PDA

View Full Version : No longer a sinner after salvation?



Jaxb
04-08-2017, 06:10 PM
After one is converted to Christ, does that mean that he is no longer a sinner? I sometimes hear street preachers say that one is no longer a sinner after he or she becomes a Christian. Sometimes people approach these street preachers and say, "Everyone is a sinner." Those street preachers reply, "Christians are not sinners. If you sin, you are not a Christian." It is true that Christians have a new nature. When God saves a person, He changes that person's life. However, he cannot obey God perfectly. I'm just wondering. What is their definition of sin?

mossrose
04-08-2017, 06:18 PM
When we become a believer, we are saved from the power of sin in our lives, and the penalty of sin.

But we are not free from the presence of sin. We struggle with sin every moment of every day. Paul makes that very clear in Romans 7:

15 For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate.

16 But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good.

17 So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me.

18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not.

19 For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want.

20 But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me.

We will be free from the presence of sin in our lives when we enter eternity. Anyone who says he does not sin is a liar and has deceived himself.

I grew up in a denomination that claimed that once you became a believer you didn't sin anymore. My grandfather wasn't happy when I left that church because I couldn't reconcile that teaching with scripture. I still have a letter he wrote me that says, "We don't sin. We make errors in judgment and mistakes, but we don't sin".

Maybe that is their definition of what is NOT sin?

KingsGambit
04-08-2017, 06:28 PM
John Wesley taught that Christians reach a state of sinless perfection. I believe this was an error that has unfortunately influenced many people since then. mossy already posted Romans 7, but there are other scriptures as well that are relevant.

1 John 1:8 - If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. Also, 1 John 2:1 - My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the FatheróJesus Christ, the Righteous One. This flat out states that it is possible for Christians to sin; they should strive not to and hopefully will sin less and less as they grow in their faith, but it is nonetheless possible. I also want to mention 1 Timothy 1:15, where Paul describes himself as the "chief of sinners". He's probably mostly describing what he did before his conversion, but it's worth noting that he is still identifying himself as a sinner there (despite the fact that they have been forgiven).

mossrose
04-08-2017, 06:29 PM
John Wesley taught that Christians reach a state of sinless perfection. I believe this was an error that has unfortunately influenced many people since then. mossy already posted Romans 7, but there are other scriptures as well that are relevant.

1 John 1:8 - If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. Also, 1 John 2:1 - My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the FatheróJesus Christ, the Righteous One. This flat out states that it is possible for Christians to sin; they should strive not to and hopefully will sin less and less as they grow in their faith, but it is nonetheless possible. I also want to mention 1 Timothy 1:15, where Paul describes himself as the "chief of sinners". He's probably mostly describing what he did before his conversion, but it's worth noting that he is still identifying himself as a sinner there (despite the fact that they have been forgiven).

And the church that I grew up in was based on Wesleyan theology.

Good other scriptures!

Thoughtful Monk
04-08-2017, 06:46 PM
I have never met anyone who had reach sinless perfection.

TheWall
04-08-2017, 07:51 PM
Peter sinned when he didn't eat with gentiles yet he was still saved. Salvation is accepting the free gift of grace in faith to Christ who died for our sins.

tabibito
04-08-2017, 08:34 PM
1 John 1:8 - If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 2:1 - My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the FatheróJesus Christ, the Righteous One.

It makes a pretty argument until it is noticed that the "IF" makes it clear that both sinning and not sinning are possible. The argument does not hold when 2:3-4 is taken into account, and when 1 John 3 (particularly verses 3 and 4) is taken into account: then a closer consideration of the statement in 1 John 1:8 becomes advisable.

Does "If we claim to be without sin" mean "If we claim that we do not sin"? The word in Koine Greek is "hold/possess" ... Does that really mean "perform/do"?



1 Timothy 1:15, where Paul describes himself as the "chief of sinners". He's probably mostly describing what he did before his conversion, but it's worth noting that he is still identifying himself as a sinner there (despite the fact that they have been forgiven).
Given that Paul explicitly states that he is the worst of sinners because of his prior deeds, there is no "probably" in sight - the correct word is "definitely." Paul's position is the very same that 1 John 1:8 is referring to.

Jedidiah
04-08-2017, 08:42 PM
It is possible to define "sinner" so that we are no longer sinners after salvation. Such a definition would not be anything but a word game. I am a sinner saved by grace. I know the stuff that goes on in my mind, it is sin. Just because I do not act on those thoughts does not make me no sinner. Some folks seem to think that sin is only defined by certain actual actions. I disagree.

tabibito
04-08-2017, 08:59 PM
Tis equally possible to define temptation as sin. I haven't seen anything to suggest that attaining to living without committing sin is an instantaneous change - nor have I seen anything to suggest that it is unattainable.

