can A Chrsitian Attain Sinless perfection before they Die?

[Mark_13]

Why is suicide a sin?

Did Christ commit suicide by "giving His life" when He could have very easily avoided death?

Do soldiers who knowing they will die if they go into a certain battle commit suicide?

If Christ truly has the key of death, and determines when a person is to die, then is suicide even capable?

I am reminded of what I read recently, that Comrade Duch, the director of Tuol Sleng prison camp, who oversaw the torture and murder of 10's of thousands of people there during Pol Pot's regime in Cambodia, subsequently became a born again Christian. So even Hitler wasn't beyond the grace of God, nor was Judas Iscariot. Both of those ended their life presumably before coming to repentance, which on one level was contrary to God's will. I imagine that Judas at least was thinking his suicide was a noble act and justified payment for his failure. Both he and Hitler (or at least Hitler) were motivated I think from a grandiose conception of themselves that did not allow them to live with their own failure. (So there's a probably a lesson there for all of us to some extent, as we all can commit other types of suicide not entailing actual death).

Interestingly, Comrade Duch actually escaped after Pol Pot's overthrow and became a Christian during those years of living in freedom and seclusion. He was only brought to trial years later. So, I don't know why Hitler just didn't shave his moustache and try to escape. I guess he thought he owed it to his troops to end his life honorably.

Is suicide always a sin - probably not.

 

[Mark_13]

So now that I think of it, a realization of the Sovereignty of God allows one to live with themselves with the knowledge that they have committed atrocities, knowing that ultimately it was God who allowed these atrocities to happen.

 

[freeatlast]

Why is suicide a sin?

Did Christ commit suicide by "giving His life" when He could have very easily avoided death?

Do soldiers who knowing they will die if they go into a certain battle commit suicide?

If Christ truly has the key of death, and determines when a person is to die, then is suicide even capable?

Your joking, right?

 

[MB]

(Gal 5:19-21) Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Can you claim you have no sin right now? How do you know that you didn't mis one in your confession? You fail to realize several things. Those who do those things you quoted from Galations are not Christians. True Christians work to keep from such sin. Yet we fail though not as much as the lost. John wrote;
1Jn 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.

What did Christ do in the verse above? Christ when sacrificed destroyed the works of the devil. The works of the Devil is getting you to sin through temptation.

1Jn 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

do you see my point? If those who are born of God do not sin then the sin we do is by the flesh because sin dwells in the flesh not the Spirit.
Paul wrote;
Rom 7:15 For that which I do, I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
Rom 7:16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
Rom 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

In the spirit of man we agree with the law and have been washed in the blood of the Lamb. We have surrendered our lives to Christ
Man is indwelled by Christ and the flesh has a will of it's own. It simply is not saved nor will it be until It's regenerated as is the spirit of man at the ressurrection or rapture.

1Jn 3:10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

Do you notice a difference between verse 8 and verse 10? You see since I was saved my attitude about sin has changed. I work to train my flesh not to sin yet it still on occasion does sin. I admit that I'm not a good trainer of my flesh there are men a lot better at it than I am. Yet still regardless of my sin I do the works of righteousness. Which before Salvation I didn't do anything that was very righteous at all. Our Spirit does not sin but, our flesh does.


MB

 

[MB]

MB. That is not correct. Desire is not sin. Coveting is sin.While all coveting requires desire not all desire is coveting.

My goodness I can't imagine why I would disagree with you but I certainly do. Desire is the "want" we have when we covet and Christ said it is sin. the dictionary defines it thus:
Covet
COVET, v.t.
1. To desire or wish for, with eagerness; to desire earnestly to obtain or possess; in a good sense.
Covet earnestly the best gifts. 1 Cor 12.
2. To desire inordinately; to desire that which it is unlawful to obtain or possess; in a bad sense.
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors house, wife or servant. Exo 20.
COVET, v.i. To have an earnest desire. 1 Tim 6.

