Did the Apostle In 1 John mean A Christian cannot Sin any longer?

[matt wade]

So, you were a master machinist from day one? You knew it all, you had all the skills you have now? Did you make more errors starting out than you do now?

I have been playing guitar about 40 years. I promise you I am a much better player now than I was when I started. I made a lot of mistakes back then. I still make mistakes on occasion.

But even when you were beginning playing guitar, you didn't practice making mistakes. Yes, you made mistakes, but they weren't your intention. I think that's FAL's point, if I am reading his posts properly.

 

[convicted1]

But even when you were beginning playing guitar, you didn't practice making mistakes. Yes, you made mistakes, but they weren't your intention. I think that's FAL's point, if I am reading his posts properly.

BINGO for me. The Spirit will lead us unto all truths. We are babes in Christ after the new birth. We grow in faith and knowledge, and we will make mistakes, but we never do practice sinning any more.

 

[freeatlast]

Some define sinless perfection as reaching a point in our christian lives in which we no longer sin, either in word or deed. I think Fal gets accused of teaching this because he says that all of our sins are a choice that we can choose not to make, which is true. Romans 6 teaches that sin shall no longer have dominion, or mastery over us when we are in Christ.

I think wHere most on this board (Inlcuding me) disagree with FAL, is when it comes to the working out of this. I believe (correct me FAL If I am misrepresenting you) that FAL believes that it is theoretically and even practically possible to go some time without sinning, perhaps even a few days, if we devote our whole being to that aim. However, I still do not see exactly what he means by the "practice" of sin.

I think most of the rest of us would say that even though we now are free NOT to sin, which we were not before salvation...our old nature is still strong enough to taint everything we do. I can lead worship on Sunday morning thinking about how people view me. I can feed the poor with the motive of simply making myself feel helpful. I can still have a bad habit (is this a "practice") of responding in anger when attacked, rather than turning the other cheek, and praying for my enemies. I can still NOT love the lord my God with ALL MY HEART. I still do many things with no thought for the glory of God (and so Disobey 1 Cor. 10:31).

It seems that many, if not most of the great spiritual writers of history wrestled with their own sinfulness well after they were Christians.

But...Fal is not teaching sinless perfection, but rather a different, more optomistic view of sanctification than most of us are used to hearing.

You are correct in as far as you go. I am also saying it is possible to live above any sin at all based on what the bible teaches. I have not done it, but I certainly seek for it and do better then I did in the past as each day is a new start. However to live as if it is impossible then it will be. I do not believe we are to live our Christian life as if we are defeated before it is even finished. Sadly that is exactly how most approach the Christian walk as they live to the sayings of "no one is perfect" or "we all sin every day" " we are just human" or what ever other kind of negitive attitude we hold to keep us in defeat. The real problem is not that we cannot do it but most do not want to know we can as it piles too much light on our love for darkness.

The question has anyone ever done it (live without sin after salvation)? Yes I would say some probably have. The thief on the cross would be one in my opinion. To suggest that we cannot even make it one day without sinning is defeatism. Why would anyone want what we have as they already have it without all the conviction if we cannot even make it one day?

I would say this also. None of the things you mentioned can keep us from achieving this walk, as all they do is give an excuse as why not to seek it diligently. Some things you mentioned are very close to piling weights on the backs of men that you cannot even bear yourself. For instance to suggest that we have to be thinking about what we do is for the Lord and if not it is sin is not correct. You cannot find such a thing any place in scripture. Yes all we do in word or deed should be done for the Lord and that will become a natural event without a thought as our hearts and minds are surrendered to Him if we do not deny it is possible. Also to suggest that we cannot respond to to an attack is incorrect. The Lord did get angry and did respond with actions. If you mean we are not to hold hate or retaliate to a insult then I agree. We are commanded not to sin in the mist of anger not to keep anger totally out of our lives.Total passivity is not biblical.

I am not sure how it is in your Christian life but I can say with full peace before my Lord that since the day I was saved, pushing 30 years now, and I have talked with others who experience the same thing, there has not been a month, not a week, not a day, not an hour, not a minute I am not aware of the Lord. In fact even in the night when I am asleep I many times am aware of Him. I awake to Him and fall to sleep to Him and all day long he fills my mind in everything I do so it is possible to do all we do unto the Lord. It is just a choice in the mist of being aware of Him if we will and yes even in that I sometimes do not do His will, but it is not an everyday thing to do mine instead of His.

Another problem is when anyone tries to put the time frame of a day as being how often we all sin. That is simply false. First we do not ever have to sin, it is always a choice. Second if we can go a minute then we can go an hour and if an hour, 5 hours, and if 5 then the day. We are not even awake for 24 hours. The problem with so many is that they love grace above righteousness and we are eagerly deceiving ourselves.

By the way the things you mentioned are not habits, they are sin. We need to learn not to tone down the truth. Habits sounds like we are overcome, sin says I chose to do it with no excuse.

 

[freeatlast]

BINGO for me. The Spirit will lead us unto all truths. We are babes in Christ after the new birth. We grow in faith and knowledge, and we will make mistakes, but we never do practice sinning any more.

Mistakes are not sin. It is not a mistake if we sleep with another spouse, or lie or rob or use the ord's name in vain. All sin is a choice and from the moment of salvation we have the ability to not sin if we choose to.
1Cor 10:13
There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God [is] faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear [it].

 

[convicted1]

Mistakes are not sin. All sin is a choice and from the moment of salvation we have the ability to not sin if we choose to.
1Cor 10:13
There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God [is] faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear [it].

The word "mistakes" I was using for "sin". If we sin, we chose to do it. We are not coerced/forced to do it, btw.

 

[freeatlast]

The word "mistakes" I was using for "sin". If we sin, we chose to do it. We are not coerced/forced to do it, btw.

I understand what you were saying, but I think it is not wise to change the word. Adultery is not a mistake, it is sin. Murder is not mistake it is sin, a lie is not a mistake it is sin. All stem from thought out willful acts and all are sin. When we use the word mistake it sounds like we are not totally responsible while sin says I chose to do it against what I knew I should have done. And you are correct, all sin is a choice.

 

[convicted1]

I understand what you were saying, but I think it is not wise to change the word. Adultery is not a mistake, it is sin. Murder is not mistake it is sin, a lie is not a mistake it is sin. All stem from thought out willful acts and all are sin. When we use the word mistake it sounds like we are not totally responsible while sin says I chose to do it against what I knew I should have done. And you are correct, all sin is a choice.

You are, in deed, correct.

 

[12strings]

I do not believe we are to live our Christian life as if we are defeated before it is even finished.

I don't believe it is defeatism to say that though my sin abounds, grace abounds much more. Now it is incorrect to take that truth and say, "let's keep sinning some more, so grace abounds".

Sadly that is exactly how most approach the Christian walk as they live to the sayings of "no one is perfect" or "we all sin every day" " we are just human" or what ever other kind of negitive attitude we hold to keep us in defeat. The real problem is not that we cannot do it but most do not want to know we can as it piles too much light on our love for darkness.

You are correct that we often use the "no one is perfect excuse" to excuse our sin. However, not everyone who believes Christians still sin a lot is trying to use it this way. I think you are right that we should aim to please God, aim to not sin at all, no matter how small. We differ as to whether we will be successful in this life. I think this constant struggling with our sin might be part of what makes us long for heaven, where we will be finally "saved to sin no more."

The question has anyone ever done it (live without sin after salvation)? Yes I would say some probably have. The thief on the cross would be one in my opinion. To suggest that we cannot even make it one day without sinning is defeatism. Why would anyone want what we have as they already have it without all the conviction if we cannot even make it one day?

I am simply overwhelmed by the vast majority of Godly Christians in the present and in history who have written about their own ongoing struggles with sin. I am not aware of too many who beleived they could go a day or several days without sinning. Now, they could have all been mistaken on this issue; but it is quite a list of those who have recounted thier struggles with sin, and God's grace in forgiveness and in giving victory to say no.

I would say this also. None of the things you mentioned can keep us from achieving this walk, as all they do is give an excuse as why not to seek it diligently. Some things you mentioned are very close to piling weights on the backs of men that you cannot even bear yourself. For instance to suggest that we have to be thinking about what we do is for the Lord and if not it is sin is not correct. You cannot find such a thing any place in scripture. Yes all we do in word or deed should be done for the Lord and that will become a natural event without a thought as our hearts and minds are surrendered to Him if we do not deny it is possible. Also to suggest that we cannot respond to to an attack is incorrect. The Lord did get angry and did respond with actions. If you mean we are not to hold hate or retaliate to a insult then I agree. We are commanded not to sin in the mist of anger not to keep anger totally out of our lives.Total passivity is not biblical.

I don't think that every sinful habit (using habit to describe a sin is valid, I think, as long as it is still called a sin) that we had before salvation automatically disappears after salvation. I think you could have 2 racists alcoholics who get saved, and one immediately has victory over his desire for alcohol, while struggling for years to adjust his treatment of black people. The other could immediately be freed from his hatred and bigotry, while struggling for years to say no to strong drink. It doesn't mean that they are excused for their sins, but that God is working in them in different ways. Both could be validly saved, and yet have these 2 different experiences.

Regarding Anger, you are correct that we are not told to never be angry. However, we are told that it is a blessing to be persecuted and accused falsely for Christ's sake. We are told to turn the other cheek, and to feed and pray for our enemies, realizing that vengence is the Lords. We are told to repay evil with good, to correct our opponents with gentleness. I think we too often define righteous anger as: "I am right, and I am angry."

 

[12strings]

Some Scriptural Light:

-I Kings 8:46 - " If they sin against you—for there is no one who does not sin"

-Proverbs 20:9 - "Who can say, “I have made my heart pure; I am clean from my sin”?

-Ecclesiastes 7:20 - "20 Surely jthere is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins."

-Jesus told us to pray DAILY: "forgive us our sins." (Matt 6).

 

[freeatlast]

I don't believe it is defeatism to say that though my sin abounds, grace abounds much more. Now it is incorrect to take that truth and say, "let's keep sinning some more, so grace abounds".



You are correct that we often use the "no one is perfect excuse" to excuse our sin. However, not everyone who believes Christians still sin a lot is trying to use it this way. I think you are right that we should aim to please God, aim to not sin at all, no matter how small. We differ as to whether we will be successful in this life. I think this constant struggling with our sin might be part of what makes us long for heaven, where we will be finally "saved to sin no more."



I am simply overwhelmed by the vast majority of Godly Christians in the present and in history who have written about their own ongoing struggles with sin. I am not aware of too many who beleived they could go a day or several days without sinning. Now, they could have all been mistaken on this issue; but it is quite a list of those who have recounted thier struggles with sin, and God's grace in forgiveness and in giving victory to say no.



I don't think that every sinful habit (using habit to describe a sin is valid, I think, as long as it is still called a sin) that we had before salvation automatically disappears after salvation. I think you could have 2 racists alcoholics who get saved, and one immediately has victory over his desire for alcohol, while struggling for years to adjust his treatment of black people. The other could immediately be freed from his hatred and bigotry, while struggling for years to say no to strong drink. It doesn't mean that they are excused for their sins, but that God is working in them in different ways. Both could be validly saved, and yet have these 2 different experiences.

Regarding Anger, you are correct that we are not told to never be angry. However, we are told that it is a blessing to be persecuted and accused falsely for Christ's sake. We are told to turn the other cheek, and to feed and pray for our enemies, realizing that vengence is the Lords. We are told to repay evil with good, to correct our opponents with gentleness. I think we too often define righteous anger as: "I am right, and I am angry."

