don't you know that the righteous requirements of the law are necessary? Jesus gives us His Spirit so we can't sin! 1 John 3:4-9. It is evident by what you believe that you believe the blood of Jesus just covers our sin that is still there, not takes it away completely. That is so wrong. 9 out of 10 Christians have been brainwashed with this false doctrine. The veil is taken away in Christ; but the true gospel, not the turning of grace into licentiousness.

 

[aiki]

If your only "reality" is having a carnal mind, then you ARE going to struggle.

??? Strawman. And an implied false dichotomy.

What I don't understand is why 9 out of 10 Christians read and understand Romans 7 out of context. It is NOT depicting the life of living in the law of the Spirit of life in Christ. It is not about someone that is NOT in the flesh as Romans 8:9 describes. It is the opposite!!!!!

Perhaps in this instance, those 90% of Christians you rail against understand Romans 7 without your preexisting commitment to the idea that Christians cannot willfully sin. And since they do, they aren't obliged to read the chapter in the peculiar way that you are.

Paul says a few things that make it pretty clear that he is not speaking of an unregenerate person in his description of the struggle between the "law of his mind" and the "law of the flesh." How so? Well, Paul described the unregenerate person in Ephesians 2:1-3:

Ephesians 2:1-3
1 And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins,
2 in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience,
3 among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others.

This is, generally, the state of people before they come to a saving faith in Christ. If Paul's description here is correct - and it is - then the person he describes in Romans 7 can't be unregenerate (he may, in fact, be personifying a principle rather than himself). One who is "dead in trespasses and sins," who walks according to the lusts of his flesh as all unregenerate people do, does not have the desire Paul describes in Romans 7:18:

18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find.

Paul goes on:

Romans 7:19
19 For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice.

Where is Paul's desire to do good, to live according to the command of God, coming from if he is unregenerate? If the Spirit isn't inciting Paul to right living, from where does he, a person who is "dead in trespasses and sins," obtain a desire for the things of God?

Romans 7:21-22
21 I find then a law, that evil is present with me, the one who wills to do good.
22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man.

Again, here, Paul does not appear to be describing an unregenerate person. He doesn't just have a sense of obligation to observe religious commands but actually "delights" in God's law. How one who is "dead in trespasses and sins" could feel this way about God's law apart from the Spirit working in him, is a mystery to me. It seems, then, very clear to me that Paul is not describing an unregenerate person in the latter half of Romans 7.

It is the last chapter of Paul's teaching about the LAW GIVEN TO MOSES, leading up to his introduction of the Spirit.

I don't see Romans 6 taken up with a discussion of the LAW GIVEN TO MOSES. He mentions it only briefly to say that born-again believers are no longer under the law but under grace. There is no other comment Paul makes about the law in the entire chapter.

When it came to the flesh, the law was weak because of sin. Before the law was given on Mt. Sinai, sin was not imputed to man, even though since Adam sinned, all his descendants from then on had a carnal nature, spiritually called "the flesh."

Have you not read the story of the Flood? Before Moses and the Ten Commandments, God had already judged and punished the sin of mankind. Sounds like imputing sin to me...

Adam had a carnal nature before he and Eve sinned in Eden. What do you think provoked him to sin in the first place?

The carnal mind can't relate to that. So what does the carnal mind do - it creates false doctrine that negates the work of Christ. It says Romans 7 is about the struggle of a Christian, so they can relate, and feel better about their own struggle with sin.

Well, this is an interesting theory you've formed here, but a theory is all it is. As I've pointed out from Scripture, willful sin did occur among believers in the Early Church - just as it does today.

They say the are only "positionally" dead to sin, because of another false teaching, this time about Ephesians 2.

??? Explanation, please.

But, if they actually had the Holy Spirit dwelling in them, they would instead relate to the fact they are dead to sin by the experience of having power over sin, for it is real and instant the moment you are baptized in the Spirit.

Yes, one's co-crucifixion with Christ is real the moment one is saved. As I said, I have been dead - positionally - to sin since my conversion many decades ago. With each passing day, I live out this spiritual reality in my daily living more and more. This is what is expressed in Hebrews 10:14:

Hebrews 10:14
14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.

