Scriptural Christianity

[St_Worm2]

...the earliest Christians were known as haters of man.

Hello Timothy, I've never heard that before (or I don't remember it if I have). Does the Bible tell us that this is so? If it does, please tell us where it does (Chapter/Passge/Verse).

Thanks

--David

 

[timothyu]

Hello Timothy, I've never heard that before

as recorded by the historian Tacitus

 

[ForAllTruth]

Hello again ForAllTruth, hating the sinful things of this world (the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and/or the boastful pride of life) is hardly the same thing as "hating" one's parents, spouse and/or children, all of whom the Bible commands us to love and/or honor, yes?

Which is why you asked us to interpret 1 John 3 out-of-context (something which I believe is impossible if arriving at a proper exegesis of the Chapter is the intended goal ).

On the other hand, I agree with you that there is any easy answer to this seeming contradiction (between what is said in 1 John 1/1 John 2 and 1 John 3), but I suspect that your "easy" answer and mine will be quite different

Before I comment further, I have a couple of questions for you about the above (for clarity's sake) if you don't mind.

First, is the "concept" of which you speak the "sinless perfection" of believers who are still living on this side of the grave? If not, what is it?

Second, do you believe that at least some true believers/Christians can sin once they are saved (justified) by God (at least every once in awhile anyway), or do you believe that such a person (a person who 1. claims to be a Christian but 2. continues to sin from time to time) is actually NOT saved?

Thanks for your help

--David

The full context will only confirm the basic fact that there is a power spoken of that those who have a form of godliness lack (referring to 2 Timothy 3:5-7). This is the key that unlocks the Scriptures and is the miraculous ability to avoid sin. There is also the much neglected doctrine of Jesus' on-going prayerful intersession for the elect. When Jesus prays for the elect He gets totally perfect results as in Hebrews 7:25 (pay special attention here to the phrase "save completely" - save from what? Sin!). He is the resurrection as in John 11:25. Those who have the Son have eternal life (referring to 1 John 5:12).

Now, how and when this all of this works out temporally is less spelled-out but the general thrust of the Bible is that one who abides in Christ will not sin because in Him there is no sin (thinking along with 1 John 3:5).

I think we have both had these discussions before with other people. So, I am trying to avoid giving my opinion as a mere man. I just want you to ponder your prior commitments to a particular way of reconciling verses seeming to be at odds with each other as it is historically understood and taught by the clergy (even those reformed). And after doing so, try to see how it would be very easy without these prior commitments to just let the text speak for itself. I know you think you already do that. But that is where this power from God in a miraculous way will need to overcome natural instincts of how to understand the Bible.

Can someone who is "saved" sin occasionally?

Can an elect and not yet justified person still sin? Yes
Can a justified/converted/convicted (not sure which word to pick) yet unregenerate person still sin? Maybe, unintentionally; Thinking he is doing right but messing up.

Can a regenerate person still sin? 1 John 5:18 is your straight from the Word answer.

Did the reformers infallibly define the "order of salvation" so that we can answer these tough questions more accurately using their framework? I doubt it.

Finally, someone (you) said sinless perfection. It had to happen, I guess. God obviously ordained it like all other events in history. Praise be to Him! Jesus had it for sure. And then we see this verse in 1 John.

1 John 4:17

It even has the word perfect in it. How appropriate is that.

Again, it seems to me that man doesn't miss what the text teaches so much as that man doesn't like what the text teaches. I really believe that if it were possible we (I am speaking as a fool) would just change the text to match our theology.

 

[St_Worm2]

This is why the earliest Christians were known as haters of man. They wouldn't support the system.

as recorded by the historian Tacitus

Hello again Timothy, thank you for replying (as I didn't remember the Bible mentioning anything about early Christians being characterized by others as "haters of men" ).

The Christians of which you (and Tacitus) speak are the ones used as a scapegoats by Nero following the burning of Rome. It appears that it was a last-ditch effort on Nero's part to sway the public away from the truth (that it was by Nero's command that the city was burned) and to a lie instead (that it was the Jewish "Christians", living among the Jews in the Jewish Quarter, who had done this horrible thing). So yes, some of the Christians living in that area of Rome at that time were considered to be haters of men for that reason.