No disrespect but I sense you are holding to defeatism. While you admit we should strive for no sin you hold it is impossible or at least very impractical to be done and any such a mindset cancels any real seeking.
It is no different then when I was young and played sports. If the coach at the start of the season said to us "I know we want to win every game and become the champs, but we also know no one has ever done it so we won’t be able to either."
At that point I would have walked off the field and not played for him because I was not intending of putting in all those hours with the expectation of failure. If living above sin is possible then it is possible! It does not make any difference who or how many before us have failed.
I heard this defeatism theology for several years in my early Christian life. More then that I saw it in the lives of the church. There is little wonder why the church is inthe shape it is today.
As I began to become better read in the bible I knew the teaching was not of God. Just to make a point. While I understand your Pastor’s heart and attempt not to cause someone unnecessary burdens of guilt, I can tell you there is not a single place in scripture that teaches to not sin and then follows it with even the suggestion but no one can accomplish it. The Spirit of God only calls for living without sin and He gives every believer what they need to accomplish it, but it will never happen in the life of someone who is defeated. As to those of us who seek it and fail, one thing can be said we sought it in the mist of our failings unlike those who never seek it at all. Each can decide which camp they would be in.
Each day is a new day and we start from that new day our Christian life. Just live that one day above sin as tomorrow does not belong to you. No one has to be sinning and no believer will practice sin. The problem is not with teaching the truth but with watering it down. No coach trains their players with the idea that what they are seeking is not practical or impossible. The same should be in the church. God says, keep the commandments, but man says no one can do that. God says the saved do not practice sin, man says Christians do practice sin even if only for a season. We have a defeated church and even worse then that we have churches filled with those who are bing told they are saved when they are not because of men in the pulpits and places of teaching that deny the word of God for man’s teachings.
There is no reason for any believer to sin except personal choice out of a lack of proper love, me included. Until we start to accept the truth about what God says we will never be able to take proper responsibility for our sins through confession and turning from them leaving many to hear on that day, “I never knew you.”
My challenge is to seek diligently to make it through just one day with no sin. You will find the rewards far out weigh the pleasures of sin.

 

[freeatlast]

Some Scriptural Light:

-I Kings 8:46 - " If they sin against you—for there is no one who does not sin"

-Proverbs 20:9 - "Who can say, “I have made my heart pure; I am clean from my sin”?

-Ecclesiastes 7:20 - "20 Surely jthere is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins."

-Jesus told us to pray DAILY: "forgive us our sins." (Matt 6).

You are seeking to hang on to defeatism. The first three passages are dealing with self righteousness, and those who claim no sin ever not a believer living above sin in their daily life.

As for the last passage I will say at a minimum you have miss-read it and miss-applied it.
First the prayer was not suggesting we sin daily unless you are saying we are sinned against daily also, but we are not. Also you left out an important passage in that prayer;

And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen

If we are to believe He is going to forgive us, give us our daily needs then we also need to believe He is going to deliver us from all evil and not lead us into temptation. That passage suggests that He leads, keeping us from temptation, so we are following. We have the tools, we just have to stop living a defeated life and use them.
Again a strongly challenge you to diligently seek to live just one day above sin and learn the blessings that come with it, but you will have to stip the defeated mind-set to get it done. Unless we are following the God that can accomplish all things He calls us to we are not following as we should.

 

[JesusFan]

Some define sinless perfection as reaching a point in our christian lives in which we no longer sin, either in word or deed. I think Fal gets accused of teaching this because he says that all of our sins are a choice that we can choose not to make, which is true. Romans 6 teaches that sin shall no longer have dominion, or mastery over us when we are in Christ.

I think wHere most on this board (Inlcuding me) disagree with FAL, is when it comes to the working out of this. I believe (correct me FAL If I am misrepresenting you) that FAL believes that it is theoretically and even practically possible to go some time without sinning, perhaps even a few days, if we devote our whole being to that aim. However, I still do not see exactly what he means by the "practice" of sin.

I think most of the rest of us would say that even though we now are free NOT to sin, which we were not before salvation...our old nature is still strong enough to taint everything we do. I can lead worship on Sunday morning thinking about how people view me. I can feed the poor with the motive of simply making myself feel helpful. I can still have a bad habit (is this a "practice") of responding in anger when attacked, rather than turning the other cheek, and praying for my enemies. I can still NOT love the lord my God with ALL MY HEART. I still do many things with no thought for the glory of God (and so Disobey 1 Cor. 10:31).

It seems that many, if not most of the great spiritual writers of history wrestled with their own sinfulness well after they were Christians.

But...Fal is not teaching sinless perfection, but rather a different, more optomistic view of sanctification than most of us are used to hearing.

Could FAL be getting that theology because from his understanding, we no longer have dual natures any more, sinful/saved?

IF so, he would hvae to teach as he does, WHAT would be causing one to sin IF all that now have new nature in Christ.period?

 

[JesusFan]

You are correct in as far as you go. I am also saying it is possible to live above any sin at all based on what the bible teaches. I have not done it, but I certainly seek for it and do better then I did in the past as each day is a new start. However to live as if it is impossible then it will be. I do not believe we are to live our Christian life as if we are defeated before it is even finished. Sadly that is exactly how most approach the Christian walk as they live to the sayings of "no one is perfect" or "we all sin every day" " we are just human" or what ever other kind of negitive attitude we hold to keep us in defeat. The real problem is not that we cannot do it but most do not want to know we can as it piles too much light on our love for darkness.

The question has anyone ever done it (live without sin after salvation)? Yes I would say some probably have. The thief on the cross would be one in my opinion. To suggest that we cannot even make it one day without sinning is defeatism. Why would anyone want what we have as they already have it without all the conviction if we cannot even make it one day?

I would say this also. None of the things you mentioned can keep us from achieving this walk, as all they do is give an excuse as why not to seek it diligently. Some things you mentioned are very close to piling weights on the backs of men that you cannot even bear yourself. For instance to suggest that we have to be thinking about what we do is for the Lord and if not it is sin is not correct. You cannot find such a thing any place in scripture. Yes all we do in word or deed should be done for the Lord and that will become a natural event without a thought as our hearts and minds are surrendered to Him if we do not deny it is possible. Also to suggest that we cannot respond to to an attack is incorrect. The Lord did get angry and did respond with actions. If you mean we are not to hold hate or retaliate to a insult then I agree. We are commanded not to sin in the mist of anger not to keep anger totally out of our lives.Total passivity is not biblical.

I am not sure how it is in your Christian life but I can say with full peace before my Lord that since the day I was saved, pushing 30 years now, and I have talked with others who experience the same thing, there has not been a month, not a week, not a day, not an hour, not a minute I am not aware of the Lord. In fact even in the night when I am asleep I many times am aware of Him. I awake to Him and fall to sleep to Him and all day long he fills my mind in everything I do so it is possible to do all we do unto the Lord. It is just a choice in the mist of being aware of Him if we will and yes even in that I sometimes do not do His will, but it is not an everyday thing to do mine instead of His.

Another problem is when anyone tries to put the time frame of a day as being how often we all sin. That is simply false. First we do not ever have to sin, it is always a choice. Second if we can go a minute then we can go an hour and if an hour, 5 hours, and if 5 then the day. We are not even awake for 24 hours. The problem with so many is that they love grace above righteousness and we are eagerly deceiving ourselves.

By the way the things you mentioned are not habits, they are sin. We need to learn not to tone down the truth. Habits sounds like we are overcome, sin says I chose to do it with no excuse.

again, all Christians would hold that the Lord wants us to NOT sin, and that we can overcome sinful habits on a daily basis by keeping my old man nature dead /yielding to the HS, and practical means of prayer/bible study/fellowship etc to help stay pure...

Think my biggest disagreements would be :

Do you hold that we now have JUST 1 nature?
That relationship/fellowship same thing to a Christian?
That a Christian cannot still greatly sin still?

You seem to be following a path that either leads to sinless perfection, or else extreme lordship salvation?

 

[freeatlast]

Could FAL be getting that theology because from his understanding, we no longer have dual natures any more, sinful/saved?

IF so, he would hvae to teach as he does, WHAT would be causing one to sin IF all that now have new nature in Christ.period?

Free will and the pleasure of sin for a season.

 

[freeatlast]

again, all Christians would hold that the Lord wants us to NOT sin, and that we can overcome sinful habits on a daily basis by keeping my old man nature dead /yielding to the HS, and practical means of prayer/bible study/fellowship etc to help stay pure...

Think my biggest disagreements would be :

Do you hold that we now have JUST 1 nature?
That relationship/fellowship same thing to a Christian?
That a Christian cannot still greatly sin still?

You seem to be following a path that either leads to sinless perfection, or else extreme lordship salvation?

I am not sure what "extreme Lordship salvation is." I do hold to Lordship salvation although it has taken on bad connotations for some. As you know I do not hold to two natures. Even the idea of it is silly if we just think about it. The next time you dog starts acting like a cat let me know and I will take another look at dual natures in man.
As to relationship and fellowship they are not the same any more then repentance and faith are, but like repentance and faith they are not seperatable. You cannot have a relationship without fellowship. The fellowship may not be all one would like, but it has to be there if there is a relationship.

As to sinless perfection you still have not answered my question as to what you consider that to be.

 

[12strings]

The two natures issue is one that can explain rationaile for Lordship Salvation, in that Those like John MacArthur do not believe a Christian has 2 natures (old and new), but rather that the old nature is transformed into a new nature that does not "practice" sin. (again, there is the problem of defining what "practice" means).

However, Even John Mac accepts that Christians do sin, even though they shouldn't:

Who's right? Are the perfectionists right? Can we reach a point of sinless perfection? Are Antinomians correct in saying, "Look, you're going to sin, you can not sin, so don't make an issue out of, that's what grace is for, grace covers it, so that in the view of God it's not sin,"is that the right answer?
Well neither are correct, as you would assume. Christians do sin and it does matter. How do I know that? Because I am one, and that's how you know it as well. And because the Bible does say if we say we don't, we lie. We do sin, but it matters. That's why chapter 2 says, "I'm writing these things to you...verse 1...that you may not sin." You do sin, you should not sin.

And further, regarding how a transformed person can sin, He denies the two natures, but says mingled in my one nature is both Godly desires and sinful desires: (so to me, the 2 natures argument on both sides may be more of a way to speak about the inner struggle than two actual beings in side of us.)

When I sin, I sin and I acknowledge that sin. It does not come from the life of God in me, but it comes from in me as a fallen person. I am one person and in me is mingled the life of God in holy aspirations and righteous longings, along with sin. So it can't just refer to the flesh, the old nature, as if that's somehow divorced from me and I'm not responsible for what it does.

So MacArthur also admits that christians WILL SIN:

The correct view, finally, after wandering through that sort of useless list, the correct view is based upon the tenses in the Greek. Present tenses, all of them, referring to continuous, habitual action. The Christian does not, cannot habitually and persistently sin. He will sin sometimes. He will sin willfully. But he will not sin habitually, persistently and relentlessly.

 

[HankD]

The next time you dog starts acting like a cat let me know and I will take another look at dual natures in man.

A dog is never born again.

The new birth is why we have two natures.

The new birth brings the spiritual nature.

The controversy is whether the old (the flesh) is eradicated.

If not why then are we instructed to walk in the Spirit to avoid the works of the flesh?

Galatians 5

This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.​

The flesh remains and we are instructed to mortify the deeds of the old nature:​

Colossians 3:5 Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:
6 For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:
7 In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them.
8 But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth.
9 Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;
10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:​

Seems we could all use a little more of this kind of scriptural advice seeing the awful and accusatory interchanges going on here at the BB lately.​

HankD​

 

[Winman]

A dog is never born again.

The new birth is why we have two natures.

The new birth brings the spiritual nature.

The controversy is whether the old (the flesh) is eradicated.

If not why then are we instructed to walk in the Spirit to avoid the works of the flesh?

Galatians 5

This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.​

The flesh remains and we are instructed to mortify the deeds of the old nature:​

Colossians 3:5 Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:
6 For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience:
7 In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them.
8 But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth.
9 Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;
10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:​

Seems we could all use a little more of this kind of scriptural advice seeing the awful and accusatory interchanges going on here at the BB lately.​

HankD​

I agree with you Hank, the scriptures would not have to repeatedly tell us to "put off" sin if we have one nature.

And this is exactly HOW the Holy Spirit works in those that believe, through the Word of God. If we listen to God's Word and obey it, we will not sin.

 

[HankD]

I agree with you Hank, the scriptures would not have to repeatedly tell us to "put off" sin if we have one nature.

And this is exactly HOW the Holy Spirit works in those that believe, through the Word of God. If we listen to God's Word and obey it, we will not sin.

Agreed.

1 Peter 1

13 Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ;
14 As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance:
15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;
16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.​

HankD​

 

[Winman]

Agreed.

1 Peter 1

13 Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ;
14 As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance:
15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;
16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.​

HankD​

1 Pet 1:14 describes the unsaved or natural man. They operate according to their natural desires and lusts. They are ignorant of the ways of God and operate according to their own thinking. For example, the natural man will hate someone who hates him, it is a natural reaction, where Jesus told us to love our enemies as God loved us even when we were in enmity to him.

When a person believes God's word, he will naturally be inclined toward it.