The believer is both fully sanctified - perfected (in their spiritual position in Christ) - and being sanctified progressively (in their daily condition or experience). This is not the imaginings of a carnal mind but the clear teaching of Scripture.

For we are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if indeed we have the Spirit of God in us. And if anyone (calling themselves a Christian) and does not have the Spirit of Christ in them, they DO NOT belong to Him. Romans 8:9

Yes, yes, we know: If we don't agree with you, we must not be saved. Yikes.

Anyone who needs the Spirit in their lives and wants to be free of sin just needs to repent. Repentance from ALL sin, and wanting to be scrubbed clean with all your heart is key to receiving this gift of Jesus.

No, what is needed is surrender - surrender to the will and way of the Spirit, moment-by-moment, throughout every day. This is the key to holy living. It is only when we are surrendered to the Spirit, that he transforms our mind and heart, conforming us over time to the character of Christ. Even the desire to be surrendered, to be transformed, is something God must work in us. He truly does it all when it comes to our walk with Him.

Philippians 2:13
13 for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.

The misinterpretation of much of Romans and 1 John 1:8 is so common in the church, it is scary. I can tell when a person believes a false doctrine by the quotes from the book of Romans they make.

What is scarier still is someone who is so convinced of their false doctrine that they believe all others who hold right doctrine are not only mistaken but going to hell. Now that's scary.

They even say Paul claims it is about his own present struggle. Why? Because it is written in first person? Was Paul there with Moses when he received the law? No, so writing in first person is a writing style that Hebrew people use, which also explains the first person of 1 John 1:8 that is about a Gnostic. Was John a Gnostic?

Trying to twist the plain meaning of the text by way of Semitisms won't work. Semitisms may be in play, but this doesn't mean one cannot understand Paul's (or John's) meaning without knowing of them.

And, by the way, you still haven't addressed 1 Corinthians 3:1-3 or 1 Corinthians 6, both of which are clear that Christians do willfully sin.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Paul says a few things that make it pretty clear that he is not speaking of an unregenerate person in his description of the struggle between the "law of his mind" and the "law of the flesh." How so? Well, Paul described the unregenerate person in Ephesians 2:1-3:

Exactly. Romans 7 is BEFORE Christ. Before regeneration.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Trying to twist the plain meaning of the text by way of Semitisms won't work. Semitisms may be in play, but this doesn't mean one cannot understand Paul's (or John's) meaning without knowing of them.

Common sense tells us also. All you have to do is read the whole passage, not just pull out the description of the unregenerate, and superimpose it onto a Christian, JUST BECAUSE PAUL USED FIRST PERSON.

Common sense tells us that Paul could not have been old enough to have been living when the law was given to Moses. Romans 7:9 "I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died." The word, "I" is referring to the human race from Adam to Moses, and from Moses to Jesus.

 

[aiki]

And the references from 1 Corinthians 3, 6 and Galatians 5? You have refused thus far to explain how Paul refers to the Corinthian believers as genuine believers when they were guilty of abusing the Lord's table (and each other), were engaging in gross sexual sin, and squabbling over petty allegiances to teachers. And you haven't dealt at all with Paul referring to those in the Galatian church who were "biting and devouring one another" as brethren. It seems to me you're fussing so much over Romans 7 in an attempt to distract from the fact that the Bible is quite clear in these other places that born-again believers do willfully sin.

 

[1stcenturylady]

And the references from 1 Corinthians 3, 6 and Galatians 5? You have refused thus far to explain how Paul refers to the Corinthian believers as genuine believers when they were guilty of abusing the Lord's table (and each other), were engaging in gross sexual sin, and squabbling over petty allegiances to teachers. And you haven't dealt at all with Paul referring to those in the Galatian church who were "biting and devouring one another" as brethren. It seems to me you're fussing so much over Romans 7 in an attempt to distract from the fact that the Bible is quite clear that born-again believers do willfully sin.

