Featured He Who Covers Sin Shall Not Prosper

I think that there are two issues here.

You are absolutely correct that in the New Covenant only born-again believers exist in any true sense. Even as we try to root out sin from our behavior (and the behavior of our church) there will always be tares among the wheat. We are faced with this as a fact (do not pull the tares because we may be pulling wheat kinda thing). I think that some will be shocked to hear the words "I never knew you". That is a sad and terrifying thing.

The other issue is sin in our own lives. People tend to like to point out the sins of others without examining themselves. They look for the splinter in the eye of the brother while ignoring the log in their own eye.

I gave an example where a man made false accusations against me. I think he probably just made a mistake and misunderstood, but that does not matter. I focused on his accusations and insulted him. What I should have done (and did later) was look at the "log" in my own eye, address my own sin before pointing to the sin in this man. That was pride in my own heart that expressed itself in self-justification. I did not want to be wronged and I wanted people to know exactly why that man's accusations were false. What I should have done was simply comment that he had made a mistake and ignored any continued false accusations.

My own actions ended up as an act to cover up my sin (my sin of unforgivness, of pride, of insulting the man) by pointing to his sin of making false accusations about me.

Some times our attempt to "root out" sin in other people are just that - an attempt not to deal with the sins in our own lives.

If someone makes enough noise perhaps others will not see their sin. But the problem is that the more noise they make the more obvious their sin becomes.

 

I learned this from experience.

God used an instance where I responded to a person making false accusations about me with hatred. I do not even remember what the initial conflict concerned, only that the man assumed a meaning that was wrong and made false claims. This was probably just a misunderstanding (I do not always articulate myself clearly.....some would say I rarely do ).

But instead of letting it go I responded by insulting him, and of course he responded by insulting me. In the end we were both guilty - he of false accusations and me of responding in hatred. And this did keep things stirred up.

I've apologized already, have forgiven him, and have been forgiven. So these types of things can have a good ending (God used the strife to open my eyes to my own sinfulness in the engagement).

 

Which is why it is most needed.

God has created in me this concern. I am convinced that biblical illiteracy is problem facing contemporary Christianity. Peoe think of truth as subjective (what ir means to me, my truth, ect.). But truth is truth. Truth is not dependent on our understanding of it.

So Christians need to learn how to study the Bible. For this I recommend Grasping God's Word. It will walk you through a system of interpretation and application.

Keep in mind that a fool despises correction while a wise man welcomes it. Take the observations of others for what they are. If you believe they do not apply then thank the person and ignore the observation. But don't attack people for offering help.

 

Reading this thread that is my concern here. I have to admit that it is difficult to view the response of the OP as anything but a sin. That said, I do believe that Christians can commit a sin.

The reason I believe that Christians can sin is that both Peter, John and Paul state such as a fact and urge Christians to repent from their sin as well as insure them that they have a mediator in Christ when they do sin.

Perhaps there is a distinction between committing a sin and being marked by sin? I don't know. How do you interpret 1 John 2:1?

1 John 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous;

 

I agree. Christians may stumble but we are not mastered by sin. That is, IMHO, the difference.

I gave an example earlier of a man making false accusations, slanderous claims, and insults against me. I responded by attacking him. Both he and I were guilty. But I was convicted and repented, apologized for my actions, forgave and was forgiven. Since that time I have endeavored to reach this man (he professes to be a Christian). But thus far he remains in sin.

I was wrong. God disciplined me, convicted me, and I repented. I no longer engage in that sin.

As a Christian I believe we are to wear out that path to the throne - not confessing a life of sin as we are not to sin but repenting of those times we do.

 

Tim Keller often compares sin to addiction as sin leads to sin. I think another example, smoking cigarettes, is a good example but I want to be very clear that I am not saying that smoking is a sin (that is for you to decide for yourself).

When I was young I smoked. I did not want to smoke. I wanted to quit smoking. It was difficult, but I had to stop. I stopped. I tried to smoke a cigarette about a year after I had quit. That was decades ago. When I walk by someone who has been smoking I can smell the smoke on him. It stinks. The thought of smoking is sickening to me.

I think this like sin. At one time I was a sinner. But now I am marked by Christ, mastered by the Spirit and not sin. I may sin, but that sin will have a "stink" to it. I will be convicted of that sin and repent, not to return to that sin.

There are others who claim to not smoke but the cigarette in their mouth betrays the lie. Christians demonstrate a Christ-likeness. We do not know if God is working in the lives of those who are disobedient, but we are to treat them according to their disobedience when their actions are in conflict to their profession.

 

Very good point.

This is why I mentioned previously (I can't remember where) that we need to stress biblical literacy. Too many times people pick through Scripture to validate what they already want to say, and in so doing they risk severely taking that passage out of context. I think that this most often occurs with people mishandling the Old Testament (I'm not sure why, but I suspect it is because they apply it to a contemporary setting).

So many do not realize that under the OT Law all sins were not merely forgiven or covered. Sins of the individual were forgiven Israel (as a whole) when that sin was dealt with (the one who willfully sinned was, in most cases, killed). The priest made atonement for the person who sinned unintentionally, that he may be forgiven. But not for intentional sins. That person was cut off from the people because that person despised the word of the Lord and has broken His commandment, therefore he remains in his guilt.

This carried forward to the New Testament. In Acts this was the reason Peter gave to the Jews that they could be forgiven (they acted out of ignorance).

The reason for the misunderstanding, IMHO, is that people take verses to justify their own behavior and beliefs rather than allowing Scripture to dictate their understanding.

I recommend to anyone here to consider Grasping God's Word by Duvall and Hays. I think that would help the OP greatly. We need to learn how to read Scripture rather than extracting Scripture to "support" what we want to say.