Can a Christian sin?

[DHK]

I have asked before and as I recall have never received a satisfactory answer. How many sins does a person have to commit in order that it can rightfully be said of them that they are a habitual sinner and as such cannot be a believer? How often must they commit the same old sins for it to be said that they are a habitual sinner?

10, maybe 10 and 3/4. But if you reach 11...Do no pass go, do not go near purgatory; go straight to Hell.
You did ask, didn't you?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Can a Christian sin? Can anyone but a Christian, sin? Because sin to nobody but a Christian is a reality. There is no Christian who is a Christian but because he is a sinner! Jesus saves sinners, and none, but sinners.

 

[steaver]

HP: How does this prove that thoughts are sin? I know full well that when they proceed out of the heart with formed intents to commit the things mentioned here they are, but that was not your point. You need to distinguish between thoughts that may in fact be mere temptation and thoughts that have grown into sin.

So I can hate someone in my heart (which they cannot see) but as long as I am nice to their face I have not sinned before God?

I can run the act of slaying them to death in my heart and mind but as long as I do not do it I have not sinned before God?

Looking upon a woman to lust in my heart and thoughts is not sin before God as long as I do not physically carry it out, as long as I keep it in fantasy only?

 

[steaver]

The issue of fornication, adultery, etc are also on the list. Jesus said that to marry one that has been put away is paramount to adultery. If one continues to cohabitate with one that Jesus said was adultery to enter into a relationship with, would that be a habitual sin? If not why not?

This is a great question!

Do you think it is HP?

 

[steaver]

Not visiting the sick, will bring forth chastisement. It is not breaking the Law, as far as I understand, but yet is sin.

Do you think, not visiting the sick, is sin?


BBob,

If it is not breaking the law, then it is not sin.

All unrighteousness is sin and sin is the transgression of the law. I must know what law is being violated by not visiting the sick before I can call it sin.

So what law do you see being violated? If none, then according to scripture it is not sin.

I see the law of not loving God with all of your heart, soul and mind being violated if we do not do what Jesus told us to do.

Therefore I conclude that not visiting the sick is breaking the law and thus it is sin.

Now, what I have been looking for from you is a scripture that discribes a sin and says that this sin is not unto death. Do you have any??

 

[Goldie]

That "sin unto death" that was previously mentioned here is unbelief - otherwise known as "blaspheming the Holy Spirit". How does one blaspheme the Holy Spirit? By rejecting Him. Unbelievers do not have the Holy Spirit because they aren't born-again - they have rejected Him, and if they die without him, they will go straight to hell.

 

[Goldie]

Do you think, not visiting the sick, is sin?

The above is works - good works. No amount of good works will get you into heaven. You can also pray for the sick or email them or write them letters. I'd say if you do visit the sick, you would do really good in preaching the Gospel to them - that way you'd be saving their souls, and that's the best thing you can do for anyone.

I think for a person to stop sinning you'd have to lock him or her up, tape their mouths shut and sedate them - permanently. So we might as well all be dead then, eh? One day we'll be really surprised to see who all is in heaven....... "Oh look there's John the Baptist, and he questioned the Messiah! Wow! And look there's David the adulterer and murderer! What's he doing here????" I really think people should stop trying to be self-righteous and concentrate more on being sinners saved by Grace. Not do - it's already been done, and have the motive of pleasing God in their good works, not doing good works for all and sundry to see and say, "So and so is a really good person, say what?" And increase your level of pride. :flower:

We still carry the sin nature - like it or not (but preferably like it not). :thumbs:

People really need to mature in Christ and take note when he was talking to unbelievers, compared to believers in the Bible. We must rightfully divide the Word of truth, and be secure in Him - yes, we'll fall, but that's why we have the Helper and the Comforter - we are not alone, yes, we aren't perfect, but He guides us, He is our friend.

Anyone saying that a believer hasn't got eternal security and that he becomes unsaved each time he commits a sin, don't know what they're talking about, because today alone (according to them) I became unsaved about 10 times (I call it yo-yo salvation) and the day isn't finished yet, and I'm not glorying in my shame either, I'm just stating a fact - human being sin, whether they're saved or unsaved, although I must admit some do it more than others. :tongue3: :tongue3: But as Christians mature, they're less prone to committing certain sins.

 

[Brother Bob]

But we are not told if she sinned no more. Perhaps she did. She was given salvation, but no guarantee that she didn't sin again.

Go and sin no more, seems to be a commandment from the mouth of the Lord. I guess you are saying we don't have to keep a direct commandment that is to you individual either. Do we just have to be a "part time Christian" to be saved?? I take it we have to be a habitual sinner to finally be condemned, but we do not have to be a habitual Christian to be saved.

BBob,

 

[Goldie]

Go and sin no more,

Please note that Jesus said this AFTER a person was saved and healed. He didn't state it as a condition to be saved as Lordship Salvationists profess.

John 5:14 - Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee.

Please note 1) thou art made whole and 2) sin no more NOT
1) sin no more and 2) thou art made whole.