What the Corinthians were doing was being immature Christians. But they were not being lawless. Not all sin is the same in the eyes of God. Some sin just has to do with small fruit, and are called trespasses, not willful, presumptuous sin. John differentiated them as sins unto death, and sins not unto death. As for the man sleeping with his stepmother, Paul considered that willful sin, and told them to excommunicate him from out of their fellowship. Anyone who claims to be a brother in Christ, but walks in darkness is not a Christian at all. They are not to even have lunch with him. But the Corinthians were better Christians than 90% of all who call themselves Christians today. They fell short in no gift. 90% of the Church doesn't even have the Holy Spirit, let alone His gifts or fruit. So to bring up the Corinthians is just not taking the log out of your own eyes. How many gifts do you have? Fruit?

1 Corinthians 1:
4 I thank my God always concerning you for the grace of God which was given to you by Christ Jesus, 5 that you were enriched in everything by Him in all utterance and all knowledge, 6 even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you, 7 so that you come short in no gift, eagerly waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ, 8 who will also confirm you to the end, that you may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

The trespasses Paul was working on with the Corinthians, was pruning off the dead twigs spiritually. They didn't know about excommunication. The one branch that did not bear fruit at all and sinned willfully was completely cut off. One! You cannot rightly judge with any honesty the acts of the unsaved, and say they were all guilty. It was a congregation. I cannot respect anyone who judges the Corinthians, with as much as they overcame and succeeded. Their hearts were better than are their judges.

I'm really not sure what you want me to say about Galatians 5. It's pretty clear, there is a difference between those who walk in the Spirit and are saved, and those who walk in the flesh and won't inherit the Kingdom of God. Pretty clear cut. The law of liberty is being free from the desire to sin. It is not freedom to sin. The term has to do with slavery. You are either a slave to sin, or are free from sin. Only those whom the Son makes free are free indeed. They will be sons and daughters of God. Those in the flesh can never please God. Romans 8:8.

 

[aiki]

What the Corinthians were doing was being immature Christians. But they were not being lawless.

One might get away with arguing this way about Paul's comments in 1 Corinthians 1, but he goes on to spell out in detail the sins plaguing the Corinthian church and these sins were not mere "trespasses."

1 Corinthians 6:5-8
5 I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one, who will be able to judge between his brethren?
6 But brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers!
7 Now therefore, it is already an utter failure for you that you go to law against one another. Why do you not rather accept wrong? Why do you not rather let yourselves be cheated?
8 No, you yourselves do wrong and cheat, and you do these things to your brethren!

Paul uses some pretty strong language here as he rebukes the Corinthians. He tells them they ought to be ashamed (vs. 5), that they are failing utterly (vs. 6), and that they are doing wrong (vs. 8). Doesn't sound to me like Paul thought the Corinthians were just being spiritually immature.

Paul goes on to talk to the Corinthian believers about sexual immorality. Why? Well, obviously, because they were engaging in such behaviour themselves. This is particularly plain in verse 15 where Paul clearly implies that some of the Corinthian believers had been sexually active with prostitutes (likely temple ones). Whether it arose out of spiritual immaturity or not, such sin is not merely a "trespass" but flat-out willful sin.

1 Corinthians 6:13-20
13 Foods for the stomach and the stomach for foods, but God will destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for sexual immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.
14 And God both raised up the Lord and will also raise us up by His power.
15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a harlot? Certainly not!
16 Or do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her? For "the two," He says, "shall become one flesh."
17 But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him.
18 Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.
19 Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?
20 For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's.

Paul's rebukes to the Corinthian believers are not finished. He has more criticisms to level at them:

1 Corinthians 11:18-22
18 For first of all, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you, and in part I believe it.
19 For there must also be factions among you, that those who are approved may be recognized among you.
20 Therefore when you come together in one place, it is not to eat the Lord's Supper.
21 For in eating, each one takes his own supper ahead of others; and one is hungry and another is drunk.
22 What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you in this? I do not praise you.

