Hate Of Reformed Theology

[Socialite]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Socialite View Post
You've never met one then.

That's probably John Piper verbatim.

One thing I've noticed on this post so far, is the attitude that sin is only sin until it's become an action. That's not the standard Jesus drew up.

BLUME:
On the contrary, I already implied that sin is a moral force whether we act upon it or not.

Is it a moral force (external) or a moral force (internal) or both? Are we still in a "body of death" while at the same time a "new creation?"

I know LUKE2424 (I think that's his handle) suggested he had thought of sin, but had not acted on it, so he was okay. This is why I made the observation. Our hearts are where we sin the most. And God looks on the heart!

Quote:
For example, he told the man who never cheated on his wife he was still an adulterer by looking on another woman. At the playing field of action, many of us are still guilty, but the Pharisees thought they had that one down. However, Jesus informed them that it was their heart that was full of sin. They had the moral laws down, but their hearts were distant from God and filled with pride.
BLUME:
Amen.

And I see that as an indictment on us all. Another reason we all need the Cross.

Quote:
At the heart level, I realize I'm still a sinner --- a sinner, overcoming by the Spirit, learning how to walk in God's grace and not my own record, and one growing until the day we are glorified.

BLUME:
This is the sort of thing I have problems with. The word never describes as us sinners in the present sense. We are sanctified ones. Saints.

Sanctified, is our process of being redeemed, made holy, etc.. Justified is our positional difference before God. Positionally I am righteous. At a heart-level, I am re-born as a son of God. But we are not delivered from this body of sin yet. We still are inclined to sin, doubt, suffer, become afraid, die, etc.

I think when most are describing Christians as "sinners saved by Grace" it's the truth. Without the Grace of God, that's exactly how he sees us. We are no more perfect.

Quote:
But perfect we are far from. It seems Pennies don't feel that way (in my experience). If they do admit we are sinners, it's viewed in terms of moralism, and not what sin is really about.

How many times a day to I fail to trust God? Get anxious not believing He is in control? Become worried about other's opinion not believing He is most glorious? A hateful thought about the annoying person next to me (not showing love -- one of his greatest commandments). Lustful thoughts and looks? Selfishness? Yeah... knowing my heart, this is WHY I strive to live a life 'in the Spirit,' in response to Grace, etc...

BLUME:
I think these are issues that reveal immaturity in the Spirit rather than evidence we are still sinners.

This immaturity is still sin. Failing to trust God was the most fundamental of sins, and was the sin behind Eve's disobedience. It's where it all began. The more mature we become, the deeper that trust becomes. But it's not perfected yet.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Socialite

Is it a moral force (external) or a moral force (internal) or both? Are we still in a "body of death" while at the same time a "new creation?"

Yes!

But the BODY OF DEATH was termed so because Paul saw that sin (the moral force) was IN that body, internally, and he seemingly felt he could not escape it aside from actually DYING and leaving that body! He spoke of the body in those terms in his hypothetical state of ANY person who is saved and does not know they can walk after the Spirit. He described what a person saved will experience when they do not realize what life will be lived when one tries to live by LAW to serve God, rather than newness of the Spirit.

And note what Paul said! THERE IS A DELIVERANCE from the body of death! He thanked God for that deliverance that comes THROUGH JESUS CHRIST, which is basically what he said in Rom 7:4.

I have long considered this part of Paul's words. I know there is more to it than I can presently grasp. But somehow, by revelation of our death with Christ, we are delivered from our bodies by PROXY, so to speak. This occurs when we know that Christ's death that led to His resurrection is actually our deaths which were meant to lead us to experience a resurrection ("present yourselves alive from the dead" - Ro 6:13) while in mortal bodies (Rom 8:11-13).

I know LUKE2424 (I think that's his handle) suggested he had thought of sin, but had not acted on it, so he was okay. This is why I made the observation. Our hearts are where we sin the most. And God looks on the heart!

I agree. But even THAT can be overcome.

And I see that as an indictment on us all. Another reason we all need the Cross.

We always need the cross in this life, for sure. That is because carrying our crosses and denying ourselves is the same thing as saying we walk after the Spirit to not fulfill the lusts of the flesh. The cross slays flesh so as to cause us to receive empowerment of resurrection Life from the Spirit. That empowerment causes us to not sin.

Sanctified, is our process of being redeemed, made holy, etc.. Justified is our positional difference before God. Positionally I am righteous.

Right. But revelation and spiritual maturity through Paul's revelation causes this to occur experientially.

At a heart-level, I am re-born as a son of God. But we are not delivered from this body of sin yet. We still are inclined to sin, doubt, suffer, become afraid, die, etc.

YES WE ARE! Again, read the last two verses of Rom 7. Paul said HE thanked God he was already delivered through Christ and the cross, which is what he was trying to teach in Rom 6.

I think when most are describing Christians as "sinners saved by Grace" it's the truth. Without the Grace of God, that's exactly how he sees us. We are no more perfect.

But the Word does not describe us like that. Granted it is a humbling effort, but I think it goes against Paul's focus in Romans.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Yes!

But the BODY OF DEATH was termed so because Paul saw that sin (the moral force) was IN that body, internally, and he seemingly felt he could not escape it aside from actually DYING and leaving that body! He spoke of the body in those terms in his hypothetical state of ANY person who is saved and does not know they can walk after the Spirit. He described what a person saved will experience when they do not realize what life will be lived when one tries to live by LAW to serve God, rather than newness of the Spirit.

And note what Paul said! THERE IS A DELIVERANCE from the body of death! He thanked God for that deliverance that comes THROUGH JESUS CHRIST, which is basically what he said in Rom 7:4.

I have long considered this part of Paul's words. I know there is more to it than I can presently grasp. But somehow, by revelation of our death with Christ, we are delivered from our bodies by PROXY, so to speak. This occurs when we know that Christ's death that led to His resurrection is actually our deaths which were meant to lead us to experience a resurrection ("present yourselves alive from the dead" - Ro 6:13) while in mortal bodies (Rom 8:11-13).



I agree. But even THAT can be overcome.



We always need the cross in this life, for sure. That is because carrying our crosses and denying ourselves is the same thing as saying we walk after the Spirit to not fulfill the lusts of the flesh. The cross slays flesh so as to cause us to receive empowerment of resurrection Life from the Spirit. That empowerment causes us to not sin.



Right. But revelation and spiritual maturity through Paul's revelation causes this to occur experientially.



YES WE ARE! Again, read the last two verses of Rom 7. Paul said HE thanked God he was already delivered through Christ and the cross, which is what he was trying to teach in Rom 6.



But the Word does not describe us like that. Granted it is a humbling effort, but I think it goes against Paul's focus in Romans.

Blume, both Romans 6 and 12 make it clear that we are no longer slaves to sin but slaves to righteousness. I don't dispute that.

What is sounds like is there is an anxiety when someone suggests that Christians don't still sin -- fearing that this will be license for people to willfully commit sin. This is probably the similar argument Paul was beating-to-the-punch in Romans 6-7, after his wonderful articulation of Grace in the preceding chapters. The way Paul said it, the cross covers us historically, presently and in the future. Christ did it! So the reaction is, "well then should we just continue to sin?"

It should also be noted that "living in sin" is not the same as one who lives a life in the Spirit, but sins. This is hard to splice out in technical terms, but not so ambiguous when we see what this looks like (a committed vs. a uncommitted believer).

The reality of being freed from sin, and the "experiential" reality increasingly match as we are sanctified, but don't always.

Otherwise, I make the Spirit and Paul a liar --- because I often become aware when sin is in my heart... and even when I act upon it. And it's almost daily! At the same time, most would not view my life as one "lived in the flesh." And God views me as righteous, since I'm in Christ. So, if we are freed from death, sin no longer having reign on us, in the sense that it's no longer possible, and that's expected of Christ, then I can't be so sure I'm even saved! Can you???

I don't propose an encouragement to sin -- in fact, I'd say the reality of the Spirit working in our lives, should produce good, obedient fruit. But I find it necessary to assure believers that they aren't sub-Christian when they sin, because they will. And He still loves them and doesn't condemn them (Rom 8). We have an advocate with the Father.


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

Anyone who says they have not sinned is living a lie. In the verse above you must notice John adds himself into the mix of sinners. He says if we say we have no sin. “No” in the Greek is “ou” and is expressed absolutely, and emphatically.

John is addressing believers “In Christ”, not the unsaved. Here in this verse John tells us if we claim we have not sinned we make Jesus Christ a liar. John tells us His (God's) word cannot be in someone who says they have never sinned, or even in those who claim now that, because they are saved, they no longer sin. Again John places himself in the middle of this assertion by using the words “we” and “us”

“If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.” 1 John 1:10.

“My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:” 1 John 2:1.
Can you see what a contradiction this verse is when we neglect the exegeses of the scriptures? “My little children” is referring to born again believers and John wants us to fully understand that point. When we compare “That ye sin not” to the previous verse we can see John isn’t advocating sinning. He’s simply telling us to turn away from habitual sin. In other words don’t let our whole focus in life be on one big sin party without thought of the consequences. If that be your case, salvation has eluded you.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Socialite

Blume, both Romans 6 and 12 make it clear that we are no longer slaves to sin but slaves to righteousness. I don't dispute that.

I know. But what you feel that implies and what I feel it implies may not be the same thing. I think we are bound to slavery if we sin and do not want to. I would think you feel it means we may sin but should not be condemned.

What is sounds like is there is an anxiety when someone suggests that Christians don't still sin -- fearing that this will be license for people to willfully commit sin.

Maybe. But that is due to false teaching, too. We can believe we can get to the place where we do not sin, and yet not be condemned if we do in the meantime.

This is probably the similar argument Paul was beating-to-the-punch in Romans 6-7, after his wonderful articulation of Grace in the preceding chapters. The way Paul said it, the cross covers us historically, presently and in the future. Christ did it! So the reaction is, "well then should we just continue to sin?"

It should also be noted that "living in sin" is not the same as one who lives a life in the Spirit, but sins. This is hard to splice out in technical terms, but not so ambiguous when we see what this looks like (a committed vs. a uncommitted believer).

The reality of being freed from sin, and the "experiential" reality increasingly match as we are sanctified, but don't always.

This is a matter of maturity.

Otherwise, I make the Spirit and Paul a liar --- because I often become aware when sin is in my heart... and even when I act upon it. And it's almost daily! At the same time, most would not view my life as one "lived in the flesh."

But what is living after the flesh and what is not? I think it is reliance uipon fleshly ability to not sin. Most think living after the flesh is adulterating and lying and stealing, but Paul said it was something else. It is actually trying to please God through self effort instigated by trying to please God through sheer obedience to commandments.

And God views me as righteous, since I'm in Christ. So, if we are freed from death, sin no longer having reign on us, in the sense that it's no longer possible, and that's expected of Christ, then I can't be so sure I'm even saved! Can you???

Sure! I have lived and looked at it in the way I described now for about 25 years. I am not condemned to defeat when I sin, but just remind myself I have more maturity to experience and more illumination.

I don't propose an encouragement to sin -- in fact, I'd say the reality of the Spirit working in our lives, should produce good, obedient fruit. But I find it necessary to assure believers that they aren't sub-Christian when they sin, because they will.

I agree. I have maintained all along that it is not that REAL Christians do not sin.'

And He still loves them and doesn't condemn them (Rom 8). We have an advocate with the Father.

I agree, but I do not think Rom 8:1 is saying the same thing John did in 1 John 2:1.

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

Anyone who says they have not sinned is living a lie.

Right! But that does not mean we cannot STOP sinning.

In the verse above you must notice John adds himself into the mix of sinners. He says if we say we have no sin. “No” in the Greek is “ou” and is expressed absolutely, and emphatically.

John is addressing believers “In Christ”, not the unsaved.

Right, but that does not mean we cannot stop sinning. John even emphasized he wrote for the purpose of seeing us not sin. He was not being idealistic, either, for that is guile.

Here in this verse John tells us if we claim we have not sinned we make Jesus Christ a liar. John tells us His (God's) word cannot be in someone who says they have never sinned, or even in those who claim now that, because they are saved, they no longer sin. Again John places himself in the middle of this assertion by using the words “we” and “us”

“If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.” 1 John 1:10.

He did not place it in the present. But, anyway, I never said we are not saved if we sin. Neither did Paul, in my estimation.

“My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:” 1 John 2:1.
Can you see what a contradiction this verse is when we neglect the exegeses of the scriptures? “My little children” is referring to born again believers and John wants us to fully understand that point.

It is immature believers, S. LITTLE children, contrasted in the epistle itself from young men and fathers.

When we compare “That ye sin not” to the previous verse we can see John isn’t advocating sinning. He’s simply telling us to turn away from habitual sin. In other words don’t let our whole focus in life be on one big sin party without thought of the consequences. If that be your case, salvation has eluded you.

I think John meant more and yet that does not mean salvation eludes us either, though.

[Socialite]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by mfblume

I know. But what you feel that implies and what I feel it implies may not be the same thing. I think we are bound to slavery if we sin and do not want to. I would think you feel it means we may sin but should not be condemned.

Then, let me ask you, do you sin, Mike -- or are you now sinless?
Does that mean you are bound to sin?

(Never get clear answers on this question)


Maybe. But that is due to false teaching, too. We can believe we can get to the place where we do not sin, and yet not be condemned if we do in the meantime.

This is a matter of maturity.

But what you call "maturity," it should evident that it's also SIN! Corinthians were called "little children" as well, and referred to as brothers in Christ, and they were fornicating, prideful, etc. It most definitely was a lack of discipleship and maturity, but let's be clear, it's also sin.

But what is living after the flesh and what is not? I think it is reliance uipon fleshly ability to not sin. Most think living after the flesh is adulterating and lying and stealing, but Paul said it was something else. It is actually trying to please God through self effort instigated by trying to please God through sheer obedience to commandments.

Agree. But my point, that you responded to here, is that I have sin. I acknowledge that. Yet, I live in Christ. I am His. And, I'd like to think of myself as a little more mature of a believer too.

Sure! I have lived and looked at it in the way I described now for about 25 years. I am not condemned to defeat when I sin, but just remind myself I have more maturity to experience and more illumination.

Again, what you call "immaturity" is still sin. That goes back to the question: Does that mean we are "bound to slavery" as you indicated in the bold above?

Quote:
I don't propose an encouragement to sin -- in fact, I'd say the reality of the Spirit working in our lives, should produce good, obedient fruit. But I find it necessary to assure believers that they aren't sub-Christian when they sin, because they will.
BLUME:
I agree. I have maintained all along that it is not that REAL Christians do not sin.'

See, and the way you phrase this is simply dishonest. "Real Christians," first of all sounds like some grade school kid chest bumping about "real men don't (Fill in the Blank)." Christians are very real and imperfect. So I couldn't disagree with you more.

I agree, but I do not think Rom 8:1 is saying the same thing John did in 1 John 2:1.

Right! But that does not mean we cannot STOP sinning.

Right, but that does not mean we cannot stop sinning. John even emphasized he wrote for the purpose of seeing us not sin. He was not being idealistic, either, for that is guile.

Never said we couldn't STOP. Said we still can't be perfect. It couldn't be more clear in 1 John.

Quote:
Here in this verse John tells us if we claim we have not sinned we make Jesus Christ a liar. John tells us His (God's) word cannot be in someone who says they have never sinned, or even in those who claim now that, because they are saved, they no longer sin. Again John places himself in the middle of this assertion by using the words “we” and “us”

“If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.” 1 John 1:10.
He did not place it in the present. But, anyway, I never said we are not saved if we sin. Neither did Paul, in my estimation.

Blume, any exegetical commentary on this shows he's referring to the present -- and he's talking to believers. If we have sin, and we aren't "real Christians" then how can we be saved? And, BTW, I believe Lukey's view is you can't be saved if you sin --- either that, or you have to make sure you acknowledge and individually confess each sin in time before you are called home else be lost for eternity *cue evil music*

[mfblume]

[QUOTE=Socialite;1021223]

Then, let me ask you, do you sin, Mike -- or are you now sinless?

Yes I sin. But far far less than in time gone by til now.

Does that mean you are bound to sin?

Put it this way. When Paul said he was bound to sin I believe he meant he caused himself to be bound to it, for he was speaking hypothetically of someone saved, and not unsaved. And he was putting himself in slavery to sin, which is all that we can do with sin once saved. So, yes, I put myself in slavery to sin by simply not walking after the Spirit.

But what you call "maturity," it should evident that it's also SIN!

Oh, I do not water it down at all! IT IS SIN! And it needs repentance that is utmost sincere and genuine. But by the same token, a person may think Paul is simply telling people that if they sin they should not be condemned, and I think that is watering his words down a little. I claim he meant we will not sin and will not therefore be condemned in the way he described it at the end of chapter 7 if we learn to walk in the Spirit and not sin.

Corinthians were called "little children" as well, and referred to as brothers in Christ, and they were fornicating, prideful, etc. It most definitely was a lack of discipleship and maturity, but let's be clear, it's also sin.

Amen!!

Agree. But my point, that you responded to here, is that I have sin. I acknowledge that. Yet, I live in Christ. I am His. And, I'd like to think of myself as a little more mature of a believer too.

It's not about you or me. Maturity, as I honestly see it, is greatest when we are so full of faith that we are seated with Christ above this that it affects our behaviour. That is KINGDOM Christianity. A man who controls his own spirit is greater than one who takes a city.

Again, what you call "immaturity" is still sin.

I never said it wasn't.

See, and the way you phrase this is simply dishonest. "Real Christians," first of all sounds like some grade school kid chest bumping about "real men don't (Fill in the Blank)." Christians are very real and imperfect. So I couldn't disagree with you more.

You need to re-read what I said, for you totally missed it. I said IT IS NOT true that "Real Christians do not sin." I simply responded to your use of terms since you asked me if I thought REAL Christians do not sin. I said that is not the case.

Never said we couldn't STOP. Said we still can't be perfect. It couldn't be more clear in 1 John.

I agree.

Blume, any exegetical commentary on this shows he's referring to the present -- and he's talking to believers. If we have sin, and we aren't "real Christians" then how can we be saved?

Sin is a principle, though. A moral force. And yes we have sin. SINS are actions whether inner or outward.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Socialite

Blume, both Romans 6 and 12 make it clear that we are no longer slaves to sin but slaves to righteousness. I don't dispute that.

What is sounds like is there is an anxiety when someone suggests that Christians don't still sin -- fearing that this will be license for people to willfully commit sin. This is probably the similar argument Paul was beating-to-the-punch in Romans 6-7, after his wonderful articulation of Grace in the preceding chapters. The way Paul said it, the cross covers us historically, presently and in the future. Christ did it! So the reaction is, "well then should we just continue to sin?"

It should also be noted that "living in sin" is not the same as one who lives a life in the Spirit, but sins. This is hard to splice out in technical terms, but not so ambiguous when we see what this looks like (a committed vs. a uncommitted believer).

The reality of being freed from sin, and the "experiential" reality increasingly match as we are sanctified, but don't always.

Otherwise, I make the Spirit and Paul a liar --- because I often become aware when sin is in my heart... and even when I act upon it. And it's almost daily! At the same time, most would not view my life as one "lived in the flesh." And God views me as righteous, since I'm in Christ. So, if we are freed from death, sin no longer having reign on us, in the sense that it's no longer possible, and that's expected of Christ, then I can't be so sure I'm even saved! Can you???

I don't propose an encouragement to sin -- in fact, I'd say the reality of the Spirit working in our lives, should produce good, obedient fruit. But I find it necessary to assure believers that they aren't sub-Christian when they sin, because they will. And He still loves them and doesn't condemn them (Rom 8). We have an advocate with the Father.


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

Anyone who says they have not sinned is living a lie. In the verse above you must notice John adds himself into the mix of sinners. He says if we say we have no sin. “No” in the Greek is “ou” and is expressed absolutely, and emphatically.

John is addressing believers “In Christ”, not the unsaved. Here in this verse John tells us if we claim we have not sinned we make Jesus Christ a liar. John tells us His (God's) word cannot be in someone who says they have never sinned, or even in those who claim now that, because they are saved, they no longer sin. Again John places himself in the middle of this assertion by using the words “we” and “us”

“If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.” 1 John 1:10.

“My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:” 1 John 2:1.
Can you see what a contradiction this verse is when we neglect the exegeses of the scriptures? “My little children” is referring to born again believers and John wants us to fully understand that point. When we compare “That ye sin not” to the previous verse we can see John isn’t advocating sinning. He’s simply telling us to turn away from habitual sin. In other words don’t let our whole focus in life be on one big sin party without thought of the consequences. If that be your case, salvation has eluded you.

Have fun Blume with Mr. OSAS

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by LUKE2447

Have fun Blume with Mr. OSAS

As I said, Calvinists cannot see us above sin as I honestly think Paul taught it. It only becomes an ideal, at best.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by mfblume

As I said, Calvinists cannot see us above sin as I honestly think Paul taught it. It only becomes an ideal, at best.

exactly... It HAS TO BE a forensic justification vs practical in their view. We are saved by his leading not ourselves.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by mfblume

As I said, Calvinists cannot see us above sin as I honestly think Paul taught it. It only becomes an ideal, at best.

You've obviously never heard of John Piper or Mark Driscoll.

You are reading your own fears into their theology, as opposed to the reality.