 

[Brother Bob]

If it is not breaking the law, then it is not sin.

All unrighteousness is sin and sin is the transgression of the law. I must know what law is being violated by not visiting the sick before I can call it sin.

So what law do you see being violated? If none, then according to scripture it is not sin.

I see the law of not loving God with all of your heart, soul and mind being violated if we do not do what Jesus told us to do.

Therefore I conclude that not visiting the sick is breaking the law and thus it is sin.

Now, what I have been looking for from you is a scripture that discribes a sin and says that this sin is not unto death. Do you have any??

People according to Jesus are going to Hell over it, but you don't call it sin. GREAAAAAAt!!!

BBob,

 

[Brother Bob]

Please note that Jesus said this AFTER a person was saved and healed. He didn't state it as a condition to be saved as Lordship Salvationists profess.

John 5:14 - Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee.

Please note 1) thou art made whole and 2) sin no more NOT
1) sin no more and 2) thou art made whole.

Goldie that is our argument, to sin no more. They are saying you can murder, adultery anything known to man and still be a Christian, as long as you don't do it over 10 and 3/4 times according to DHK; then it becomes an habitual sinner and you are lost.

I have never found in scripture where you have to be a habitual sinner. Someone point out the "habitual sinner" to me, please.

Also, no one has ever answered.

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

I could use some help on this scripture from these bible scholars.


BBob,

 

[Andre]

If it is not breaking the law, then it is not sin.

I provisionally disagree, but I can certainly see why you would think this. Look at what Paul says in Romans 7:

5For when we were controlled by the sinful nature,the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies, so that we bore fruit for death.

It is sin that produces death, not the knowledge of sin. Sin was still at work in the world before the Torah was given.

And then Paul makes another statement distinguishing Torah from sin:

What shall we say, then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! Indeed I would not have known what sin was except through the law.

Paul appears to be saying that the Law exposes sin - but the Law is not the same thing as sin. So to this point, and with knowledge of the entry of sin and death into the world before Torah (Law) was given, it seems clear that sin was at work in the world, producing death for humanity, even in the absence of the Torah.

But then, perhaps in line with steaver's thinking, we get this curious statement:

But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of covetous desire. For apart from law, sin is dead. 9Once I was alive apart from law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died. 10I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death

Now Paul seems to be saying that without Torah sin is "dead".

So which is it? At a superficial reading, Paul appears to either be a bit muddled or is downright self-contradictory here.

I have learned the hard way that when Paul seems obscure and muddled, it is I that has the problem.

I cannot go into detail here, but I think that in Romans 7, Paul is addressing the state of the Jew under Torah, analysed from a Christian perspective. He is not, primarily, talking about the nature of Christian perspective.

And I think he is making this very particular case: God gave Torah to Israel to make her "re-enact" the sin of Adam, to actually make Israel stumble into sin. Why would God do that? I think that the answer is that God is using Torah as a kind of lure for sin - tricking sin (here understood to be a malevolent and intelligent force) into taking up residence in the nation of Israel. Why would God do this? To finally concentrate sin into the flesh of Israel's faithful Messiah and condemn sin on the cross.

So, in conclusion for now, I think that when Paul talks about sin being dead apart from the Law, he is talking specifically about this project of God to concentrate sin in Israel. He is saying that without the Torah, sin is dead in the sense of not being subject to being built up and concentrated in Israel. Paul, I suggest, still believes that sin produces death for a human being. So this is why I think that it is a misreading of Paul to see him as saying that "sin does not exist if there is no law".

 

[Andre]

The above is works - good works. No amount of good works will get you into heaven.

I believe that Paul believes otherwise. From Romans 2:

God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11For God does not show favoritism.
12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous.

I know the "standard" reformed response to this is to say that Paul is describing a hypothetical way to heaven that he later goes on to say is impossible when he allegedly denies "justification by works".

Well, he does indeed deny "justification by works" later in the letter to the Romans. But he is not denying what he says here in Romans 2 - that "good works" count for ultimatle justification - he is denying that doing the works of Torah is the basis for justification.

So I think we have to take the Romans 2 test as it stands - humans will indeed be given eterrnal life based on the works their lives manifest. And lest there be any misunderstanding, Paul is not saying we are justified by "moral self-effort" - he is saying that we are justified by the good works that are produced in the believer by the Holy Spirit (see Romans 8). So it is still "pure grace".

 

[Amy.G]

I have never found in scripture where you have to be a habitual sinner. Someone point out the "habitual sinner" to me, please.

Also, no one has ever answered.

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

I could use some help on this scripture from these bible scholars.



BBob,

According to the Greek, "cannot sin", or rather "sin", is in the present infinitive and refers to continuous or repeated action, without implying anything about the time of the action.


So, "cannot sin" means to continue in, or to make a habit of sin, or to have sinful lifestyle.

How many sins does it take to be habitual? I think a better question would be, how long does this continual sinful behavior have to go on before it can be said that a person is really not saved. But the answer to both question is, only God knows. We cannot judge the salvation of others. But we can examine ourselves to see if we are in the faith or not.

The point is though, that the scriptures (in the original Greek) say that Christians do not make a "habit" or "lifestyle" of sin, not that they do not ever sin.

 

[DHK]

Go and sin no more, seems to be a commandment from the mouth of the Lord. I guess you are saying we don't have to keep a direct commandment that is to you individual either. Do we just have to be a "part time Christian" to be saved?? I take it we have to be a habitual sinner to finally be condemned, but we do not have to be a habitual Christian to be saved.

BBob,

Go and sin no more, is what Jesus said, specifically to the woman caught in adultery and to none other.
Can you give any direct evidence that she followed that command?
Did she obey it?
How do you know this?

 

[Brother Bob]

According to the Greek, "cannot sin", or rather "sin", is in the present infinitive and refers to continuous or repeated action, without implying anything about the time of the action.

You can not take away "cannot". It is scripture and to do so is wrong.

Below you are using the definition of sin, as the definition of "cannot sin", that is wrong to do so Amy, you change the scripture.

So, "cannot sin" means to continue in, or to make a habit of sin, or to have sinful lifestyle.

How many sins does it take to be habitual? I think a better question would be, how long does this continual sinful behavior have to go on before it can be said that a person is really not saved. But the answer to both question is, only God knows. We cannot judge the salvation of others. But we can examine ourselves to see if we are in the faith or not.

The point is though, that the scriptures (in the original Greek) say that Christians do not make a "habit" or "lifestyle" of sin, not that they do not ever sin.

266
amartia
hamartia
ham-ar-tee'-ah
from amartanw - hamartano 264; a sin (properly abstract):--offence, sin(-ful).


Where does it say doth not commit sin is habitual?? Where???

3756
ou
ou
oo, also (before a vowel)
ouk ook, and (before an aspirate) ouch ookh a primary word; the absolute negative (compare 3361) adverb; no or not:--+ long, nay, neither, never, no (X man), none, (can-)not, + nothing, + special, un(-worthy), when, + without, + yet but. See also ou mh - ou me 3364, mhkoV - mekos 3372.


Where does it say, that "cannot" means habitual?? Absolutely nothing about habitual Amy, nothing.

 

[Brother Bob]

Go and sin no more, is what Jesus said, specifically to the woman caught in adultery and to none other.
Can you give any direct evidence that she followed that command?
Did she obey it?
How do you know this?

Where do you know that she did sin????

Also, answer


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

And do not make up words for the definition. Use the true Greek, instead of adding habitual, which is not there and is a sin to add it.

BBob,

 

[Amy.G]

Where does it say, that "cannot" means habitual?? Absolutely nothing about habitual Amy, nothing.

It's the tense of the word that indicates that the action is continuous.

 

[Marcia]

That "sin unto death" that was previously mentioned here is unbelief - otherwise known as "blaspheming the Holy Spirit". How does one blaspheme the Holy Spirit? By rejecting Him. Unbelievers do not have the Holy Spirit because they aren't born-again - they have rejected Him, and if they die without him, they will go straight to hell.

The context of the sin unto death is one that is committed by believers and refers to physical death. This was in a letter written to believers at a church. This came up not long ago in a thread in the Baptist forum.

Some of the Corinthian believers were taken home because they were abusing the Lord's Supper; this was a "sin unto death."

"For this reason many among you are weak and sick, and a number sleep." 1 Cor 11.30

Also, there is a the case of Aninias and Sapphira.

Many believe the "sin unto death" was a special case in the early church when God was fiercely protecting them from corruption since they were so new. Others believe this can still happen today.

 

[Marcia]

Also, no one has ever answered.

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

I could use some help on this scripture from these bible scholars.


BBob,

I am not a Bible scholar but we had to write up a paper on this sentence in seminary and supposedly the verb form comes out to "practicing sin," implying that it refers to someone habitually sinning without repenting.

I think it's hard to say who is doing this and who is not. I've known believers who got involved in something they knew was wrong and continued it for years but then repented and came back to the Lord. According to them, they were saved during the time they were sinning but God was convicting them. They just ignored it and tried to go on, but eventually it got to them.

But when I see someone who professes Christ and is involved in constant sin as a lifestyle (for example, living with someone outside of marriage, being very worldly, not reading the Bible, etc.) and they go on and on this way for a long time and seemingly do not feel they are doing anything wrong, then one has to wonder about their salvation.

I think really that only the Lord knows the truth in these cases. It's not up to us. What we are called to do is rebuke and exhort someone who professes Christ and is committing sin with no repentance.

I John 1.8 also says this:

If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.

I deal with a lot of new believers and professing believers in my ministry (as well as unbelievers) and one of the things I notice the most that separates believers from those professing Christ in name only is that the believers are receptive to God's word and accept being wrong. The unbelievers (or those Chirstian in name only) resist this and argue with it.