Yikes! Now the Corinthian Christians are guilty of fractious behaviour, selfishness, drunkenness and humiliating the poorer members of their community. And yet, Paul still refers to them as fellow believers, not apostates or unregenerate. The rebukes go on:

1 Corinthians 11:29-30
29 For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
30 For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep.

Now, the sin of the Corinthians is so grave that they are falling ill and dying as a consequence! But they are still, in Paul's estimation, fellow born-again believers! In the face of all this glaring evidence to the contrary, your claim that true Christians never willfully sin quite dissolves.

They fell short in no gift.

But were they using these gifts well? 1 Corinthians 14 indicates not.

90% of the Church doesn't even have the Holy Spirit, let alone His gifts or fruit.

Proof, please.

So to bring up the Corinthians is just not taking the log out of your own eyes. How many gifts do you have? Fruit?

Taking the log out of my own eye? Hardly. I am simply acknowledging the plain facts of Paul's very critical letter to the sinning Corinthian believers.

How many gifts do I have? A few. Fruit? I have led quite a number of people to the Lord over the years. I have discipled many men, as well. I preach and teach. You?

The trespasses Paul was working on with the Corinthians, was pruning off the dead twigs spiritually.

In a sense, yes. But those "dead twigs" were sin and willfully so, to boot - in direct contradiction to your claims.

The one branch that did not bear fruit at all and sinned willfully was completely cut off. One!

And the Corinthian believers who had eaten unworthily of the Lord's Table and had died? That wasn't willful sin? Come on, now. Their gross sexual immorality that Paul condemns in chapter 6 wasn't willful sin, either? Really? Your dedication to your perspective is admirable but it has compelled you to deny the obvious.

You cannot rightly judge with any honesty the acts of the unsaved, and say they were all guilty.

In the case of the Corinthian believers, I have only to read of Paul's own judgments of them to say they were guilty. See above.

I cannot respect anyone who judges the Corinthians, with as much as they overcame and succeeded.

Tell that to the apostle Paul! Goodness! How far into foolishness your misunderstanding is pushing you!

 

[1stcenturylady]

One might get away with arguing this way about Paul's comments in 1 Corinthians 1, but he goes on to spell out in detail the sins plaguing the Corinthian church and these sins were not mere "trespasses."

1 Corinthians 6:5-8
5 I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one, who will be able to judge between his brethren?
6 But brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers!
7 Now therefore, it is already an utter failure for you that you go to law against one another. Why do you not rather accept wrong? Why do you not rather let yourselves be cheated?
8 No, you yourselves do wrong and cheat, and you do these things to your brethren!

Paul uses some pretty strong language here as he rebukes the Corinthians. He tells them they ought to be ashamed (vs. 5), that they are failing utterly (vs. 6), and that they are doing wrong (vs. 8). Doesn't sound to me like Paul thought the Corinthians were just being spiritually immature.

Paul goes on to talk to the Corinthian believers about sexual immorality. Why? Well, obviously, because they were engaging in such behaviour themselves. This is particularly plain in verse 15 where Paul clearly implies that some of the Corinthian believers had been sexually active with prostitutes (likely temple ones). Whether it arose out of spiritual immaturity or not, such sin is not merely a "trespass" but flat-out willful sin.

1 Corinthians 6:13-20
13 Foods for the stomach and the stomach for foods, but God will destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for sexual immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.
14 And God both raised up the Lord and will also raise us up by His power.
15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a harlot? Certainly not!
16 Or do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her? For "the two," He says, "shall become one flesh."
17 But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him.
18 Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.
19 Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?
20 For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's.

Paul's rebukes to the Corinthian believers are not finished. He has more criticisms to level at them:

1 Corinthians 11:18-22
18 For first of all, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you, and in part I believe it.
19 For there must also be factions among you, that those who are approved may be recognized among you.
20 Therefore when you come together in one place, it is not to eat the Lord's Supper.
21 For in eating, each one takes his own supper ahead of others; and one is hungry and another is drunk.
22 What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you in this? I do not praise you.