I hope that you can understand because you certainly have a non english definition of covet.
MB

 

[freeatlast]

1Jn 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

do you see my point? If those who are born of God do not sin then the sin we do is by the flesh because sin dwells in the flesh not the Spirit.
Paul wrote;

MB

You are not giving the proper understanding to that passage and it is leading you astray. Here is how it should read;
1 John 3:9 ESV
No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God's [fn] seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God.

The passage is dealing with a practice not claiming that the sins of the flesh have no bearing on the spirit.


MB I am afraid that your current understanding is gnostic and that is exactly what the writer is condemning in 1John. One thing they held, among many was the things done in the flesh had no ability to effect the spirit and claimed they had never sinned. The spirit was good and the flesh is evil so since the things done by the flesh can cause no harm to the spirit there is no sin. That is exactly what you are doing and John warns that this is denying sin. As long as we are in the flesh our sins as real sins and they are part of the whole person. We are body sole and spirit and that cannot be separated.


Listen to what this greek scholar says about 1John 3:9

(3:9) "Is born" is a perfect participle in the Greek text, speaking of the past completed act of regeneration, namely, the impartation of the divine nature (2 Pet. 1:4) or divine life, and the present result, the fact that the person who has been made the recipient of divine life is by nature, and that permanently, a spiritually alive individual. "Commit" is poieō in the present tense which always speaks of continuous action unless the context limits it to punctiliar action, namely, the mere mention of the fact of the action, without the mentioning of details. The translation reads, "Every one who has been born out of God, with the present result that he is a born-one (of God), does not habitually do sin." "His seed" refers to the principle of divine life in the believer. It is this principle of divine life that makes it impossible for a Christian to live habitually in sin, for the divine nature causes the child of God to hate sin and love righteousness, and gives him both the desire and the power to do God's will, as Paul says, "God is the One who is constantly putting forth energy in you, giving you both the desire and power to do His good pleasure" (Phil. 2:13). Smith comments: "The reason of the impossibility of a child of God continuing in sin. The germ of the divine life has been implanted in our souls, and it grows — a gradual process and subject to occasional retardations, yet sure, attaining at length to full fruition. The believer's lapses into sin are like the mischances of the weather which hinder the seed's growth. The growth of a living seed may be checked temporarily; if there be no growth, there is no life."
"Cannot sin" is dunamai, "I am not able," and the present infinitive of hamartanō, "to sin." The infinitive in the present tense in Greek always speaks of continuous, habitual action, never the mere fact of the action, since the aorist infinitive which refers to the fact of the action, may be used at will if the writer wishes to speak of the mere fact without reference to details. The translation therefore is, "He is not able to habitually sin." The Greek text here holds no warrant for the erroneous teaching of sinless perfection.
Translation: 1John 3:9 Everyone who has been born out of God, with the present result that he is a born-one (of God), does not habitually do sin, because His seed remains in him. And he is not able to habitually sin, because out of God he has been born with the present result that he is a born-one (of God).
—Wuest's Word Studies

 

[gb93433]

Why is suicide a sin?

Self-focus with a complete disregard for the people left behind.

 

[MB]

Why is suicide a sin?

Did Christ commit suicide by "giving His life" when He could have very easily avoided death?

Do soldiers who knowing they will die if they go into a certain battle commit suicide?

If Christ truly has the key of death, and determines when a person is to die, then is suicide even capable?

Laying down ones life for his friends is a lot different than suicide. It's giving your life for the good of others. Suicide on the other hand is taking your own life because you can't face the trials of the life you are living. Most of the time suicide is seen as a way out when actually it's a sure way in to hell.
Christ died because it was required of Him to win the battle against Satan, sin, hell, and death. He layed down His life of Him self, and of Him self took it back again. Praise God.
MB

MB

 

[freeatlast]

My goodness I can't imagine why I would disagree with you but I certainly do. Desire is the "want" we have when we covet and Christ said it is sin. the dictionary defines it thus:
Covet
COVET, v.t.
1. To desire or wish for, with eagerness; to desire earnestly to obtain or possess; in a good sense.
Covet earnestly the best gifts. 1 Cor 12.
2. To desire inordinately; to desire that which it is unlawful to obtain or possess; in a bad sense.
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors house, wife or servant. Exo 20.
COVET, v.i. To have an earnest desire. 1 Tim 6.