On 19-27 July 64, Rome was destroyed by a great fire: only four of its fourteen quarters remained intact. The emperor Nero was blamed by the Roman populace, and he in turn blamed the Christians. The Roman historian Tacitus explains what happened.

As Tacitus said,

"An immense multitude [of Roman Christians] was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired." ~Publius Cornelius Tacitus​

The history of these events (including the persecution of the Christians) in the city of Rome, I was aware of. The "why" of it that you posited for us, that "they wouldn't support the system", I did not know, nor have I been able to find evidence of .. so far. Rather, it seems that Nero blamed the Christians in that area of the city for the simple reason that it was the most politically expedient thing for him to do in the moment (or so he thought). There were Jews living near the place where the fire started (as I mentioned earlier in this post), but Nero could not blame them (without overwhelming evidence against them anyway) as there were thousands of them. The Jewish "Christians" who lived there, on the other hand, were small in number and an easy target

(If you know of additional evidence from Tacitus that tells a different story, please point us to it, and if I find anything else, I will do the same)​

Thanks!

--David

 

[timothyu]

So yes, some of the Christians living in that area of Rome at that time were considered to be haters of men for that reason.

So you prefer to ignore the Gospel taught by Jesus that early followers such as The Way adhered to, where they had no use for the ways or systems and institutions of man, preferring the ideals of the Kingdom instead. This made them haters of man. No wonder the later Church, an institution built upon the same foundations as previous institutions of man, turned away from the Gospel of the Kingdom to cover it's own treachery in aligning itself with the world rather than the Kingdom.

Luke 16:15, James 1:27, Romans 12:2, James 4:4

 

[timothyu]

not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind.

Yes it wasn't about the fire. It was as it says about hatred against the ways of mankind compared to the ways of the Kingdom. It all goes back to Jesus' Gospel of the Kingdom He taught, not that other one we hear about all the time which diverts attention.

 

[St_Worm2]

Can someone who is "saved" sin occasionally?
Can an elect and not yet justified person still sin? Yes
Can a justified/converted/convicted (not sure which word to pick) yet unregenerate person still sin? Maybe, unintentionally; Thinking he is doing right but messing up.
Can a regenerate person still sin? 1 John 5:18 is your straight from the Word answer.

Unfortunately, I need to go right now, so I'll need to reply to your post tomorrow night or Monday. I think that we may need to get ourselves on the same page concerning some of the terminology that you just used in the quote above first however .. so I'll start there when I return.

One quick question that comes to mind (about the Apostle John), do you believe that he was a true or regenerate believer when he wrote 1 John?

Thanks!

Talk to you soon (Dv).

--David

 

[ForAllTruth]

Unfortunately, I need to go right now, so I'll need to reply to your post tomorrow night or Monday. I think that we may need to get ourselves on the same page concerning some of the terminology that you just used in the quote above first however .. so I'll start there when I return.

One quick question that comes to mind (about the Apostle John), do you believe that he was a true or regenerate believer when he wrote 1 John?

Thanks!

Talk to you soon (Dv).

--David

1 John 3:14 seems to suggest strongly that the author was regenerate.

Also, I think it is obvious that 1 John is black and white no gray area to be sinner and saint at the same time.

The question is...
Is this for literary effect/impact?
or
Is it truly this way?

I think you know which way I take it.

 

[St_Worm2]

So you prefer to ignore the Gospel taught by Jesus that early followers such as The Way adhered to, where they had no use for the ways or systems and institutions of man, preferring the ideals of the Kingdom instead. This made them haters of man.

What I was taught (and have, as a result, believed) is that the Jewish Christians in AD 64 Rome were considered to be haters of men for a short period of time for a wholly different reason than the reason that you posited for us earlier in this thread.

I am not "ignoring" anything Timothy, rather, I am seeking to know what the truth really is (and to see the evidence that you mentioned to confirm it). You pointed me in the direction of the Roman historian Tacitus (as one to look to for that evidence), so I looked and then reported back about what I discovered (see post #24 above).

What I found and read (of Tacitus') didn't seem to support your assessment, so I asked you (and I will ask you again now) to point me/us in the direction of additional evidence (from Tacitus .. evidence that I must have missed) that ~does~ support the statements that you made earlier in this thread about all of this.