Yikes! Now the Corinthian Christians are guilty of fractious behaviour, selfishness, drunkenness and humiliating the poorer members of their community. And yet, Paul still refers to them as fellow believers, not apostates or unregenerate. The rebukes go on:

1 Corinthians 11:29-30
29 For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
30 For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep.

Now, the sin of the Corinthians is so grave that they are falling ill and dying as a consequence! But they are still, in Paul's estimation, fellow born-again believers! In the face of all this glaring evidence to the contrary, your claim that true Christians never willfully sin quite dissolves.



But were they using these gifts well? 1 Corinthians 14 indicates not.



Proof, please.



Taking the log out of my own eye? Hardly. I am simply acknowledging the plain facts of Paul's very critical letter to the sinning Corinthian believers.

How many gifts do I have? A few. Fruit? I have led quite a number of people to the Lord over the years. I have discipled many men, as well. I preach and teach. You?



In a sense, yes. But those "dead twigs" were sin and willfully so, to boot - in direct contradiction to your claims.



And the Corinthian believers who had eaten unworthily of the Lord's Table and had died? That wasn't willful sin? Come on, now. Their gross sexual immorality that Paul condemns in chapter 6 wasn't willful sin, either? Really? Your dedication to your perspective is admirable but it has compelled you to deny the obvious.



In the case of the Corinthian believers, I have only to read of Paul's own judgments of them to say they were guilty. See above.



Tell that to the apostle Paul! Goodness! How far into foolishness your misunderstanding is pushing you!

Is every instructional sermon an accusation? Suing someone was not lawlessness. Lack of love, is lack of a fruit of the Spirit. Something they had to grow in. All Paul's letters were for the instruction of the whole church. The letters were passed around. Paul writes what is lawlessness. Take for instance:

1 Corinthians 6-9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were (past tense) some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.

I'm surprised you can't see your judgment against them as sin. But, no, you take a sermon and place every sin mentioned against them. Even though they were from before Christ. Paul says so with the word "were."

And as far as what they were really presently guilty of you say I don't see, I already said:

As for the man sleeping with his stepmother, Paul considered that willful sin, and told them to excommunicate him from out of their fellowship. Anyone who claims to be a brother in Christ, but walks in darkness is not a Christian at all. They are not to even have lunch with him.

Your false accusations against both the Corinthians and me, a willful sin, is causing strife and dissension. I have no more to say to you. I won't even have lunch with you. Good bye.

 

[Dan the deacon]

Isnt 1 John 3:9 referring to all mankind, not John in particular?

Indeed and the baptist was one.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Isnt 1 John 3:9 referring to all mankind, not John in particular?

Not just John the Baptist, but all Spirit-filled believers, not all mankind.

 

[aiki]

Indeed and the baptist was one.

??? Not sure what you mean here...

 

[drich0150]

John the Baptist received the Holy Spirit in the womb, thus he was literally born again before he was even born. 1 John 3:9 says that those who have the seed (Holy Spirit) do not (willfully) sin, so did John the Baptist ever willfully sin?

Another question regarding John the Baptist. Jesus said that there was none greater than John the Baptist, but the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than John. Seeing as John had the Holy Spirit, what was Jesus meaning?

Of course He sinned! He himself said he was not worthy to untie the sandels of Jesus let alone baptize him. He told christ it should be he Christ who baptized john. if John did not sin why the need for the baptism if indeed he had already the Spirit and no sin?

False modesty would be a lie, which is a sin

 

[1stcenturylady]

Of course He sinned! He himself said he was not worthy to untie the sandels of Jesus let alone baptize him. He told christ it should be he Christ who baptized john. if John did not sin why the need for the baptism if indeed he had already the Spirit and no sin?

False modesty would be a lie, which is a sin

I am talking willful sin, not trespasses which are unintentional. Both are called "sin." John makes it clear there is a difference. Sins unto death; and sins not unto death. Both sin, but different types.

1 John 1:7 shows sins are still being cleansed WHILE we are walking in the light and filled with the Spirit as John the Baptist was. What type? Willful sins? NO!!! Those are sins unto death. They are trespasses unintentionally committed. Baptism is still required.