ARCHIVE: The Apostle Pauls affirms that a Christian can sin.
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
While you are there could you get a "name-change" for the word sin in relation to a Christian?Sozo said:
Here are some suggestions for a replacement....
- stupidact
- sanssin
- snot-a-sin
When you come up with a term you feel comfortable with let me know in our One on One . :up:
Last edited:
If He had foreseen the change it wouldn't be a change. :duh:Benjamin said:
Turn on the noggin' Ben.
Knight said:
The change is BASED ON THE PEOPLE'S CHANGE- which He forknew.
This does not change, however, the fact that God would have to carry out righteous judgement had they not repented ("shall not the Judge of the earth Judge righteously")- so God would tell them what He was going to have to do. When the people repent, God is then able to tell them He "changed His mind"- because God "changes His mind" on all of us when we get saved anyway. (Romans 5:9-10- we all were "enemies"). God already knew that He was going to have to "change" His mind. Exhaustive forknowledge.
elected4ever
New member
That is just the point. To you the future is just a contingency. Not that it can be contingency but actually is a contingency even when God make a defiant statement concerning it. It is not that God does not know, it is that we do not know.. Everything is a contingency to us.godrulz said:
That's illogical.Benjamin said:
And again, off topic. :up:
drbrumley
Well-known member
Sozo said:
Sozo is being cryptic. :chuckle:
And I think here is the difference.
It is right for us Christians to be identified in Christ.
Just like it is right for Married women to be identified in her husband.
But the actions of the wife in no way puts blame on the husband UNLESS the husband forces her to do a wrong. Now, Jesus never forces us to do a wrong, thereby throwing Sozo's cryptic argument right out the window.
Sinless perfectionism and the marriage between a man and a woman provide a great illustration of what Sozo is talking about.
Sozo, Lighthouse and E4E say since we are identified in our Lord Jesus, we cannot sin. Even though we may do something that might be called a sin, it isn't really a sin.
Then the same principal follows for married couples. A wife is identified thru her husband. A wife who cheats on her husband does not reflect upon her husband. Just shows how stupid she is.
I could be wrong and I'm sure Sozo will jump on me if I am.
:chuckle: Love ya Bro.
That's fine, and it really doesn't matter. Arguing apples to Oranges.
Excellent point! :up:drbrumley said:
A very wise man recently made a similar analogy about a person with diplomatic immunity. A foreign dignitary (by law) is not under our laws (in the USA). And therefore a foreign dignitary can do things in our country that are against our laws but not against the laws in his country. The dignitary is still committing a crime, yet since he has diplomatic immunity no crime is imputed to him.
Likewise Christians have immunity to sin through Christ's work on the cross.
Romans 4:7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered; 8 Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.”
rehcjam
Member
Lighthouse said:
I understand what he is saying, he argues it well although he concedes my point in it.
"The identity of a Christian is in the Spirit." and "A Christian is not identified by the flesh, but alone by who they are in Christ,.."
You see a Christian can still sin but the sin is not imputed to him.
Also
"I can never concede that a Christian can sin. It is impossible for him to do so. However, I know that the body is still subject to the law of sin and death. It still sins. But, that is not who I am."
This sounds like a new twist on "love the sinner hate the sin" and is a ridiculous statement. A body cannot sin apart from the persons will. It is the person who sins, not the body and the person is responsible, only the penalty is paid in Christ. The person is a sinner although not identified as one. Paul uses the same type of language although he speaks figuratively (i.e., the personification of sin) which I don't think that is Sozo is doing.
A Christian can physically steal, therefore willfully, therefore spiritually and therefore can sin.
Brilliant rebuttal. Had I not picked my POTD already.... your post would clearly be a candidate.Sozo said:
Or maybe I could save your post for Post of the Year also known as "POTY".
I think he is spot on!Sozo said:
When you, Lighthouse, and e4e acknowledge that the fleshy part of a Christian can indeed sin you concede the debate that a Christian can indeed sin.
Sozo
New member
Refuting liars, requires more effort, than a few words, but right now, it's all I have time for.
If every godless moron, who makes ignorant statements that completely contradict the entirety of the gospel and the sacrifice of Christ, was responded to completely, I would be here full time.
If every godless moron, who makes ignorant statements that completely contradict the entirety of the gospel and the sacrifice of Christ, was responded to completely, I would be here full time.
Do you think I am a liar? (after all, I agree with rehcjam's post)Sozo said:
I have news for you Sozo....
I do not think you are a liar. Instead, I think you have a misunderstanding regarding a word that God uses in the Bible. I think it's OK to have disagreements. I think I have shown very clearly as to your error (especially in our One on One), yet I do not think you are lying - just wrong!
He also says....Sozo said:
1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live. 7 However, there is not in everyone that knowledge; for some, with consciousness of the idol, until now eat it as a thing offered to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. 8 But food does not commend us to God; for neither if we eat are we the better, nor if we do not eat are we the worse. 9 But beware lest somehow this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to those who are weak. 10 For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol’s temple, will not the conscience of him who is weak be emboldened to eat those things offered to idols? 11 And because of your knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? 12 But when you thus sin against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ.
Ephesians 4:25 Therefore, putting away lying, “Let each one of you speak truth with his neighbor,” for we are members of one another. 26 “Be angry, and do not sin”: do not let the sun go down on your wrath, 27 nor give place to the devil.
Romans 4:7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered; Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.”
1Corinthians 6:17 But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him. 18 Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.
Clearly Paul acknowledges the broader definition and understanding of the word sin.Ephesians 4:25 Therefore, putting away lying, “Let each one of you speak truth with his neighbor,” for we are members of one another. 26 “Be angry, and do not sin”: do not let the sun go down on your wrath, 27 nor give place to the devil.
Romans 4:7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered; Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.”
1Corinthians 6:17 But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him. 18 Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.
drbrumley
Well-known member
No, Paul is not a liar. Paul says that it is not him and he is right. He is identifying himself with Christ.Sozo said:
Let's look closer at that verse Sozo. Just by mentioning it, even though he identifies himself with Christ, still says his flesh committed the act. His flesh is dead. Absolutely, categorically dead on right. But it is still his. And just mentioning it proves it.