Judging by your extremely sparse response, it would appear that I've got your number.I am sorry, I don't know Jan Hus. Never heard of him.
You are all stumbling over my strong objection and failing to address the questions effectively.
I couldn't care less about the term "sinless perfection", it is unscriptural anyway. I don't know who coined the term but it would have been better if he tied a millstone around his neck and jumped off the deck into the deep blue sea.
I am tired of the false accusations. I am tired of being told I am a sinner unless I keep sinning [because that's what you're all saying without realising it]. I am tired of being told that I have to sin because I am living in this body. Jesus and his apostles never told me this. Why do I have to sin just to satisfy you?
I tell you I won't do it. Jesus has set me free from all that and put the Spirit of my Father in me to obey him. I do not lie, I do not steal, I do not covet, I do not lust, and I don't want to; but, according to you, I have to [I think not!]
Sinlessness is not about perfection, its about maturity.
I have been and am a dad. I've changed pooey nappies in my day, and its offensive. You do it because you're dad and you love, but it doesn't mean you enjoy it. I have a son who is 38 and one who is 22, I would be extremely unhappy if I was still changing diapers today. My boys are brilliant and they have grown up and I'm happy about that.
Some here have served Jesus that long but they still want their heavenly Father to forgive their soiled nappies and wash their dirty backsides [1 John 1 vs 9 misapplied].
Why don't you grow up church?
I am always dependent on Jesus Christ. There is no salvation without him. I don't have to sin to prove it. I wouldn't even be alive having this discussion with you today if it weren't for him.
I don't know what TV evangelists I am supposed to be mimicking, I don't watch them.
I am 59 years old and have served Jesus for more than 50 of those years.
I'm sorry, I am not as educated as all of you, I barely made school leavers certificate. I was more interested in loving and serving Jesus than an education that served other gods, but this means that I am nothing in your eyes.
I don't mind this but I know that I can honestly say that I would die for each and every one of you. Jesus taught me this. I would do this even though I know my death would never be vicarious and, to you, a waste of time, but it is my prayer that God would forgive you through Jesus, as he did me, and give you everlasting life.
If this is pride, I am guilty. If this is sin, I am guilty. And I will gladly pay the price if my Father will show the real Jesus to you. Believe in the true power of his cross, my friend, it really is salvation.
Not all of us.You all continually claim that we will continue to sin until we leave this body.
Once again you are incorrect, 1 John 1:8 does not state this.
No one can say that they have no sin because we have all sinned. John is not saying that sin continues to abide in us. This chapter is his gospel message and he clarifies his meaning in this statement with another in 1 John 1:10, then he opens with the statement that he wrote these things so that we sin not and continues to emphasise the same argument Paul puts forward in Romans 6, whoever is born of God cannot sin. Why? Because sin does not abide in them.
Absolute bunk. Where do you get this stuff? I can think of a single verse that flatly up-ends this nonsense. Oh, my head hurts....there are minor infractions or hidden faults that do not lead to spiritual death.
Or, perhaps, you err in your interpretation.This is where I think you err in your interpretation. John 1:8 says "if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." Well, it's pretty clear to me that he is saying sin is still in us. And he also includes himself by saying "we." It means he has the very same experience as is common among Christians. Since he says later "the one born of God cannot sin..." we must conclude that the term "sin" in these two statements have a different contextual meaning, or else he is contradicting himself.
Absolute bunk. Where do you get this stuff? I can think of a single verse that flatly up-ends this nonsense. Oh, my head hurts.
Once again you are incorrect, 1 John 1:8 does not state this.
No one can say that they have no sin because we have all sinned. John is not saying that sin continues to abide in us. This chapter is his gospel message and he clarifies his meaning in this statement with another in 1 John 1:10, then he opens with the statement that he wrote these things so that we sin not and continues to emphasise the same argument Paul puts forward in Romans 6, whoever is born of God cannot sin. Why? Because sin does not abide in them.
You are all stumbling over my strong objection and failing to address the questions effectively.
I couldn't care less about the term "sinless perfection", it is unscriptural anyway. I don't know who coined the term but it would have been better if he tied a millstone around his neck and jumped off the deck into the deep blue sea.
I am tired of the false accusations. I am tired of being told I am a sinner unless I keep sinning [because that's what you're all saying without realising it]. I am tired of being told that I have to sin because I am living in this body. Jesus and his apostles never told me this. Why do I have to sin just to satisfy you?
I tell you I won't do it. Jesus has set me free from all that and put the Spirit of my Father in me to obey him. I do not lie, I do not steal, I do not covet, I do not lust, and I don't want to; but, according to you, I have to [I think not!]
Sinlessness is not about perfection, its about maturity.
I have been and am a dad. I've changed pooey nappies in my day, and its offensive. You do it because you're dad and you love, but it doesn't mean you enjoy it. I have a son who is 38 and one who is 22, I would be extremely unhappy if I was still changing diapers today. My boys are brilliant and they have grown up and I'm happy about that.
Some here have served Jesus that long but they still want their heavenly Father to forgive their soiled nappies and wash their dirty backsides [1 John 1 vs 9 misapplied].
Why don't you grow up church?
I am always dependent on Jesus Christ. There is no salvation without him. I don't have to sin to prove it. I wouldn't even be alive having this discussion with you today if it weren't for him.
I don't know what TV evangelists I am supposed to be mimicking, I don't watch them.
I am 59 years old and have served Jesus for more than 50 of those years.
I'm sorry, I am not as educated as all of you, I barely made school leavers certificate. I was more interested in loving and serving Jesus than an education that served other gods, but this means that I am nothing in your eyes.
I don't mind this but I know that I can honestly say that I would die for each and every one of you. Jesus taught me this. I would do this even though I know my death would never be vicarious and, to you, a waste of time, but it is my prayer that God would forgive you through Jesus, as he did me, and give you everlasting life.
If this is pride, I am guilty. If this is sin, I am guilty. And I will gladly pay the price if my Father will show the real Jesus to you. Believe in the true power of his cross, my friend, it really is salvation.
I believe that the doctrine of entire sanctification / perfect love / Christian perfection is not the same thing as a doctrine of sinlessness.I have a few questions for those who believe that one cannot be sinless in this life.
I take the view that Romans 7 is about what happens when a Christian puts themselves under law again. But who will save from this body of death? Thanks be to Jesus Christ, our Lord.1. Romans 7 vs 7 to 23 is interpreted as being post salvation. If this is true...
Why is Paul, who claims to live by faith and not by the law since coming to Christ still struggling with the law?
Many would say that John is referring to a 'habit' or 'lifestyle' of sin, not to never sinning again. That certainly makes sense given the context. John Wesley would make a differentiation between willful sin and mistakes. It's a helpful distinction.2. 1 John 1 is often interpreted as proof that those who say they have achieved sinlessness in this life are liars, Yet in John 2 vs 1 he says he wrote it so that we may stop sinning. Does this not show that you have misinterpreted his intention in chapter 1?
It would be amazing and I would want that. But I haven't come across such a one.3. If you came across such a one as has not sinned since salvation, why would this bother you? Is it not a good thing?
I think, though, that 'sinless' is not the right phrase. Perfection is something that keeps going (we are constantly being perfected) and yet has defined moments where a certain level of perfection is received. I agree that the perfecting of a Christian is all an act of Christ's grace, but I don't think 'sinlessness' is helpful nor true.4. Do you not know that to become sinless is a gift of grace? It is all of Christ and not of man. Are you not aware that no one can be sinless without Christ?
I do think this is incorrect.I must conclude from reading the Scriptures that the claim one will never cease from sinning while in the body is heresy and not the doctrine of Christ or his apostles.
I believe that the doctrine of entire sanctification / perfect love / Christian perfection is not the same thing as a doctrine of sinlessness.
I take the view that Romans 7 is about what happens when a Christian puts themselves under law again. But who will save from this body of death? Thanks be to Jesus Christ, our Lord.
So in that case, I think it may refer to Paul's experience when he would put himself under law - then sin would return. And so the warning there is not to live in the Law but live in the Spirit, which is what Romans 8 then starts talking about.
Many would say that John is referring to a 'habit' or 'lifestyle' of sin, not to never sinning again. That certainly makes sense given the context. John Wesley would make a differentiation between willful sin and mistakes. It's a helpful distinction.
It would be amazing and I would want that. But I haven't come across such a one.
I think, though, that 'sinless' is not the right phrase. Perfection is something that keeps going (we are constantly being perfected) and yet has defined moments where a certain level of perfection is received. I agree that the perfecting of a Christian is all an act of Christ's grace, but I don't think 'sinlessness' is helpful nor true.
I do think this is incorrect.
However, to make the claim that we are not perfected or cannot live entirely sanctified is also incorrect.
The meaning of sanctification is to be 'set apart' for Christ's purposes. But like faith, this is an ongoing, living thing. It needs to be a constant state, not achieved one day. However, there may be a 'one day' or several 'one days' when a person reaches a certain level of perfection in Christ and never goes back. I think that's a healthy doctrine of Christian perfection, and much more truer to the original proponents of the doctrine.
Many would say that John is referring to a 'habit' or 'lifestyle' of sin, not to never sinning again. That certainly makes sense given the context. John Wesley would make a differentiation between willful sin and mistakes. It's a helpful distinction.
I believe that the doctrine of entire sanctification / perfect love / Christian perfection is not the same thing as a doctrine of sinlessness.
It would be amazing and I would want that. But I haven't come across such a one.
Thank you for providing such a detailed and lengthy commentary. Sometimes at forums like this we put a lot of work into our posts, and the person replies with, "meh". So thanks for all the effort, appreciate it.I disagree, friend. I believe in Romans 7:14-24, Paul is talking from his perspective as a Pharisee before he became a Christian. The Pharisees believed in the false religion of turning God's plan of salvation into a system of works (with very little emphasis on God's grace - See: Luke 18:9-14). I believe Romans 8:2 says there is a "New Covenant Law" that makes us free from the "Old Covenant Law." This New Covenant Law is the "Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus." It is defined for us in Romans 8:1 and Romans 8:3-4.
Romans 8:1 says there is no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Certain Modern Translations wrongfully remove the words that say: "walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." But these words are repeated in Romans 8:13 using different wording. Anyways, Romans 8:2 says that there is a "law of sin and death." (i.e. the 613 laws of the "Law of Moses"). Keeping the NT Law called: "The Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus" makes one free from the Old Law called "the law of sin and death." (i.e. the Law of Moses or the Torah given to Israel). Romans 7:6 says we are to SERVE in newness of Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter. The oldness of the letter is the Torah (i.e. the five books of Moses, and or the whole of the OT Scriptures). The newness of spirit that we are to serve in are the commands within the New Testament Scriptures. These commands are from the Lord Jesus Himself, and from His followers. Hebrews 7:12 says the Law has changed. So there is still law under the New Covenant. In fact, believing in Jesus is a commandment or law (See 1 John 3:23). Repentance is also a commandment or law under the New Covenant (Acts of the Apostles 17:30) (Note: I believe repentance is seeking forgiveness with the Lord Jesus by way of prayer, and that the "fruits of repentance" is forsaking sin and living holy). Anyways, the Bible tells us to live holy for the Lord. For we are still told, "Be ye holy, as I am holy" by God in the New Covenant (1 Peter 1:16). For God's grace teaches us to deny ungodliness, and that we should live righteously and godly in this present world (Titus 2:11-12). For we are told to cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh, perfecting holiness in the fear of God (2 Corinthians 7:1). For we are told to work out our salvation with fear and trembling (Philippians 2:12).
These are good points, but I'll address my views in a summary form below, in reply to your follow-up post.While is true that John says we have an advocate if we do sin, John is not saying that we will always sin the rest of our lives whereby we would need an advocate. If such were the case, then "sin not" would not make any sense.
If I tell a person to "jump not" that does not mean I am telling them to not habitually make a lifestyle of jumping and yet it is okay if they sometimes jump. It simply means I am telling them to no longer jump anymore.
Also, if John is talking exclusively about not living in a habitual lifestyle of sin (Which he is not), then why does he say the following words in 1 John 3:15?
For 1 John 3:15 says,
"Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."
If we are to be consistent with John speaking in his epistle about not "making sin a lifestyle choice only and not refraining from sinning ever again," then that means we can sometimes murder on occasion and it will be okay with God.
But we know that such a thing is not okay. For it only took one sin to separate Adam and Eve from God spiritually. Furthermore,
#1. Numbers 35:16-18 says it only takes on act of murder to be a murderer; And Leviticus 20:10 says it only takes on act of adultery to be an adulterer.
#2. Jesus Himself regarded just looking at woman once as an act of adultery (Matthew 5:28).
#3. John says, "NO murderer has eternal life abiding in them." (1 John 3:15).
#4. Proverbs 6:32 says "Whosoever commits adultery with a woman lacks understanding: he that does it destroys his own soul."
One sin.
That is all it takes for a person to destroy their own soul, unless of course they repent (seek forgiveness with the Lord Jesus Christ), and they put away such a sin out of their lives.
I will read the link.While I do not want to talk great length about Sinless Perfectionism in this section of the forums (because it is not allowed), I will say briefly that my view of Sinless Perfectionism is different, as well. I do not believe it is exclusively taking about putting away grievous sin (like lying, lusting, hating, etc.), but is also focused on putting away minor transgressions or faults of character that do not lead to spiritual death (like not taking out the trash on time, or going over the speed limit a little, etc.). In short, Sinless Perfectionism is not a salvation issue. But a believer does need to put away grievous sin that does lead to spiritual death in order to maintain a right standing with their Lord (i.e. salvation). Believers should be meeting the bare minimum level requirements for living holy as a part of the Sanctification process. They shouldn't be justifying any kind of grievous sin of any kind.
To learn more about my view of Sinless Perfectionism, you can check out my thread on it here:
The Scriptures Teaching on Sinless Perfection.
Yes, we live by faith in God's word, but we must always make sure not to put our words (our interpretation of matters) into God's mouth (his Word). Very often, we do just that, and then when we don't experience it we think God's Word is faulty when, in fact, we just presumed and assumed what it was saying.Well, we are living in the last days. Many have a form of godliness but they deny the power thereof. They are lovers of pleasures more than they are lovers of God (See 2 Timothy 3:1-9). This is a test of our faith. Do we walk by sight? Or do we walk by faith in God's Word?
These are good points, but I'll address my views in a summary form below, in reply to your follow-up post.
I will read the link.
I agree with this "putting away" concept but it betrays the view of sinless perfectionism, simply because it implies that we are always "putting away".
If we are always "putting away" then we never quite arrive at a state of sinless perfectionism, and if that's the case, well then we are quite agreed. There is certainly a case to be made for the "putting away", but a lot of "putting away" of the minor transgressions only happens once you're aware of them. For example, not taking out the trash on time. Well, what I might view as "on time" and my wife as "on time" are two different things. To honour and love her, I might very well take it out on her "on time" but knowing when that is might take a bit of time. In other words, it's not always clear how to love someone and often we miscalculate and sin against someone through quite an innocent mistake. So the constant learning of loving better is surely a lifelong process - and the "putting away" of sins is surely also a lifelong learning. The point is having a heart that wants to put away such things, and that's what I think the original doctrine of entire sanctification was getting at.
Yes, we live by faith in God's word, but we must always make sure not to put our words (our interpretation of matters) into God's mouth (his Word). Very often, we do just that, and then when we don't experience it we think God's Word is faulty when, in fact, we just presumed and assumed what it was saying.
I believe we've been living in the last days since the time of the apostles, so our eschatological frameworks may differ. However, I agree many have a form of godliness and deny its power. Having said that, a test of faith comes in battling with sin as well. Do you believe that if you do sin, if you even fall into some sort of addiction, that you are still saved by the blood of the Lamb if you continue to put your trust in Him? That is also a test of faith in God and His Word.
I'm digressing, though. But I think the fact that I have never met someone who really was sinlessly perfect means I have to be careful to make assumptions as to the Bible's meaning. Surely, at some stage, God would actually prove His word true, somewhere, somehow?
Unless you've met someone who was sinlessly perfect? If so, that's amazing, and I am genuinely curious about that.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?