That's all.

--David

 

[St_Worm2]

1 John 3:14 seems to suggest strongly that the author was regenerate.

Thanks I'll comment upon my return concerning this as well (Dv). I've gotta go however, especially since I just spent time (that I shouldn't have ) replying to Timothy's post, and it's now after midnight here. Yikes

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

The main issue that Jesus, the prophets, and apostles seem to be concerned about is sin. The scriptures go to great lengths to help us understand what it is, how it manifests, the results of it, who can overcome it and how, etc.

What I have found to be the source of almost all divisions/contentions among those who claim to be Christians is on this topic. And that is exactly what we would expect to happen based on the teachings of scripture. The whole history described in the Bible is a story about the continual failure of the human race to achieve success in this area.

There are, however, individual exceptions. Have you noticed that certain people in the history of the world according to the Bible are exceptional in the way the scriptures describe their righteousness as contrasted to the overall situation presented of unrighteousness? What I am getting at is that the biblical standard of what it is to even be a Christian is very high. And the tendency throughout time has been to lower that standard down both in and outside of what passes as Christ's church among men.

With all this in mind, I would like to direct your attention to 1 John 3. Please read this chapter carefully. And then answer the following question.

What is the standard presented here that must be achieved to be considered born-again/regenerated?

Please resist the temptation to bring into consideration anything else outside this chapter until this question is properly answered.

What John is saying is that repentance from all known sin is essential to receiving saving faith. This is not salvation by works, but that ceasing from known sin is the fruit of being born again of the Spirit of God through God's grace and faith in Christ alone. The Scripture says that we should show the fruit of repentance, by demonstrating a holy life.

1 John 1:8-10, says that the person who says they have no sin deceives himself and the truth is not in him. This is not a contradiction to 1 John 3. To truly repent of sin one needs to see that one is a sinner deserving of hell. Then the Gospel is good news because it shows that through the suffering and death of Jesus on the Cross the guilt and punishment of sin is removed as the person embraces Christ by faith.

But as James says, the person who says they have faith, they must demonstrate it by what they do. If a person says they have faith in Christ and continues in a state of unrepentance, then their faith is dead. However, there is a vast difference between a lifestyle of regular chosen sin, and the times when one falls off the holiness wagon through temptation. They mourn when the temptation overtakes them and they quickly come to Christ in repentance, asking for more strength from the Holy Spirit to help them avoid further failure. They don't hide their sinfulness from God. They openly declare it. The hypocrite has his favourite sins which he seeks to hide from the Lord, while making it appear that he is a totally righteous believer, but God is not fooled, and in due time that person's sin will find them out.

Therefore 1 John 3 shows that the true believer does not sin in his heart. He hates it and fears what it may do to him if he does not confess it right away. Paul said that there was nothing good in him, that is in his flesh. When he sinned, he said that it was sin in him that did it, not him. What he was saying was that in his new heart and spirit, he did not sin, but the sin came through the weakness of his flesh. But applying 1 John 1:9 deals with it and preserves the truth that there is no condemnation for those in Christ, and that the law of the spirit and of life has set one free from the law of sin and death.

 

[The Liturgist]

Unfortunately, I need to go right now, so I'll need to reply to your post tomorrow night or Monday. I think that we may need to get ourselves on the same page concerning some of the terminology that you just used in the quote above first however .. so I'll start there when I return.

One quick question that comes to mind (about the Apostle John), do you believe that he was a true or regenerate believer when he wrote 1 John?

Thanks!

Talk to you soon (Dv).

--David

1 John 3:14 seems to suggest strongly that the author was regenerate.

Also, I think it is obvious that 1 John is black and white no gray area to be sinner and saint at the same time.

The question is...
Is this for literary effect/impact?
or
Is it truly this way?

I think you know which way I take it.

The idea that the Holy Apostle John was not regenerate is shocking and scandalous and contrary to the New Testament in its entirety.

 

[St_Worm2]

1 John 3:14 seems to suggest strongly that the author was regenerate. Also, I think it is obvious that 1 John is black and white no gray area to be sinner and saint at the same time.

Hello again ForAllTruth, the reason that I asked you whether or not you believed the Apostle John was regenerate at the time of the writing of 1 John is because of the inclusion of himself in the following passage (among many others). For what it's worth, I believe that he was the very first NT (regenerate) believer following the Lord's resurrection .. see John 20:8.

As far as it being possible for a true/regenerate believer to be simul justus et peccator (as Martin Luther famously said), I'll stick to 1 John to consider that possibility for right now.

Please take special note of the words in bold below, as they tell us who the Apostle was both writing to and/or about concerning sin (as well the important use by the Apostle of the Greek present tense and what that helps us understand about what is being said here).

1 John 1
8 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.
9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.

1 John 2
1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous;
2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.
3 By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments.
4 The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him;
5 but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him:
6 the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.
7 Beloved, I am not writing a new commandment to you, but an old commandment which you have had from the beginning; the old commandment is the word which you have heard.
8 On the other hand, I am writing a new commandment to you, which is true in Him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true Light is already shining.
9 The one who says he is in the Light and yet hates his brother is in the darkness until now.
10 The one who loves his brother abides in the Light and there is no cause for stumbling in him.
11 But the one who hates his brother is in the darkness and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going because the darkness has blinded his eyes.
12 I am writing to you, little children, because your sins have been forgiven you for His name’s sake.
13 I am writing to you, fathers, because you know Him who has been from the beginning. I am writing to you, young men, because you have overcome the evil one. I have written to you, children, because you know the Father.
14 I have written to you, fathers, because you know Him who has been from the beginning. I have written to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one.
​

In quick summary, the above was written to believers at all levels of spiritual maturity in the church. In fact, the (now elder) Apostle John includes ~himself~ in the mix of those who need to continually confess their ongoing sins to God whenever they commit them (to be forgiven and cleansed of them so that full fellowship w/God and the (as King David put it) "joy of Thy salvation" .. Psalms 51:12, can be restored to them).

We are also told that "we have (present and ongoing) an Advocate" .. 1 John 2:1 who speaks to the Father on our behalf whenever we sin (and that He is/will always be, present and ongoing, the propitiation for the sins that we commit .. 1 John 2:2).

I'll stop here (as this is more than plenty to consider for now ).

The next thing is to move on to why 1 John 3 does not contradict what is said above in 1 John 1/1 John 2, as well the additional, Biblical evidence (the Bible is replete with it) concerning the ongoing sins of true believers (and what we are commanded to do about them, to avoid them or to remedy them).

God bless you!!

--David
p.s. - how a person (who claims to be a believer) responds to his/her ongoing sin is a big part of the evidence that tells us if they are ~truly~ "in Christ" (and thereby, that their "claim" is authentic), or if they are simply/sadly CINO instead. This is, in point of fact, part of the test that we are admonished to take (2 Corinthians 13:5) that helps us know the truth about our own salvation

As theologian/pastor A. W. Pink once said,

 

[ForAllTruth]

David,

I will read it closer, tomorrow evening, Lord willing. But at first glance I see nothing presented in your last post that presupposes that mature believers (i.e. those born-again) will sin. So, nothing to cast doubt on the plain meaning of 1 John 5:18.

I think the context simply instructs what to do IF a person sins.

 

[Soyeong]

The main issue that Jesus, the prophets, and apostles seem to be concerned about is sin. The scriptures go to great lengths to help us understand what it is, how it manifests, the results of it, who can overcome it and how, etc.

What I have found to be the source of almost all divisions/contentions among those who claim to be Christians is on this topic. And that is exactly what we would expect to happen based on the teachings of scripture. The whole history described in the Bible is a story about the continual failure of the human race to achieve success in this area.

There are, however, individual exceptions. Have you noticed that certain people in the history of the world according to the Bible are exceptional in the way the scriptures describe their righteousness as contrasted to the overall situation presented of unrighteousness? What I am getting at is that the biblical standard of what it is to even be a Christian is very high. And the tendency throughout time has been to lower that standard down both in and outside of what passes as Christ's church among men.

With all this in mind, I would like to direct your attention to 1 John 3. Please read this chapter carefully. And then answer the following question.

What is the standard presented here that must be achieved to be considered born-again/regenerated?

Please resist the temptation to bring into consideration anything else outside this chapter until this question is properly answered.