I hope that you can understand because you certainly have a non english definition of covet.
MB

So are you saying based in this verse and how you are interpreting "desire" the Lord is sinning because this is the word for desire/lust "epithymia" in Luke and the Lord did it.
1) desire, craving, longing, desire for what is forbidden, lust

Luke 22:15 And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer

 

[Mark_13]

Can you claim you have no sin right now? How do you know that you didn't mis one in your confession? You fail to realize several things. Those who do those things you quoted from Galations are not Christians. True Christians work to keep from such sin. Yet we fail though not as much as the lost. John wrote;
1Jn 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.

What did Christ do in the verse above? Christ when sacrificed destroyed the works of the devil. The works of the Devil is getting you to sin through temptation.

1Jn 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

do you see my point? If those who are born of God do not sin then the sin we do is by the flesh because sin dwells in the flesh not the Spirit.
Paul wrote;
Rom 7:15 For that which I do, I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
Rom 7:16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
Rom 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

In the spirit of man we agree with the law and have been washed in the blood of the Lamb. We have surrendered our lives to Christ
Man is indwelled by Christ and the flesh has a will of it's own. It simply is not saved nor will it be until It's regenerated as is the spirit of man at the ressurrection or rapture.

1Jn 3:10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

Do you notice a difference between verse 8 and verse 10? You see since I was saved my attitude about sin has changed. I work to train my flesh not to sin yet it still on occasion does sin. I admit that I'm not a good trainer of my flesh there are men a lot better at it than I am. Yet still regardless of my sin I do the works of righteousness. Which before Salvation I didn't do anything that was very righteous at all. Our Spirit does not sin but, our flesh does.


MB

Those passages you've quoted I don't think have been adequately resolved by anyone. Some maintain that Paul in Romans 7:15-17 is speaking hypothetically from the perspective of a lost person. If he sinned to any appreciable degree at all (post conversion), where is the record of it in scripture? In the Old Testament, we have someone like David murdering and committing adultery, and Solomon worshiping idols and also committing adultery and the scripture records what they did. And Both David and Solomon wrote scripture as well. Where are Paul's sins? Where are Peter's sins? There is only one borderline "sin" that Peter committed after Pentecost that we are told about - hypocrisy regarding the gentiles or some such. And maybe Paul when he spoke ill of the high priest, but even that is debated whether it was a sin. Where is the supposed struggle with sin in Paul's life that he talks about hypothetically in Romans 7. So some say he's not talking about himself post conversion.

All I know is, that Christians aren't promised freedom from any repercussions at all from sin.

(1 Cor 10:1-6) For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea; and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and all ate the same spiritual food; and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ. Nevertheless, with most of them God was not well-pleased; for they were laid low in the wilderness. Now these things happened as examples for us, so that we would not crave evil things as they also craved.

And then in the messages to the Seven Churches in Revelation you have Christ saying he will cast onto a bed of suffering all those in the Church who do not repent of sexual immorality and so forth. Now just suppose the Rapture was occurring when they were engaged in this.

(Rev 3:4) 'But you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their garments; and they will walk with Me in white, for they are worthy.

 

[Mark_13]

OK, I have to mention this regarding Paul:

(1 Cor 9:27) but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.

So Paul said this right before the passage in Corinthians I alluded to above, in which it talks about Christians being laid low for craving evil things. So Paul himself says even he could be disqualified - disqualified for what??? Salvation - no. But rather disqualified for the rapture.

And this I think would also explain why the Second Coming/Rapture never occurred in Paul's day, even though he and every other epistle writer were constantly implying it was just around the corner. The church of that day never achieved the level of purity that Christ required, so it never happened.

 

[freeatlast]

Those passages you've quoted I don't think have been adequately resolved by anyone. Some maintain that Paul in Romans 7:15-17 is speaking hypothetically from the perspective of a lost person. If he sinned to any appreciable degree at all (post conversion), where is the record of it in scripture? In the Old Testament, we have someone like David murdering and committing adultery, and Solomon worshiping idols and also committing adultery and the scripture records what they did. And Both David and Solomon wrote scripture as well. Where are Paul's sins? Where are Peter's sins? There is only one borderline "sin" that Peter committed after Pentecost that we are told about - hypocrisy regarding the gentiles or some such. And maybe Paul when he spoke ill of the high priest, but even that is debated whether it was a sin. Where is the supposed struggle with sin in Paul's life that he talks about hypothetically in Romans 7. So some say he's not talking about himself post conversion.