Jaxb
04-08-2017, 11:23 PM
When we become a believer, we are saved from the power of sin in our lives, and the penalty of sin.

But we are not free from the presence of sin. We struggle with sin every moment of every day. Paul makes that very clear in Romans 7:

15 For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate.

16 But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good.

17 So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me.

18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not.

19 For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want.

20 But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me.

We will be free from the presence of sin in our lives when we enter eternity. Anyone who says he does not sin is a liar and has deceived himself.

I grew up in a denomination that claimed that once you became a believer you didn't sin anymore. My grandfather wasn't happy when I left that church because I couldn't reconcile that teaching with scripture. I still have a letter he wrote me that says, "We don't sin. We make errors in judgment and mistakes, but we don't sin".

Maybe that is their definition of what is NOT sin?

It is clear from Romans 7 that Paul still struggled with sin. He does the very thing that he hates.

I think those street preachers are not including errors of judgment and mistakes in the concept of sin.

Jaxb
04-08-2017, 11:25 PM
Peter sinned when he didn't eat with gentiles yet he was still saved. Salvation is accepting the free gift of grace in faith to Christ who died for our sins.

That's true. Paul rebuked Peter for doing that.

tabibito
04-08-2017, 11:45 PM
It is clear from Romans 7 that Paul still struggled with sin. He does the very thing that he hates.

I think those street preachers are not including errors of judgment and mistakes in the concept of sin.

To address that claim, it would be necessary to indulge in some heavy explanations of the use of the present tense form of verbs in Koine Greek grammar.
Keeping it short, present tense can be used in Koine for events occurring in the past - as shown repeatedly in the gospels - though translators generally correct the form for English grammar in those passages.
So, what makes the second half of Romans 7 refer to the state of affairs then current for Paul? If so, the second half of Romans 7 is in conflict with the first half of chapter 7 and chapter 8.

Obsidian
04-09-2017, 12:24 AM
The Christian's spiritual nature, which has been reborn, does not sin. The flesh, which has not yet been reborn, still sins. There is a battle between them. That is why Paul says that we must continually put on the new man, like we put on clothes each day.

mossrose
04-09-2017, 07:37 AM
It is clear from Romans 7 that Paul still struggled with sin. He does the very thing that he hates.

I think those street preachers are not including errors of judgment and mistakes in the concept of sin.


My grandfather wasn't including errors in judgment and mistakes in the concept of sin, either. He was saying we don't sin anymore but we do those instead.

Rationalization, in my opinion.

tabibito
04-09-2017, 09:21 AM
It is clear from Romans 7 that Paul still struggled with sin. He does the very thing that he hates.

I think those street preachers are not including errors of judgment and mistakes in the concept of sin.

And which part of Romans 7 would that be?

This one perhaps?
7:5 For when we WERE in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.[i]



[i]7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

8:2 the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

mossrose
04-09-2017, 10:09 AM
My grandfather wasn't including errors in judgment and mistakes in the concept of sin, either. He was saying we don't sin anymore but we do those instead.

Rationalization, in my opinion.

An interesting aside, and sort of off topic, but the same denomination, that believes that once you are saved you don't sin anymore, also believes that you can lose your salvation.

KingsGambit
04-09-2017, 06:06 PM
There is a fairly well known street preacher who focuses on college campuses. I came across him several times when I was in college. He liked to claim he had not sinned since the 1960s. Ironically, through his pride, I think he actually did sin on a regular basis. Once, he accused a man and woman walking together on my campus of committing sexual sin with each other, having no idea that they were brother and sister.

Obsidian
04-09-2017, 11:09 PM
1 John 1:9 says "We deceive ourselves" about it, because we generally aren't deceiving anyone else.

Jedidiah
04-10-2017, 09:26 AM
1 John 1:9 says "We deceive ourselves" about it, because we generally aren't deceiving anyone else.

Verse 10 goes on to say, "If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us." So ?

37818
04-11-2017, 12:12 PM
A Christian is to be no longer under the Law 1 John 3;4, 6; Romans 6:14; Galatian 3:10; Deuteronomy 27:26; James 2:10; Galatians 2:21; Galatians 5:4, 18. Read contexts. 1 John 1:9-2:2.

Jaxb
04-12-2017, 01:03 PM
To address that claim, it would be necessary to indulge in some heavy explanations of the use of the present tense form of verbs in Koine Greek grammar.
Keeping it short, present tense can be used in Koine for events occurring in the past - as shown repeatedly in the gospels - though translators generally correct the form for English grammar in those passages.
So, what makes the second half of Romans 7 refer to the state of affairs then current for Paul? If so, the second half of Romans 7 is in conflict with the first half of chapter 7 and chapter 8.