According to 1 John 3, they way to be born again is by obeying God's law/commandments/practicing righteousness/believing in the name of the son/loving one another/refraining from sin in transgression of God's law.

A chip off the old block is someone who has the same character or nature as their father, which is expressed through do the same works as him, and this is the sense that Jesus is the Son of God insofar as the Son is the exact expression of God's nature (Hebrews 1:3), which he expressed through living in sinless obedience to God's law, so that is also the sense that we are children of God when we are partaking in the divine nature through follow his example in accordance with the Spirit. In John 8:39, Jesus said that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doing the same works that he did. The fruits of the Spirit are aspects of God's nature, so this is why those who are born again of the Spirit are contrasted with those who have minds set on the flesh, who are enemies of God, who refuse to submit to God's law (Romans 8:4-14) and why those who do not practice righteousness in obedience to it are not born again as children of God (1 John 3:10).

The way that we live expresses what we believe to be true about the nature of the Son, so when we practice righteousness or express other aspects of God's nature in obedience to God's law in accordance with the Son's example, we are expressing the believe that the Son is righteous, or in other words, we are believing in the name of the Son, which is why there are many verses that connect our faith in God with our obedience to His commandments. Likewise, when we express aspects of God's nature through our obedience to His law in accordance with the Son's example, we are expressing our love for those aspects of who God is, so all of the laws that God specifically chose to give were given because they intrinsically teach us how to love different aspects of God's nature, which is why there are many verses that connect our love for God with our obedience to His commandments. Furthermore, when we are doing this, that is the way in which we are like him and are abiding in God.

 

[ForAllTruth]

Hello again ForAllTruth, the reason that I asked you whether or not you believed the Apostle John was regenerate at the time of the writing of 1 John is because of the inclusion of himself in the following passage (among many others). For what it's worth, I believe that he was the very first NT (regenerate) believer following the Lord's resurrection .. see John 20:8.

As far as it being possible for a true/regenerate believer to be simul justus et peccator (as Martin Luther famously said), I'll stick to 1 John to consider that possibility for right now.

Please take special note of the words in bold below, as they tell us who the Apostle was both writing to and/or about concerning sin (as well the important use by the Apostle of the Greek present tense and what that helps us understand about what is being said here).

1 John 1
8 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.
9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.

1 John 2
1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous;
2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.
3 By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments.
4 The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him;
5 but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him:
6 the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.
7 Beloved, I am not writing a new commandment to you, but an old commandment which you have had from the beginning; the old commandment is the word which you have heard.
8 On the other hand, I am writing a new commandment to you, which is true in Him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true Light is already shining.
9 The one who says he is in the Light and yet hates his brother is in the darkness until now.
10 The one who loves his brother abides in the Light and there is no cause for stumbling in him.
11 But the one who hates his brother is in the darkness and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going because the darkness has blinded his eyes.
12 I am writing to you, little children, because your sins have been forgiven you for His name’s sake.
13 I am writing to you, fathers, because you know Him who has been from the beginning. I am writing to you, young men, because you have overcome the evil one. I have written to you, children, because you know the Father.
14 I have written to you, fathers, because you know Him who has been from the beginning. I have written to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one.
​

In quick summary, the above was written to believers at all levels of spiritual maturity in the church. In fact, the (now elder) Apostle John includes ~himself~ in the mix of those who need to continually confess their ongoing sins to God whenever they commit them (to be forgiven and cleansed of them so that full fellowship w/God and the (as King David put it) "joy of Thy salvation" .. Psalms 51:12, can be restored to them).

We are also told that "we have (present and ongoing) an Advocate" .. 1 John 2:1 who speaks to the Father on our behalf whenever we sin (and that He is/will always be, present and ongoing, the propitiation for the sins that we commit .. 1 John 2:2).

I'll stop here (as this is more than plenty to consider for now ).

The next thing is to move on to why 1 John 3 does not contradict what is said above in 1 John 1/1 John 2, as well the additional, Biblical evidence (the Bible is replete with it) concerning the ongoing sins of true believers (and what we are commanded to do about them, to avoid them or to remedy them).

God bless you!!