All I know is, that Christians aren't promised freedom from any repercussions at all from sin.

(1 Cor 10:1-6) For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea; and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and all ate the same spiritual food; and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ. Nevertheless, with most of them God was not well-pleased; for they were laid low in the wilderness. Now these things happened as examples for us, so that we would not crave evil things as they also craved.

And then in the messages to the Seven Churches in Revelation you have Christ saying he will cast onto a bed of suffering all those in the Church who do not repent of sexual immorality and so forth. Now just suppose the Rapture was occurring when they were engaged in this.

(Rev 3:4) 'But you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their garments; and they will walk with Me in white, for they are worthy.

Yes the passage in 1John I gave have been resolved.

 

[freeatlast]

OK, I have to mention this regarding Paul:

(1 Cor 9:27) but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.

So Paul said this right before the passage in Corinthians I alluded to above, in which it talks about Christians being laid low for craving evil things. So Paul himself says even he could be disqualified - disqualified for what??? Salvation - no. But rather disqualified for the rapture.

And this I think would also explain why the Second Coming/Rapture never occurred in Paul's day, even though he and every other epistle writer were constantly implying it was just around the corner. The church of that day never achieved the level of purity that Christ required, so it never happened.

No Christian can be disqualified for the rapture. Paul is speaking about preaching and teaching.

 

[Baptist Believer]

is that state able to be reached by us or not?

Coming at this a bit sideways, but I don't think "sinless perfection" is what we should be focused on.

Yes, Jesus states clearly that we should "be perfect" just as our Heavenly Father is perfect (Matthew 5:48), but I understand that in terms of moral and spiritual completeness, not Greek philosophical concepts of perfection. We are called to be morally and spiritually pure (which is not that distinct from the concept of "sinless perfection"), but that is something that God does within us, with our cooperation and activity, as we pursue living in the power and authority of the Spirit and extending the Kingdom of God.

The more we focus on self-improvement programs where we try to attack the problem of persistent sin in our lives by direct effort, the more we will fail. Traditional Christian spiritual disciplines, a means of intentionally opening ourselves up for God's grace to work in our lives, allows God to gradually change our attitude toward sin and take away the power of temptation so that we can choose the good as a natural course of life as a redeemed person.

However, these disciplines must take place within the context of the power of the Spirit and the focus on living in, and extending the reach of, the Kingdom of God here in this life. We learn to do this first by reading the example and teachings of Jesus in the gospels, seeing how the infant church did things in the Acts of the Apostles, and then reading Paul's writings in the context of the teachings of Jesus -- for Paul was a disciple of Jesus, not the other way around as so many modern Christians seem to want to try to interpret Jesus using a method of interpretation based on an out-of-context prioritization of Paul's writings.

So back to the original question... I believe that since the sin issue was taken care of by Jesus through His incarnation, life, death, resurrection and ascension, it is not God's top priority. Since God has to do the work of grace and has promised to complete it, we can be sure it will happen before or at the time He makes all things new. However, I believe we can make enormous progress toward moral and spiritual completeness according to the will of God and our willingness to cooperate with the grace of God.

I believe God's top priority for us is to learn how to live in the Kingdom of God for that is what we are going to be doing for eternity.

 

[MB]

Those passages you've quoted I don't think have been adequately resolved by anyone.

What's the matter can you read what it says?

Some maintain that Paul in Romans 7:15-17 is speaking hypothetically from the perspective of a lost person. If he sinned to any appreciable degree at all (post conversion), where is the record of it in scripture?

You asked for it here it is.
2Co 12:6 For though I would desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will say the truth: but now I forbear, lest any man should think of me above that which he seeth me to be, or that he heareth of me.
2Co 12:7 And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.

A messenger from Satan is nothing but sin.

In the Old Testament, we have someone like David murdering and committing adultery, and Solomon worshiping idols and also committing adultery and the scripture records what they did. And Both David and Solomon wrote scripture as well. Where are Paul's sins? Where are Peter's sins? There is only one borderline "sin" that Peter committed after Pentecost that we are told about - hypocrisy regarding the gentiles or some such. And maybe Paul when he spoke ill of the high priest, but even that is debated whether it was a sin. Where is the supposed struggle with sin in Paul's life that he talks about hypothetically in Romans 7. So some say he's not talking about himself post conversion.

I couldn't care less what your people say in fact it sounds a little SDA to me. Are you SDA?

All I know is, that Christians aren't promised freedom from any repercussions at all from sin.

So you believe men can be saved and loose that salvation. Ellen White thought the same things.

(1 Cor 10:1-6) For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea; and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and all ate the same spiritual food; and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ. Nevertheless, with most of them God was not well-pleased; for they were laid low in the wilderness. Now these things happened as examples for us, so that we would not crave evil things as they also craved.

And then in the messages to the Seven Churches in Revelation you have Christ saying he will cast onto a bed of suffering all those in the Church who do not repent of sexual immorality and so forth. Now just suppose the Rapture was occurring when they were engaged in this.

(Rev 3:4) 'But you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their garments; and they will walk with Me in white, for they are worthy.

Yep SDA.
MB

 

[Mark_13]

Yes the passage in 1John I gave have been resolved.

No, I don't believe it has. The translators cannot even agree on the proper verb tense there.

The NASB itself gives an entirely different spin on it that actually is more consistent with your interpretation:

(1 John 3:9) No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

But the translation you provided did not add "practice" in there, nor do several others, so there is quite evidently not consensus.

But regardless, were the Churches that Christ addresses in Revelation sinning or practicing sin, when he warned them he would cast them on a bed of suffering for their sexual immorality, or were they not born of God.

No offense, I just didn't find your particular spin on I John 3:9 particularly compelling - adequate I suppose as far as it goes, but hardly conclusive.

 

[Mark_13]

What's the matter can you read what it says?

Yep SDA.
MB

Nope Baptist.

You need to read more carefully. I never talked about anyone losing their salvation. I talked about missing out on the Rapture. I don't know anyone other than me saying that. If the SDA's are, that's one thing maybe they got right.

I think everyone including you should be careful about rashly denouncing something that may be the truth and from God.

 

[Mark_13]

MB - your interpretation of I John was OK, maybe that's what its saying, I don't know. I have my own agenda, i.e. the contention that if you sin enough you could miss the Rapture, and as blunt as that sounds I think its true. Denounce it at your own peril, imo.

 

[MB]

Nope Baptist.

You need to read more carefully. I never talked about anyone losing their salvation. I talked about missing out on the Rapture. I don't know anyone other than me saying that. If the SDA's are, that's one thing maybe they got right.

Yet if we miss the rapture we are lost. there isn't one Gentile saved out of the tribulation. It's for the Jews alone.

I think everyone including you should be careful about rashly denouncing something that may be the truth and from God.

I've been studying scripture all most all of my life and there is nothing new under the sun. It seems you have what is known as a priviate interpretation of the scriptures. Were you appointed to give us this new revelation you have discoverd?. Do you see your self as a John or another Paul perhaps. The only people who believe your view as told by you I know of is the Paul Crouch gang.
What is truth is written in scripture. The saved going through the tribulation is not.
MB

 

[agedman]

So now that I think of it, a realization of the Sovereignty of God allows one to live with themselves with the knowledge that they have committed atrocities, knowing that ultimately it was God who allowed these atrocities to happen.

If God had not called the invasion of Israel by Nebuchadnezzar the will of God, then you might have a case to rebuke what you don't agree with.

If God had not sent the Israeli army to kill every man, woman, child, goat, ox, cow, dog and cat then you might have a case to rebuke what you don't agree with.

But, because God does perform as He desires and plans and doesn't include nor need your view, then your rebuke is like slapping the rain in a thunder shower.