Paulís change from past tense in Romans 7:1-13 to present tense in Romans 7:14-25 implies that he is changing from his description of an unsaved man to a saved man.

Romans 7:14-25 describes someone who wants to live a holy life, but an unbeliever is described as someone who is hostile towards God (Romans 3:10).

The conflict between the flesh and the spirit mentioned in Romans 7:14-25 does not go against what a Christian can experience. Galatians 5:16-17 describes this same experience.

tabibito
04-13-2017, 01:52 AM
Paulís change from past tense in Romans 7:1-13 to present tense in Romans 7:14-25 implies that he is changing from his description of an unsaved man to a saved man.

3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread. 4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. 5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and [B]setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple, 6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in [their] hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
In verses 3 and 4, aorist tense is used (which translates in this context to English past tense). The switch to present tense in verses 5 and 6 does not indicate a change of time. Simple present verb forms are used, but the passage refers to events that are in the past - in accordance with the context established by the earlier verses.
The same occurs in Romans 7 - the change to PRESENT circumstances is explicitly stated in chapter 8:1
Romans 7: 14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Paul says that he is in the flesh (Romans 7:14), but that other Christians are not: Romans 8:9 You, however, are not in the flesh

Is that really a viable interpretation?

Obsidian
04-13-2017, 10:04 AM
"I am carnal" is not the same as saying, "I am in the flesh." The saved believer has two natures: A perfect spiritual nature, and a flawed carnal nature. When Paul uses the phrases to " in the flesh" or to "live in the flesh," he is referring to those who only have the flesh giving them life (i.e., a very temporary form of 'life'). Conversely, when he uses words like "carnal," he means that they are (at least) partly made of flesh but may also have the Spirit and simply be suppressing it.

Likewise, the phrase "[being or living] in the Spirit" means people who are saved. But walking in the Spirit means people who are saved that also act rightly.

[B]Galatians 5:25
If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.

tabibito
04-19-2017, 07:20 AM
Ah yes, I had allowed that reference to slip my mind:

Galatians 5:16 So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh

So is the claim now to be made that no human can walk by the Spirit?

Chrawnus
04-19-2017, 08:17 AM
Ah yes, I had allowed that reference to slip my mind:

Galatians 5:16 So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh

So is the claim now to be made that no human can walk by the Spirit?

I think the question is more if any human can walk perfectly by the Spirit. My guess is no, but I'm not going to die for that guess. :shrug:

tabibito
04-19-2017, 08:33 AM
A quick check of the parable of the unforgiving servant might give a LEAD toward the answer. (Matt 18:26-34) ... Is God's forgiveness unconditional? Not if God acts as does the king in that parable. 23 Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account of his servants

Obsidian
04-20-2017, 11:36 AM
Is God's forgiveness unconditional? Not if God acts as does the king in that parable. 23 Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account of his servants

That parable isn't talking about how an unbeliever gets 'forgiven,' in the sense of getting into the heavenly kingdom in the first place. Instead, it shows how God deals with people after they have entered the kingdom (i.e., become servants), if they oppress their fellow believers.

tabibito
04-23-2017, 01:00 AM
That parable isn't talking about how an unbeliever gets 'forgiven,' in the sense of getting into the heavenly kingdom in the first place. Instead, it shows how God deals with people after they have entered the kingdom (i.e., become servants), if they oppress their fellow believers.

So - a servant of God who does not act appropriately gets expelled to prison. Your point?

Obsidian
04-23-2017, 11:31 AM
Not "expelled" to prison. Sent to prison. For crying out loud, at least get the terminology right. And it was the servant's victim who only got prison. The bad servant actually got tortured.

tabibito
04-23-2017, 11:54 AM
Depending on context, παρεδωκεν actually means he, she, or it: surrendered, entrusted, transmitted, offered, allowed, bestowed, betrayed - and "expelled" is for context an acceptable rendering: but yes, he was handed to the tormentors, questioners, torturers, inquisitors as you have stated.
So his debt having been forgiven, the servant went on to be unforgiving, whereupon the forgiveness was annulled (as demonstrated by the fact that he was delivered into the hands of the tormentors until such time as his debt had been repaid.)

So - forgiveness of obligations, duties, debts, is demonstrated to not be unconditional.

Obsidian
04-23-2017, 12:27 PM
I already stated the reality: There are two different categories of forgiveness. The first gets you into the kingdom. The second gives you fellowship with the king. The parable doesn't deal with the first variety because it takes place within the kingdom already.

tabibito
04-23-2017, 12:32 PM
And the outcome for people who have entered the kingdom if they don't do what is required is what?

Obsidian
04-23-2017, 06:40 PM
To be tortured until they comply

Romans 14:8-10
For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lordís. For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living. But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

Revelation 2:22-23
Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds. And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.

KingsGambit
04-23-2017, 08:54 PM
:no: