Can Believers Go One Day Without Sinning?

[David Lamb]

You made my point! St Paul, when confessing his sin, conveniently mentioned

Bill, I didn't even mention or quote Paul!

Also, I have no idea what you mean by "the only "Jewish" sin that can not be prosecuted under Jewish law." Which sin is that? If it's sin, by definition it is a breaking of God's law.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

David Lamb: But if by "a thought to do evil or sin" you mean (3.), I would not try to "separate it from sin itself", because according to Jesus, such a thought is sin.

HP: David, I appreciate your responses in many ways, even when we disagree. In all the time we have walked together, you have always been kind and never once personally attacked any other that I have witnessed. That my friend is an indication of a heart of love towards others, a Christian trait indeed!:thumbsup:

Cannot a temptation be considered as "a thought to do?"

In my mind I believe the distinction between sin and temptation has to lie in the will itself, between forming intents to carry out an act as separated from merely 'thoughts to do.' We most likely agree that all sin starts in the heart of man, for if it is sin it is intentional disobedience to a known commandment of God. Intents are formed in the heart prior to any outside action, but all thoughts of 'doing a sin' are not necessarily sin. Agree or disagree?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

David, let me express it yet another way. Our sensibilities can produce 'desire to do,' yet I do not see that as sin until we yield our will and formulate intents to carry out those impulses or desires of the sensibilities in a manner prohibited by God.

For example our sensibilities form a desire to eat. The temptation is to indulge in those 'desires to do' , and to form intents to indulge those desires in a manner that violates the God given mandate to avoid gluttony. The sin occurs as we yeild our will by forming intents in agreement with desires to do, in agreement to or in manners opposed to clear violations of known commandments of God.

 

[The Biblicist]

]
Cannot a temptation be considered as "a thought to do?"

In my mind I believe the distinction between sin and temptation has to lie in the will itself, between forming intents to carry out an act as separated from merely 'thoughts to do.' We most likely agree that all sin starts in the heart of man, for if it is sin it is intentional disobedience to a known commandment of God. Intents are formed in the heart prior to any outside action, but all thoughts of 'doing a sin' are not necessarily sin. Agree or disagree?

Certainly a thought to do something is sin. However, have you noticed that you consistently attempt to define sin by commission whether it is an action or thought. A failure to resist an evil temptation is as much sin as a determination to implement an evil temptation. For example, you may never consider actually seducing another known actual woman but you sure can fail to resist the idea and/or even contemplate a pornographic idea of your own making. The same is true with coveting. You may not have any specific action in mind but simply contemplate, dream, imagine what you don't have as though you did have it. The determination to actually do it may not even be arise in you mind because the mind itself can be a playground of imaginery realty. The will has yeilded to embracing the temptation even though it has not activated it by external actions.

 

[David Lamb]

HP: David, I appreciate your responses in many ways, even when we disagree. In all the time we have walked together, you have always been kind and never once personally attacked any other that I have witnessed. That my friend is an indication of a heart of love towards others, a Christian trait indeed!:thumbsup:

Cannot a temptation be considered as "a thought to do?"

In my mind I believe the distinction between sin and temptation has to lie in the will itself, between forming intents to carry out an act as separated from merely 'thoughts to do.' We most likely agree that all sin starts in the heart of man, for if it is sin it is intentional disobedience to a known commandment of God. Intents are formed in the heart prior to any outside action, but all thoughts of 'doing a sin' are not necessarily sin. Agree or disagree?

Thanks for those kind words, HP. It is really good for Christians to be able to discuss things with each other in a considerate and loving way. (I'm not saying that as Christians we can never be forthright in saying what we believe !)

I think I agree with what you say about temptation. However, the line is very thin indeed (in my view) between temptation to sin, and a thought that is in itself a sin.

Thank you again.

 

[DaChaser1]

Certainly a thought to do something is sin. However, have you noticed that you consistently attempt to define sin by commission whether it is an action or thought. A failure to resist an evil temptation is as much sin as a determination to implement an evil temptation. For example, you may never consider actually seducing another known actual woman but you sure can fail to resist the idea and/or even contemplate a pornographic idea of your own making. The same is true with coveting. You may not have any specific action in mind but simply contemplate, dream, imagine what you don't have as though you did have it. The determination to actually do it may not even be arise in you mind because the mind itself can be a playground of imaginery realty. The will has yeilded to embracing the temptation even though it has not activated it by external actions.

STILL waiting to see the person recorded in the Bible as living a blameless/sinless life bofore God other than Christ!

Didn't the Apsotle himself state that some had misunderstood his teaching and pervented it to stating that p[aul was teaching since freed from effects of Sinning by god saving us, then keep on siining, in order to have Grace of God more abounding?

 

[The Biblicist]

STILL waiting to see the person recorded in the Bible as living a blameless/sinless life bofore God other than Christ!

Didn't the Apsotle himself state that some had misunderstood his teaching and pervented it to stating that p[aul was teaching since freed from effects of Sinning by god saving us, then keep on siining, in order to have Grace of God more abounding?

Yes, the only basis for such a charge would be that Paul admitted sin was not eradicated but continued within the child of God but where sin abounded grace did much more abound (Rom. 5:20). If he had claimed that we could live above sin there would be no basis to make such a charge because the doctrine of living above sin would not permit such a charge.

Good point!

 

[Moriah]

Yes, the only basis for such a charge would be that Paul admitted sin was not eradicated but continued within the child of God but where sin abounded grace did much more abound (Rom. 5:20). If he had claimed that we could live above sin there would be no basis to make such a charge because the doctrine of living above sin would not permit such a charge.

Good point!

The scriptures do not say what you are implying. You said, "Paul admitted sin was not eradicated but continued with the child of God but were sin abounded grace did much more abound."

You are of the people whom Paul was speaking to when he said, "Why not say--as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say--"Let us do evil that good may result"? Their condemnation is deserved."

Is that what you are saying Paul says? You said, "If he had claimed that we could live above sin there would be no basis to make such a charge because the doctrine of living above sin would not permit such a charge."

 

[annsni]

The scriptures do not say what you are implying. You said, "Paul admitted sin was not eradicated but continued with the child of God but were sin abounded grace did much more abound."

You are of the people whom Paul was speaking to when he said, "Why not say--as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say--"Let us do evil that good may result"? Their condemnation is deserved."

Is that what you are saying Paul says? You said, "If he had claimed that we could live above sin there would be no basis to make such a charge because the doctrine of living above sin would not permit such a charge."

Where did one person on this thread say "Let us do evil"? Sin is wrong. Every believer knows it but also every believer is not dumb enough to think that they can avoid sin for the rest of their lives. Please don't go overboard and say that just because there are those here saying that believers will sin that they are saying that they will go sin on purpose because they can, OK? That doesn't help the conversation.

 

[steaver]

Not if they do any debating on the BB! :laugh:

Excellent observation! :thumbs:

Many here who declare they are doing so well at not sinning are at the same time hurling personal attacks, twisting anothers comments and daily contributing to the de-edification of believers.

 

[David Lamb]

Where did one person on this thread say "Let us do evil"? Sin is wrong. Every believer knows it but also every believer is not dumb enough to think that they can avoid sin for the rest of their lives. Please don't go overboard and say that just because there are those here saying that believers will sin that they are saying that they will go sin on purpose because they can, OK? That doesn't help the conversation.

I agree, Ann. Well put!

 

[The Biblicist]

The scriptures do not say what you are implying. You said, "Paul admitted sin was not eradicated but continued with the child of God

A. In prison at Rome shortly before his death he admitted he is a sinner:

1 Tim. 1:15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

The Greek text translated "I am" is "ego eimi" or the present active first person singular.


B. Speaking to members of the Galatian congregations "YE" he said they were still struggling with the flesh:

Gal. 5:17 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.


C. To the Romans Christians using the PRESENT TENSE he describes himself as still in a struggle with indwelling sin:

Rom. 7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.t were sin abounded grace did much more abound."


D. To the Philippians he denied he had attained perfection:

Philip. 3:12 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.
13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended:

He is not rejoicing in this fact but deplores it but nevertheless is honest enough to admit it is a fact that will not be remedied until the glorification of the body:

Philip. 3:20 For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:
21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.


E. The Apostle John in his old age uses the present tense first person plural "we" writing to his "dear children" claims that everyone who denies they are presently without sin are liars and the truth is not in them:

1 Jn. 1:8 ¶ If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

John and Paul were honest enough to admit that they sin nature still existed within them and longed for the day when it would be eradicated from their person. The very source or origin of their SINS was indwelling sin still within their person which they hated, loathed but nevertheless still remained within them warring against them.

So yes, the Paul and other Biblical writers clearly teach that indwelling sin has not been eradicated from the child of God and will not be until glorification.

You are of the people whom Paul was speaking to when he said, "Why not say--as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say--"Let us do evil that good may result"? Their condemnation is deserved."

Would you be so kind as to point out in any post that I have ever posted on this forum where I said or even implied that I believe we should sin so that grace may abound??? If you cannot find that then you are slandering me and lying to the readers and need to apologize! I have said no such thing and believe no such thing.

I have never said anything more than what Paul said of himself in 1 Tim. 1:15 or to the Philippians and Romans about himself. Will you charge Paul with saying and believing that since he uses the exact same language that I do???

Don't play God and tell the readers that you know my mind and heart and intent and therefore claim that is what I meant when it is not! I know what I believe and what I mean and the only one Who can judge my motives is God! Are you God?

You said, "If he had claimed that we could live above sin there would be no basis to make such a charge because the doctrine of living above sin would not permit such a charge."

Think about it Moriah! If you could live above sin, then how could anyone claim you believe in sinning that grace may abound? It would take a fruit cake to charge to make that against someone who believes in living above sin!!!!! Obviously Paul did not believe in living above sin because someone did make this charge against him (Rom. 6:1).

However, if you believed the Christian did not live above sin, but struggled with indwelling sin all through their lives but yet claimed as Paul did claim in Romans 5:20 "where sin abounded grace did much more abound" then someone could make a charge against Paul, "well, if where sin abounded grace much more abounds, then let us sin more that grace may abound more."

Paul understands that such a charge might be brought against him and so gives voice to that charge in Romans 6:1 just two verses after saying "where sin abounded grace did much more abound."

Now listen carefully to what I am about to say because if you miss what I am about to say you will pervert and distort my position and the position of Paul. Paul responded "God forbid" and so does every true child of God because we died to sin through the body of Christ on the cross and we were raised to life through the resurrection of Christ from the dead. This is our position by justification and this is the condition of the inward man by regeneration. Baptism publicly identifies us with Christ in regard to both his death to sin and his resurrection life (Rom. 6:3-6).

However, our practice is determined by "reckoning" it so by faith and "yeilding" to the power of the Holy Spirit to be able to live it so in our own personal life. The rub is that we still have a free will to not reckon it so by faith and not yeild to the Holy Spirit.

However, no true child of God loves sin but sins more than he wants to because we are not merely justified by faith but we are regenerated by the Spirit of God and thereby have the "image of God" renewed within us (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10) which is the inward drive that causes us to hate sin and press toward the goal of true holiness and righteousness.

Baptism pictures both truths of death with Christ and resurrected life with Christo the Holy Spirit but still can yeild our bodies to indwelling sin because sin still indwells the child of God. However, since we "live" in the Spirit we ought to "walk" in the Spirit (Eph. 5:25) but that is not what we always do as sin does occur in the life of the Christian and sin does not originate from the regenerated inward man that is created in true righteousness and holiness after the image of God (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10; Tit. 3:5) but sin originates from the law of indwelling sin in our members/body, flesh (Rom. 7:18, 25; Gal. 3:17).

 

[steaver]

I believe the contention between us in this argument is what we have in mind when we speak of sin.

When I speak of sin I speak of ALL sin. Just today I had bad thoughts in my heart because I didn't like the way the loader operator was doing his job when loading the trucks with firewood. It's not that he was doing anything wrong besides slowing me down. To me this attitude in my heart today was sin and I needed to repent of it. I drifted a few stop signs as well and was a few miles per hour over the speed limit. All sin in my view.

This is why I say that I sin everyday, in my mind all wrong doing is sin, not just breaking the big ten.

So I ask you who say you can go days or weeks without sin, do you ever drift through any stop signs or go a mile or two over the speed limit? Do slow people in the line ahead of you get you a bit frustrated inside? Please don't say Jesus got angry as an excuse, I am not speaking of righteous anger, I am speaking of simply getting angry because YOU are being inconvienenced.

 

[steaver]

This thread got kinda quiet........

 

[The Biblicist]

This thread got kinda quiet........

There are none on this thread who can go a day, a week or a month much less a year without sinning except those who are deceiving themselves and with them it is pure imagination. They have no concept of what sin is and their view of sin is the view of lost religious people and or very spiritually imature Christians.

 

[steaver]

There are none on this thread who can go a day, a week or a month much less a year without sinning except those who are deceiving themselves and with them it is pure imagination. They have no concept of what sin is and their view of sin is the view of lost religious people and or very spiritually imature Christians.

That's why I was trying to get some info from them to see if they understand the full scope of what "sin" is.

I can gaurantee you that not one Christian in this world can possibly love the LORD thy God with ALL you body, mind and soul. This command alone just isn't possible. We can see why the ten commandments could not save anyone.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Steaver: I can gaurantee you that not one Christian in this world can possibly love the LORD thy God with ALL you body, mind and soul. This command alone just isn't possible.

HP: The God you serve is some taskmaster, demanding what one cannot do upon punishment in a living hell and that for eternity, and that without the possibility of obeying His commands. Some picture of justice or love you paint of God.

Show us one solitary Scripture that says that no one can love God with their whole heart, or admit that the philosophy you are espousing has no credible evidence to back up your assertions.

Your so-called "gaurantee," is as worthless as the one they placed on that old asphalt orange sewer pipe.

 

[DHK]

HP: The God you serve is some taskmaster, demanding what one cannot do upon punishment in a living hell and that for eternity, and that without the possibility of obeying His commands. Some picture of justice or love you paint of God.

Show us one solitary Scripture that says that no one can love God with their whole heart, or admit that the philosophy you are espousing has no credible evidence to back up your assertions.

Your so-called "gaurantee," is as worthless as the one they placed on that old asphalt orange sewer pipe.

This one Scripture is a verse that is intended to show that we cannot keep the law.

Galatians 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.

Let me demonstrate this:
If a man were to continue in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them he would have to continue from birth to death without sin, i.e. without breaking a single law. His life would be represented like this:

birth ........................................................... death
[________________________________________]

If he sins but one time in his life, he is cursed, like this:
[_____________________ __________________]

But that is not the reality. We sin more than once; many times. In fact our life looks more like this:
[----------------------------------------------------------]

During our life we have sinned so many times we would never be ever to count them all. But Gal.3:10 says that if we do not continue in ALL things that are written in the law, we are cursed--condemned to hell.

The Law is not only the Levitical law it is the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments are summed up in the two great commandments that Jesus gave, one of which you were quoting from. Jesus said: "On these two commandments rest all the law and the prophets."

No, it is impossible to keep that law, as Gal.3:10 says it is. The law is given to point us to Christ; the law cannot save.

 

[Moriah]

This one Scripture is a verse that is intended to show that we cannot keep the law.

Galatians 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.

Let me demonstrate this:
If a man were to continue in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them he would have to continue from birth to death without sin, i.e. without breaking a single law. His life would be represented like this:

birth ........................................................... death
[________________________________________]

If he sins but one time in his life, he is cursed, like this:
[_____________________ __________________]

But that is not the reality. We sin more than once; many times. In fact our life looks more like this:
[----------------------------------------------------------]

During our life we have sinned so many times we would never be ever to count them all. But Gal.3:10 says that if we do not continue in ALL things that are written in the law, we are cursed--condemned to hell.

The Law is not only the Levitical law it is the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments are summed up in the two great commandments that Jesus gave, one of which you were quoting from. Jesus said: "On these two commandments rest all the law and the prophets."

No, it is impossible to keep that law, as Gal.3:10 says it is. The law is given to point us to Christ; the law cannot save.

What is your point? You sound as if you are advocating sin. Speak to people about not sinning. You speak of sinning and never losing salvation. That is what an advocate for sin says.

James 1:23 Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like a man who looks at his face in a mirror

James 1:24 and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like.

James 1:25 But the man who looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues to do this, not forgetting what he has heard, but doing it--he will be blessed in what he does.

Romans 2:13 For 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.

Romans 8:2 because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death.

 

[steaver]

HP: The God you serve is some taskmaster, demanding what one cannot do upon punishment in a living hell and that for eternity, and that without the possibility of obeying His commands. Some picture of justice or love you paint of God.

I thought you and I were serving the same God? Or are you saying I don't serve Jesus Christ?

Show us one solitary Scripture that says that no one can love God with their whole heart, or admit that the philosophy you are espousing has no credible evidence to back up your assertions.

Your so-called "gaurantee," is as worthless as the one they placed on that old asphalt orange sewer pipe.

"I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin". (Ro7:25)

You may be a perfect lover of God in your own mind HP, but I for one humbly agree with Paul.....and the Publican....."God be merciful to me a sinner".

I admonish you brother to take heed of yourself for pride cometh before the fall. :tear: