Sin, and what we are held accountable for

[MarkEvan]

I would like other peoples views on what we are held accountable for, I have my own but would like to know what others think.


Well since its my thread I guess I had best give my view.


From what I can see of the scriptures we are not held accountable for all the sin we commit, let me explain, Paul says in Romans 14 that "anything that does not proceed from faith is sin," is it possible to walk in faith and to commit sin my answer would be yes. We all start off as mear babes in Christ what we know to be sin then is far less than say someone who is a young adult in Christ and theirs far less than a believer who has been walking in faith for 20-30 years or so. Is the babe in Christ going to be held to the same level of accountability as the one who is 20 years walking with Christ? IMO no, James says in chapter 4 that "he then that knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, to him it is sin," what a child knows to be right before God and what a adult knows to be right is very much different, or else their can be no growth!
So can a person commit sin then if walking in faith, well everything above would tend to surgest that it entierly feasable but is there more from scripture to support this view? Again I believe there is Peter (i believe) talks about love covering a multitude of sins, i believe this covers (it can mean more) sins we commit unknowingly while serving God. The royal comandment is to "love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength," and we know that love is the fulifillment of the law, so it is possible to love God with your all while still commiting sin in areas that are unbeknownst (sp?) to you, and because you are walking in love God does not hold you accountable for these.
Maybe you would say "they are not sins if you are not aware of them," but to that I would refer us back to the OT and look at the offerings given by people for the sins they had commited unknowingly, if they were not sins why would God require that they make an atonement to Him? Jesus was our sacrifice once and for all, His blood covers sins of ignorance, is anything required of us for these sins, IMO no other than perhapse a repentant heart when we realise our error.

To finish with i will leave a shortened version of what I believe we are held accountable for;

"a voluntary transgression of a known law of God"

John wesley




Well those are my views, concur or disagree, either way I would like to hear why, with scriptural backing obviously.



Mark



P.s this is going somewhere but I want to lay down the foundations before I start with what I really want to ask, and an understanding of sin is vital.

P.s.s If this is in the wrong section perhapse the mods could move it.................cheers.

 

[LamorakDesGalis]

From what I can see of the scriptures we are not held accountable for all the sin we commit, let me explain, Paul says in Romans 14 that "anything that does not proceed from faith is sin," is it possible to walk in faith and to commit sin my answer would be yes.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "not held accountable." Surely God will account for every sin, and sins by believers will be accounted through the blood of Christ. Perhaps you are referring to a type of "unknown" sins committed by a believer?

Your statement that it is possible to "walk in faith and to commit sin" is echoed in an expression of Martin Luther that a believer is "simultaneously a sinner and a saint." But I don't think Romans 14:23 supports this view because Paul was actually making a stark contrast:
23 But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

There are other stark contrasts in Scripture, such as Gal 5:17 that strongly suggest the desires of the flesh and the desires of the Spirit are mutually exclusive. Our experiences of simultaneous sinner/saint along with these contrasting passages makes the study of sanctification so fun.

We all start off as mear babes in Christ what we know to be sin then is far less than say someone who is a young adult in Christ and theirs far less than a believer who has been walking in faith for 20-30 years or so. Is the babe in Christ going to be held to the same level of accountability as the one who is 20 years walking with Christ? IMO no, James says in chapter 4 that "he then that knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, to him it is sin," what a child knows to be right before God and what a adult knows to be right is very much different, or else their can be no growth!

One should be more mature after X many years in the faith. But that's not necessarily the case, either in experience or in Scripture. Here is Hebrews 5:11-14
11 We have much to say about this, but it is hard to explain because you are slow to learn. 12 In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God's word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! 13 Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. 14 But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.

Like you have expressed, there seems to be a higher accountability that the author of Hebrews expected from his 1st century audience than from new(er) Christians in his time.

So can a person commit sin then if walking in faith, well everything above would tend to surgest that it entierly feasable but is there more from scripture to support this view? Again I believe there is Peter (i believe) talks about love covering a multitude of sins, i believe this covers (it can mean more) sins we commit unknowingly while serving God.

Peter did say in 1 Peter 4:8 that Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins. (There is a different multitude of sins verse in James 5:20). I don't think Peter is suggesting what you suggest. However, Romans 7:13-25 does suggest what you suggest. Especially if Paul was describing his post-conversion experiences rather than pre-conversion.

The royal comandment is to "love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength," and we know that love is the fulifillment of the law, so it is possible to love God with your all while still commiting sin in areas that are unbeknownst (sp?) to you, and because you are walking in love God does not hold you accountable for these.
Maybe you would say "they are not sins if you are not aware of them," but to that I would refer us back to the OT and look at the offerings given by people for the sins they had commited unknowingly, if they were not sins why would God require that they make an atonement to Him? Jesus was our sacrifice once and for all, His blood covers sins of ignorance, is anything required of us for these sins, IMO no other than perhapse a repentant heart when we realise our error.

I agree that the definition of sins cannot be confined to only "knowing" sins.

To finish with i will leave a shortened version of what I believe we are held accountable for;

"a voluntary transgression of a known law of God"

John wesley

Wesley is always a good quote. Ok, I think you've answered my first question on what is accountable. It seems you are saying that "unknowing" sins are glossed over in some way, like in Acts 17:30. And what is left - the known sins - are those sins which believers are accountable for confessing, because - how can you specifically confess unknown sins. To be honest, I'm not sure I agree or disagree at this point. Are you perhaps a Wesleyan?


LDG

 

[Macca]

I would like other peoples views on what we are held accountable for, I have my own but would like to know what others think.


Well since its my thread I guess I had best give my view.


From what I can see of the scriptures we are not held accountable for all the sin we commit, let me explain, Paul says in Romans 14 that "anything that does not proceed from faith is sin," is it possible to walk in faith and to commit sin my answer would be yes. We all start off as mear babes in Christ what we know to be sin then is far less than say someone who is a young adult in Christ and theirs far less than a believer who has been walking in faith for 20-30 years or so. Is the babe in Christ going to be held to the same level of accountability as the one who is 20 years walking with Christ? IMO no, James says in chapter 4 that "he then that knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, to him it is sin," what a child knows to be right before God and what a adult knows to be right is very much different, or else their can be no growth!
So can a person commit sin then if walking in faith, well everything above would tend to surgest that it entierly feasable but is there more from scripture to support this view? Again I believe there is Peter (i believe) talks about love covering a multitude of sins, i believe this covers (it can mean more) sins we commit unknowingly while serving God. The royal comandment is to "love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your mind, and all your strength," and we know that love is the fulifillment of the law, so it is possible to love God with your all while still commiting sin in areas that are unbeknownst (sp?) to you, and because you are walking in love God does not hold you accountable for these.
Maybe you would say "they are not sins if you are not aware of them," but to that I would refer us back to the OT and look at the offerings given by people for the sins they had commited unknowingly, if they were not sins why would God require that they make an atonement to Him? Jesus was our sacrifice once and for all, His blood covers sins of ignorance, is anything required of us for these sins, IMO no other than perhapse a repentant heart when we realise our error.

To finish with i will leave a shortened version of what I believe we are held accountable for;

"a voluntary transgression of a known law of God"

John wesley




Well those are my views, concur or disagree, either way I would like to hear why, with scriptural backing obviously.



Mark



P.s this is going somewhere but I want to lay down the foundations before I start with what I really want to ask, and an understanding of sin is vital.

P.s.s If this is in the wrong section perhapse the mods could move it.................cheers.

Because of the fact that the earth is breaking down from the effects of sin (not the continual wrong doing of men, but from Adam.) I feel that God looks at a man and "says" this is a man/woman like Adam/Eve. Because they are like Adam/Eve, even though they do not know My law (unreached people) they are capable of sin, therefore they are sinners. This means that all mankind, knowing or unknowing, needs a Saviour
.

 

[MarkEvan]

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "not held accountable." Surely God will account for every sin, and sins by believers will be accounted through the blood of Christ. Perhaps you are referring to a type of "unknown" sins committed by a believer?

Your statement that it is possible to "walk in faith and to commit sin" is echoed in an expression of Martin Luther that a believer is "simultaneously a sinner and a saint." But I don't think Romans 14:23 supports this view because Paul was actually making a stark contrast:
23 But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

There are other stark contrasts in Scripture, such as Gal 5:17 that strongly suggest the desires of the flesh and the desires of the Spirit are mutually exclusive. Our experiences of simultaneous sinner/saint along with these contrasting passages makes the study of sanctification so fun.

Hi, by "not held accountable" I mean that, God overlooks these sins because He looks at the heart not at the actions "for the word of God is living and active sharper than any two edged sword peircing joint from marrow, soul from spirit, it is a discerner of the thoughts and intentions of the heart, rendering all things naked before He to whom we must give an account." When our actions are wrong but our intentions right (that is that we do these things out of love for God) then it is the intentions not the actions that are judged. Yes I agree that those actions still needed Jesus to die for them, hence in the OT a sacrifice needed to be given for sins commited in ignorance.
As to Luther, I wholeheartedly disagree with his idea that saints could go on sinning, there is nothing in scripture to confirm this, infact as you have already pointed out there is an awful lot that disagree. But the difference is that where as Luther was talking about willfull sin, I am talking about that that is not willfull because it is unknown. I believe people like Luther say such things beacuse it justifies a life that they are unwilling to give up........but hey thats just my thoughts on the matter.
Sanctification is my ultimate goal with this, but for the time being I believ it important to discuss what sin is and what we are accountable for, there are to many threads that (IMO) have no relevance to the christian walk so I started this, it at least gets us all thinking on things we can all agree are important to discuss.

One should be more mature after X many years in the faith. But that's not necessarily the case, either in experience or in Scripture. Here is Hebrews 5:11-14
11 We have much to say about this, but it is hard to explain because you are slow to learn. 12 In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God's word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! 13 Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. 14 But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.

Like you have expressed, there seems to be a higher accountability that the author of Hebrews expected from his 1st century audience than from new(er) Christians in his time.

You are right Spiritual maturity does not necesarily go hand in hand with how long we have been a christian. But lets work on the assumption that in this instance it does . You give a good example with Hebrews of the different levels of growth between that of a older believer and a younger one. The last part of the passage would surgest that somone who is mature has been trained in righteousness to distinguish between good and evil, a babe in Christ can still distinguish good from evil but at a much reduced level, or else the passage has no meaning. The infant cannot be required to have the same training as the adult and so is less likely to be able to distinguiish between good and evil, therefore sometimes choosing the evil over the good. But as I previously said God is a discerner and judge of the thoughts and inentions of the heart, and it is these that will be judged.
Another scripture would be "he who has much, much is expected," this applies also in obediance, not always in outright and obvious cammandments from the scriptures but more so to the principles that they give, these principles that help us to know what is right to do, only come through study and practice as Hebrews says.

Peter did say in 1 Peter 4:8 that Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins. (There is a different multitude of sins verse in James 5:20). I don't think Peter is suggesting what you suggest. However, Romans 7:13-25 does suggest what you suggest. Especially if Paul was describing his post-conversion experiences rather than pre-conversion.

Yes it is Peter, I think that there are many meanings to this verse, but for me the context would seem to indicate that Peter can be talking about what we are accountable for. Notice he is talking about loving our neighbour, the very thing God commanded us to do along with "loving God" it is the fullfillment of the law. An untrained person (through youth in Christ) cant meet all the requirements of the obediance to Christ that a trained person can, yet it is becasue of the heart and that persons desire to serve both God and his fellow man that God overlooks these. Because in reality he is being obediant to the level that he can.
I am afraid that I do not think Romans 14 to be post conversion, I believ that it is Paul pre conversion, that is Paul under the law not grace, if it is Paul as a believer than it is the same principle as Luther`s "simultainiously a sinner and a saint." The two do not match IMO .

I agree that the definition of sins cannot be confined to only "knowing" sins.

I agree, Christ died for all sins commited whether knowing or not, yet it is the sins commited knowingly for which we will be judged. Because God looks at the heart.

Wesley is always a good quote. Ok, I think you've answered my first question on what is accountable. It seems you are saying that "unknowing" sins are glossed over in some way, like in Acts 17:30. And what is left - the known sins - are those sins which believers are accountable for confessing, because - how can you specifically confess unknown sins. To be honest, I'm not sure I agree or disagree at this point. Are you perhaps a Wesleyan?


LDG

Darn it wish I had read that bit first, would have saved me much typing . It is not confessing sins that is the issue, as you said you can only confess those you are aware of, but rather what we will be judged for by God. Will He hold us accountable for the sins we commit unknowingly or will He overlook those as already paid for by the blood of Jesus.....................I think the big thing to remember is that God is a judger of the heart and its reasons, they ultimatly give rise to our actions, but it is not actions that He judges.


As to being a Wesleyan, in one sense yes in another no. I do not attend a Methodist or Nazarean church. But i do place graet weight on what Wesley said, not because of who he was and what he did (allthough maybe that should come in, would God use someone as greatly as He used Wesley without them having a good grasp of scripture?) but because what he taught I see in the bible.


Mark

 

[MarkEvan]

Because of the fact that the earth is breaking down from the effects of sin (not the continual wrong doing of men, but from Adam.) I feel that God looks at a man and "says" this is a man/woman like Adam/Eve. Because they are like Adam/Eve, even though they do not know My law (unreached people) they are capable of sin, therefore they are sinners. This means that all mankind, knowing or unknowing, needs a Saviour
.

Hi Macca, I completly agree that all men need a saviour and would never deem of saying otherwise, all men are convicted of at least one sin though. "For the Spirit convicts the world of sin righteousness and judgement, of sin because they do not believe in me........." However what I am saying is in refernce to those who are born again.




Mark

 

[R3quiem]

Are we held accountable for a sin that is caused by a chemical/biological imbalance in the brain?

If the part of our brain is damaged that controls aggression, for example, and then we have an enhanced drive towards aggression, are we held accountable for the sin of wrath?

 

[squint]

A student of Word surely loves the name of "Mark" as in "not missing same" eh?

Since sin and it's causes are one of my favorite scriptural subjects as in wanting to "avoid it" at all costs, and remembering my first Love some decades back and the desires to avoid sin, the Word has provided us some very clear "separation measures" for this particular subject, which I am sure "many" will disagree with, even before putting fingers here to type.

Sin, as you stated and we know from scriptures is "anything not of faith." (I presume most here have an online concordance to quickly refer to the text if required.)

Sin is also "transgression of The Law," that being defined as either the fleshly fulfillment of The Law of Moses, OR The Spirit of The Law, which is Love. So we have then "two" potential directions for "sin" to transpire "under" the Law or even "above or apart" from the "fleshly requirements" of the Law when we see The Spirit of The Law also being "involved." I'll dissect this more as required.

And we also know this about sin, which imho, is extremely crucial as to "sin" and the fact that it is NOT just "mankind" involved in sin and sinning:

I'll start with this disclosure from John, in his 1 John 1 writings:

8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just 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.

As "believers" we simply cannot deny that we have sin, and have sinned. This is a two-fold presentation. One being active tense sin as in 'have' and one being past tense sin which is 'have sinned.' These two positions divide sin into past actions and present tense "having." There is then no way to eliminate either of these positions because "logically" as soon as we say we 'have' no sin, we fall under the condemnation of 1 John 1:8 and we certainly cannot say we have not sinned. We know that ALL have sinned (Romans 3:22) save One, Jesus Christ while He was here in The Flesh. He is the only One who has been able to make that claim as it pertains to "His Flesh" and "Mind." That is why "His Words" remain untainted by "sin" and are therefore FULL EMBODIMENT OF TRUTH.

I doubt there is much disagreement here so far. This is "sin 101" for "believers."

Now it begins to get interesting firstly from John in 1 John 3. In all cases I am using the KJV because I believe the intent of the writer has not been "watered down" by subsequent versions in adding various "words" such as "continue" or "continuing." I'd like therefore to bring in an implication to SIN that John brings in 1 John 3:

8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

In this statement then, there is to me, a clear measure from John that THE DEVIL is 'implicated' in all sin by some form or fashion. I also "presume" that most "believers" know that the DEVIL is a SEPARATE ENTITY from people. This is disputed by some, but not many, and that dialog of division of the devil from mankind is a sub-section of dialog in and of itself. FOR the purposes of this post, I am dividing the DEVIL as being "not MANKIND" but because the DEVIL is clearly implicate in SIN, that does put THE DEVIL in the midst of SIN and therefore also in the midst of MANKIND.

So in this separate, but BLENDED view, I do see TWO parties to sin. One, the flesh and minds of mankind WHERE SIN transpires, and two, the DEVIL then being implicated IN SIN because "he who commits sin is OF THE DEVIL."

Paul has a most interesting but often overlooked scriptural set in Romans 7, where Paul talks about the sin indwelling his own flesh. Paul makes some very interesting observations about that sin indwelling his flesh. Let's look closely at how Paul divided this sin indwelling from himself and the "evil" that was "present" with him. I am going to "embolden" the separation of sin from Paul, and how the Law worked to "reveal" that presence in Paul's flesh:

5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. 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.
14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? 25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

This writing by Paul to me is one of the most complicated scripture set that Paul wrote. Why? Because in this scripture set PAUL SEPARATES THE PRESENCE OF SIN INDWELLING HIS FLESH FROM HIMSELF AS A MAN OF GOD. Paul clearly says that the "sin indwelling" his flesh is NO LONGER I, twice no less. And Paul admits to the "presence of EVIL" with himself "whenever" he wants to "do good." Here Paul, just as with John, implicates "not himself" but THE DEVIL, as it is NO LONGER I, as the EVIL PRESENT. The sin indwelling Paul is as John notes in the commitment of sin, OF THE DEVIL.

Paul was not the sin indwelling his flesh. Paul was assuredly not EVIL. That presence was with him and it was NOT HIM.

I am going to stop here, and see if you or any other children of God SEE this DIVISION, right here in Romans 7. And to also SEE the "other party" to the transaction of SIN, and THEN we will go back to 1 John, and "understand" how it is that WE as Gods children can be "not sinning" and when we do, just WHO is in our flesh that IS sinning, and why SINS will NOT be counted against mankind.

Sin WILL be counted against "DEVILKIND."

John 8:34
Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin."

enjoy!

squint

 

[BreadAlone]

I believe that the *Christian*'s sins will all be accounted for, but like a previous poster said, they will be accounted for through the blood of Christ.

Those who are not Christian's will be held accountable for their sins on the last day..

 

[squint]

I believe that the *Christian*'s sins will all be accounted for, but like a previous poster said, they will be accounted for through the blood of Christ.

Those who are not Christian's will be held accountable for their sins on the last day..

That would appear to be counting sins against mankind, which is something that Paul advised against:

2 Corinthians 5:19
that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them.

 

[BreadAlone]

4For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment; 5if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others; 6if he condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah by burning them to ashes, and made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly; 7and if he rescued Lot, a righteous man, who was distressed by the filthy lives of lawless men 8(for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard)— 9if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment. 10This is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the sinful nature and despise authority.

It also sounds alot like 2 Peter 2..

The verse you quoted is VERY true, but if people don't accept Christ's work, they will have no part of it in the Day of Judgement..

 

[squint]

It also sounds alot like 2 Peter 2..

The verse you quoted is VERY true,

Then how do you suppose one avoids counting sins against mankind? Your proposal would appear to be doing that.

 

[R3quiem]

The second unforgivable sin in Christianity: skepticism.

Anyone who is skeptical about a man who preached 2000 years ago, and known only from a few sources, is doomed. That's one thing that's always been weird to me about Christianity- we're all sinners so we can't save ourselves, so our salvation is hinged on how skeptical and curious we are. God damns people who use reason and try to understand, while giving eternal life to those who blindly follow without question.

God gave man reason, but then whoever uses it is damned.

 

[BreadAlone]

Then how do you suppose one avoids counting sins against mankind? Your proposal would appear to be doing that.

To take the verse you're clinging to in more context:

17Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! 18All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.

Through CHRIST, God is reconciling the world to himself, not counting men's sins against them. If you don't accept Christ's promises, and the last day comes, you're going to burn in hell for your sins. That's what these verses are saying..

 

[MarkEvan]

Are we held accountable for a sin that is caused by a chemical/biological imbalance in the brain?

If the part of our brain is damaged that controls aggression, for example, and then we have an enhanced drive towards aggression, are we held accountable for the sin of wrath?

Difficult question, I think ultimatly the only answer can be that only God knows the degree to which someone is affected by such things, and that He being a gracious and merciful judge will make allowances because He desires to see all men saved. I still think however that it should be each mans effort to control such things as best they can allthough ultimatly it is only God working through us that can make us victorious over these things.


Mark

 

[MarkEvan]

A student of Word surely loves the name of "Mark" as in "not missing same" eh?

Ha ha very funny , but to serious things;

Since sin and it's causes are one of my favorite scriptural subjects as in wanting to "avoid it" at all costs, and remembering my first Love some decades back and the desires to avoid sin, the Word has provided us some very clear "separation measures" for this particular subject, which I am sure "many" will disagree with, even before putting fingers here to type.

So far I agree with everything, it is a very good thing to study sin and how to avoid it, this is after all the primary focus of the whole of scripture:

"sin lies at the door, its desire is for you but you must master it"

As "believers" we simply cannot deny that we have sin, and have sinned. This is a two-fold presentation. One being active tense sin as in 'have' and one being past tense sin which is 'have sinned.' These two positions divide sin into past actions and present tense "having." There is then no way to eliminate either of these positions because "logically" as soon as we say we 'have' no sin, we fall under the condemnation of 1 John 1:8 and we certainly cannot say we have not sinned. We know that ALL have sinned (Romans 3:22) save One, Jesus Christ while He was here in The Flesh. He is the only One who has been able to make that claim as it pertains to "His Flesh" and "Mind." That is why "His Words" remain untainted by "sin" and are therefore FULL EMBODIMENT OF TRUTH.

Aagin I agree completel, all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, and "the Spirit convicts the world of sin righteousness and judgement, of sin becasue they do not believe in me.......," all mankind at some point has not believed in Jesus because all men need to be born again, therefore all have sinned.

Now it begins to get interesting firstly from John in 1 John 3. In all cases I am using the KJV because I believe the intent of the writer has not been "watered down" by subsequent versions in adding various "words" such as "continue" or "continuing." I'd like therefore to bring in an implication to SIN that John brings in 1 John 3:

8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

In this statement then, there is to me, a clear measure from John that THE DEVIL is 'implicated' in all sin by some form or fashion. I also "presume" that most "believers" know that the DEVIL is a SEPARATE ENTITY from people. This is disputed by some, but not many, and that dialog of division of the devil from mankind is a sub-section of dialog in and of itself. FOR the purposes of this post, I am dividing the DEVIL as being "not MANKIND" but because the DEVIL is clearly implicate in SIN, that does put THE DEVIL in the midst of SIN and therefore also in the midst of MANKIND.

So in this separate, but BLENDED view, I do see TWO parties to sin. One, the flesh and minds of mankind WHERE SIN transpires, and two, the DEVIL then being implicated IN SIN because "he who commits sin is OF THE DEVIL."

True but (allthough I don`t believe you are saying this I will point it out anyway) the devil cannot make us sin, he can only tempt us, if we give in to that temptation then that is not due to satan but to our own disobediance, there is no sin that has overtaken us that is not common to all men, we will not be tested beyond our strength and the LORD who is faithfull will provide the way out (1 corinthians 10), if we sin we have only ourselves to blame. Yes satan prowls the camp looking for someone to devour, and yes he is the thief that comes to steal kill and destroy, he does this through temptaion to sin and most importantly through deception. But we have everything given by God that we may resist the devil, if we do not lean on those resources (for lack of a better word) then it is us that is accountable.

This writing by Paul to me is one of the most complicated scripture set that Paul wrote. Why? Because in this scripture set PAUL SEPARATES THE PRESENCE OF SIN INDWELLING HIS FLESH FROM HIMSELF AS A MAN OF GOD. Paul clearly says that the "sin indwelling" his flesh is NO LONGER I, twice no less. And Paul admits to the "presence of EVIL" with himself "whenever" he wants to "do good." Here Paul, just as with John, implicates "not himself" but THE DEVIL, as it is NO LONGER I, as the EVIL PRESENT. The sin indwelling Paul is as John notes in the commitment of sin, OF THE DEVIL.

Paul was not the sin indwelling his flesh. Paul was assuredly not EVIL. That presence was with him and it was NOT HIM.

And here is where I differ, Romans 7 is in my opinion (which you probably already know ) is Paul pre conversion, that is it is Paul under the law not under grace. As you quote later Jesus says in John 8 that "anyone who commits sin is a slave to sin" but that "if you are truelly my disciples you will know the truth and the truth will set you free," free from sin, Paul in Romans 7 is not free from sin his m,embers are still subject to it, which is the opposite of what Paul said a believer should be "therefore do not present your members as members of wickedness.......but present your members as members of righteousness" (romans 6 12), was Paul really saying in Romans 7 that a believer will always be subject to sin, will always be only capable of doing that which he doesn`t want to do? In 1 corinthians 10 he says the opposite that God will always provide the way out and that there is notyhing beyond which we can endure, Peter also backs this up by saying that God gives us everything needed for life and godliness (2 peter 1 vs 3). We are more than conquerors, of what? Of sin surely, we are conquorors of sin, it no longer has power over us because we have been set free from it, it no longer has power over us, we no longer have to do the bad or evil things we don`t want to do, but can always do the good things we couldn`t before. The opposite of Romans 7.

I am going to stop here, and see if you or any other children of God SEE this DIVISION, right here in Romans 7. And to also SEE the "other party" to the transaction of SIN, and THEN we will go back to 1 John, and "understand" how it is that WE as Gods children can be "not sinning" and when we do, just WHO is in our flesh that IS sinning, and why SINS will NOT be counted against mankind.

I am still very much interested in your view.




mark

 

[squint]

To take the verse you're clinging to in more context:

IF Paul has advised that Christ is reconciling the world through Christ unto Himself, not counting sins against mankind, it does no good to try and eliminate that presentation. We try to reconcile to the "fact." The fact and effectuation of that working of God in Christ remains a factual working of HIM whether or not it is accepted or activated by mankind.

Through CHRIST, God is reconciling the world to himself, not counting men's sins against them. If you don't accept Christ's promises, and the last day comes, you're going to burn in hell for your sins. That's what these verses are saying..

I have yet to find a single named person in the entire Bible who is stated to be heading for such a fate, nor is there a single named person even threatened with such a fate.

The devil and his messengers who "abide in the flesh" however are ascribed that fate.

When we "divide" mankind from their sins, there is only one party to the eternal torture parade left, and that is the devil and his messengers.

 

[squint]

So far I agree with everything, it is a very good thing to study sin and how to avoid it, this is after all the primary focus of the whole of scripture:

"sin lies at the door, its desire is for you but you must master it"

This thread will hopefully spring up to the clear separation between mankind and the "separate working" of sin indwelling the flesh, which is laid out in principles in Romans 7 and in 1 John.

Here is yet another look at that "separation" principle:

2 Timothy 2:19
Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.

If we do not "divide" ourselves from what we are bound with, we still in "some form" are counting sins against mankind.

MANY will be deceived in that counting. Sins can and are condemned under the scriptures without any uncertainty, but that working of sin has the DEVIL implicated up to his eyeballs.

Counting sins against mankind can and does take the common forms of blame and accusations against mankind. These forms are to blame and accuse "the old man" "the old nature" "the carnal nature" "the ego" "the self" "yourself" "your disobedience" "other people's disobedience" "the Adamic nature" "the natural man" "the flesh" etc etc etc. These are all "actively working powers" that are still employed in the flesh of mankind to "blame and accuse and therefore COUNT" sins against mankind and ONLY mankind.

We are to "resist" such things, and place the working of sins in the flesh pointedly upon the DEVIL.

Aagin I agree completel, all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, and "the Spirit convicts the world of sin righteousness and judgement, of sin becasue they do not believe in me.......,"

Here is the judgment which you write of from John 16:
7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;
10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; 11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.

If we look at the fact that the "unbeliever" is BLINDED by that same "god of this world" the "prince of this world" we understand that the SIN of unbelief will not be counted against mankind. IT WILL however be counted against the "cause" of same, that blinder who has blinded the captives.

all mankind at some point has not believed in Jesus because all men need to be born again, therefore all have sinned.

We also know from scriptures for example that anyone, yes anyone who LOVES both knows God and is born of God. So exacting the 4 step salvation routine is not the only "proof" of knowing God and being born of God. We also know from scriptures that anyone who does righteousness knows God and is born of God. (1 John 2:27 & 4:7) This is the "proof" of knowing God and being born of God. God is not against LOVE and those who do so KNOW God and are born OF God for GOD IS LOVE.

I know many people who have Jesus painted across their lips who DO NOT LOVE, even though they may have done the 4 step recitation. This does not mean they are out from under the darkness of hatred toward their fellow man, whom we are commanded to LOVE.

(I don`t believe you are saying this I will point it out anyway) the devil cannot make us sin,

Obviously that is not the case, since the devil has made ALL MANKIND sin, and all mankind have sin indwelling their flesh.

That is the principle that Paul understood and taught. That SIN is literally EMPOWERED and ACTIVATED by The Word, particularly Words of The Law, and therefore ALL have and have that working in their flesh. Whenever the law is picked up 'in the flesh' that same power "reveals" that sin indwelling is still there and working." Paul served this "law of sin in his flesh" even POST salvation, as he stated in Romans 7:25.

The position of claiming sinless flesh is not available, and that working is just as active, and perhaps moreso in believers, as they expose themselves to that working by The Word, particularly Words of Law.

he can only tempt us, if we give in to that temptation then that is not due to satan but to our own disobediance, there is no sin that has overtaken us that is not common to all men, we will not be tested beyond our strength and the LORD who is faithfull will provide the way out (1 corinthians 10), if we sin we have only ourselves to blame.

You already have the measure of scriptures on that. Sins are not counted against mankind, no matter what someone else may think. Not counting is that, not counting. We also know from Jesus that "every sin and blasphemy" will be forgiven of mankind, but NONE of those workings will be forgiven of the DEVIL.

That "dragon" has blasphemy written on all 7 of "his heads." (Rev. 13:1 & 17:3)

Yes satan prowls the camp looking for someone to devour, and yes he is the thief that comes to steal kill and destroy, he does this through temptaion to sin and most importantly through deception.

And a very big part of "his deception" is and remains to blame and accuse everyone and everything BESIDES himself. That is the working of the accuser of the brethren in "BELIEVERS."

But we have everything given by God that we may resist the devil, if we do not lean on those resources (for lack of a better word) then it is us that is accountable.

John lays down a clear line here for those believers who want to "count sins" to themselves alone in 1 John 3, which is impossible to "get around" without "separation" of yourself from that working:

6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.

So if you want to be the "sinner" here you have your "work" cut out for ya!

John re-iterates this again here from the same chapter:

9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin

And here is where I differ, Romans 7 is in my opinion (which you probably already know ) is Paul pre conversion, that is it is Paul under the law not under grace.

Paul (and we) are assuredly under "Grace" but the sin indwelling Paul's flesh was still there and still aroused by the Law, no different than in us. We still have to both divide ourselves from that working and resist that working.

As you quote later Jesus says in John 8 that "anyone who commits sin is a slave to sin" but that "if you are truelly my disciples you will know the truth and the truth will set you free," free from sin,

Mankind is set free from the "attribution" of sin indwelling the flesh, as it is "of the devil." Some, believers for example, are to KNOW this difference, and therefore condemn the sin, but not the person who does so as a SLAVE.

Jesus considered even the "thought" of adultery as a commitment of same 'in the heart.' In this way Jesus AMPLIFIED the law, to make sin's presence well beyond denial in any of us.

Paul in Romans 7 is not free from sin his m,embers are still subject to it, which is the opposite of what Paul said a believer should be "therefore do not present your members as members of wickedness.......but present your members as members of righteousness" (romans 6 12), was Paul really saying in Romans 7 that a believer will always be subject to sin,

Paul was not free from that working. Paul even had a special "messenger of Satan" placed upon him by God to remind him of the sufficiency of Grace inspite of the existence of that messenger.

will always be only capable of doing that which he doesn`t want to do? In 1 corinthians 10 he says the opposite that God will always provide the way out and that there is notyhing beyond which we can endure, Peter also backs this up by saying that God gives us everything needed for life and godliness (2 peter 1 vs 3). We are more than conquerors, of what? Of sin surely, we are conquorors of sin, it no longer has power over us because we have been set free from it,

Freedom only comes in division and separation. IF we understand that working, we truly are not slaves of IT. If we do not understand that working as something "different" than ourselves as Gods children, then imho, that person remains a slave, and will also falsely judge and condemn other slaves. Jesus did come to "set the captives free" and that "freedom" is not yet FULLY realized. That is a "to come" position, as we cannot say we "have" no sin.

it no longer has power over us, we no longer have to do the bad or evil things we don`t want to do, but can always do the good things we couldn`t before. The opposite of Romans 7.

Our "power" over sin comes in dividing ourselves and others from that "working" via Word understandings of that power, yet that same power becomes "amplified" under the dispensing of the Word:

Mark 4:15
And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately

Immediately is pretty close eh?

enjoy!

squint

 

[BreadAlone]

I have yet to find a single named person in the entire Bible who is stated to be heading for such a fate, nor is there a single named person even threatened with such a fate.

The devil and his messengers who "abide in the flesh" however are ascribed that fate.

When we "divide" mankind from their sins, there is only one party to the eternal torture parade left, and that is the devil and his messengers.

6And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. 7In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.

And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.

"You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?

24Then they prayed, "Lord, you know everyone's heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen 25to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs." 26Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.

Really?? Seems like it to me..

 

[squint]

Really?? Seems like it to me..

I have no issues with the eternal torment scriptures, but as stated you have not and will not find this measure unto a single "named" individual in the entire Bible, nor will you find a single "named" individual threatened with such a thing.

You should understand that if you are HIS, there is MORE going on in the "flesh" than just that person. There is the working of sin indwelling, which is and remains "OF THE DEVIL." On that count I can and will COUNT SINS were they should be scripturally attributed, and NOT count sins against my fellow man, Whom God in Christ came to SAVE.

IF "sins are not counted" against "mankind" they are thusly not counted against Judas.

Judas was "entered" by Satan himself to perform that work which SATAN IN JUDAS was meant by GOD to perform. Jesus knew well in advance that His own familiar friend Judas was going to lift up his heel against Him and was going to have the "entering of Satan" into his flesh, and accounted it so from the scriptures of the O.T. in Psalm 41.

Luke 22:3
Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve.

John 13:27
As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him.

In the light of this disclosure, I have NO NEED to "count sin" against Judas who was for Gods Intended Purposes, at that point the PAWN OR SLAVE of Satan.

All of Israel are taught in the O.T. to be "children of God" for examples in Deut. 14:1 and Psalm 82:6 (which Jesus also stated to the Pharisees.)

It is very unlikely that "children of God" will be counted as SINNERS, as the connection to God then spawning "sinners" is the inevitable and false conclusion. All mankind were taught by Paul to also be "Gods offspring" in Acts 17:23-29 for example, so again, when we understand "all" of the parties involved in the flesh, it is quite easy to DIVIDE our fellow man from the SLAVE MAKERS and to aquit our fellow man of sin, even while actively engaging the "sinners" who have captured their minds and hearts in Truth.

enjoy!

squint

 

[holyrokker]

As has already been mentioned, our sin was placed upon Jesus. As believers, we are no longer under the penalty of our sin.

As Paul said in Romans 6:12-15 "Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, to make you obey its passions. Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness. For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.

What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!