--David
p.s. - how a person (who claims to be a believer) responds to his/her ongoing sin is a big part of the evidence that tells us if they are ~truly~ "in Christ" (and thereby, that their "claim" is authentic), or if they are simply/sadly CINO instead. This is, in point of fact, part of the test that we are admonished to take (2 Corinthians 13:5) that helps us know the truth about our own salvation

As theologian/pastor A. W. Pink once said,

View attachment 319721​

There is nothing presented here that would even begin to seem to contradict 1 John 5:18.

All you have demonstrated is that a true-believer might still sin. I do NOT disagree. They don't have to sin on any given occasion where temptation might present itself, however.

In order to have anything that would seem to be contrary to 1 John 5:18 it would need to be a statement that someone who is regenerate still might sin.

I think you are assuming that all true believers are regenerate. I know of no passage that would lead us to believe that. It is a theological assumption. But after diligent study I think that the Bible only makes sense in total when we admit that followers of Jesus can really and truly believe the gospel and the Holy Spirit can do much in the area of grace and favor toward a person (giving light) but stop short of actual regeneration (as the Holy Writ defines it). This would help us see why the Bible talks about people believing for a season and then falling away with only the elect finishing the race as it is ordained/predestined for only them to achieve final salvation.

 

[ForAllTruth]

According to 1 John 3, they way to be born again is by obeying God's law/commandments/practicing righteousness/believing in the name of the son/loving one another/refraining from sin in transgression of God's law.

A chip off the old block is someone who has the same character or nature as their father, which is expressed through do the same works as him, and this is the sense that Jesus is the Son of God insofar as the Son is the exact expression of God's nature (Hebrews 1:3), which he expressed through living in sinless obedience to God's law, so that is also the sense that we are children of God when we are partaking in the divine nature through follow his example in accordance with the Spirit. In John 8:39, Jesus said that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doing the same works that he did. The fruits of the Spirit are aspects of God's nature, so this is why those who are born again of the Spirit are contrasted with those who have minds set on the flesh, who are enemies of God, who refuse to submit to God's law (Romans 8:4-14) and why those who do not practice righteousness in obedience to it are not born again as children of God (1 John 3:10).

The way that we live expresses what we believe to be true about the nature of the Son, so when we practice righteousness or express other aspects of God's nature in obedience to God's law in accordance with the Son's example, we are expressing the believe that the Son is righteous, or in other words, we are believing in the name of the Son, which is why there are many verses that connect our faith in God with our obedience to His commandments. Likewise, when we express aspects of God's nature through our obedience to His law in accordance with the Son's example, we are expressing our love for those aspects of who God is, so all of the laws that God specifically chose to give were given because they intrinsically teach us how to love different aspects of God's nature, which is why there are many verses that connect our love for God with our obedience to His commandments. Furthermore, when we are doing this, that is the way in which we are like him and are abiding in God.

Isn't it actually the way to avoid all sin is to be born again? 1 John 3:9 1 John 5:18

 

[fhansen]

Isn't it actually the way to avoid all sin is to be born again? 1 John 3:9 1 John 5:18

But, while technically possible by the power of the Spirit, I suppose, do you think absolute sinless perfection is a practical option in this life?

 

[BobRyan]

But, while technically possible by the power of the Spirit, I suppose, do you think absolute sinless perfection is a practical option in this life?

Romans 8:4-8 says that only the lost soul "does not submit to the Law of God neither indeed CAN it".

Romans 6 makes the case that as a born again Christian we are freed from slavery to sin

1 Cor 10 makes the case that NO temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man AND GOD IS FAITHFUL who will not ALLOW you to be tempted beyond that which YOU ARE able.

But at the same time it does not say "if we sin that is the sign that we are not born again, or that we are lost".

Rather we wage war against sin --
1 Cor 9:
24 Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may obtain it. 25 And everyone who competes for the prize is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a perishable crown, but we for an imperishable crown. 26 Therefore I run thus: not with uncertainty. Thus I fight: not as one who beats the air. 27 But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified.

So the popular idea that Christians are enslaved to sinning is wrong.
But so also is the idea that if a born-again Christian sins that person must not be saved.

 

[ForAllTruth]

But, while technically possible by the power of the Spirit, I suppose, do you think absolute sinless perfection is a practical option in this life?

Those verses and many more highly suggest that!