What is sin to a believer?

[Dave M]

Below is your blasphemy and contradiction of scripture:

what a shame you allowed emotion and name calling into this conversation I am done

 

[regibassman57]

Dave M,
There is no name calling in this, and when I used the pronoun "you" i'm talking about you as a believer. I don't need to call you out of your name. Emotions is a part of life; either we will deal with it, or it will deal with us. This is very beneficial information.
But I honetly think you playing. Looking at some of your post, you are not that sensitive. So why you playing :smile:

 

[bibleguy]

@bibleguy

What is an unfruitful believer according to scripture?

You presented:
“James 4:17 plainly says that when you do wrong, you SIN.”

I would agree; we know James was speaking to Jews on their level in their terms (1Co. 9:20). They did not have the revelation knowledge we have today. This is why God’s Grace is sufficient.

What is the definition of sin according to the Torah? I’m sure it’s missing the mark.

I believe any wrong doing is of Satan, but it’s not sin in God’s eyes. As I’ve said, “sin is missing the mark.” Believers have no mark to miss, because we are not justified by the law. A person can only sin if they are justified by the law (Rom.3:19, 20); this is the principle understanding scripture gives. If the law tells you you sin, then you sin. The law cannot tell me I sin. Believers are justified by Jesus Christ who took all man’s sins upon Himself. The Judicial Law to told a person they've sinned; believer are not justified by the Judicial Law of Moses. It cannot tell a believer they've sinned.

I’ve presented factual, scriptural information that specifically says what Jesus did regarding sin. You cannot refute “ANY” of those scriptures I’ve presented to you.

I have asked you to present a scripture that teaches, "the penalty of sin has been removed, but sin is still applicable;" you haven't. The simplicity is Jesus came into the world to save sinners from sin (Eph.2:5); below you purposefully contradicted what scripture said. You didn't contradict what I said.

I’ve presented to you many scriptures that teach what Jesus did regarding man’s sins. You’ve made the choice to reject the scriptural references that I’ve place with factual scriptures. You’ve added conflicting carnal knowledge to express how you've interpreted scripture.

G264 (sin)
hamartanō
Perhaps from G1 (as a negative particle) and the base of G3313; properly “to miss the mark” (and so not share in the prize), that is, (figuratively) “to err”, especially (morally) to sin: - for your faults, offend, sin, trespass.

What did Jesus say He save you from? (Mat. 1:21; Eph. 2:5; 1Ti 1:15)
What did Jesus say He healed you from? (1Pe. 2:24; Mar. 2:17; Isa.33:24)
What did Jesus say He sanctified you from? (Acts 26:18)
What did Jesus say He made you free from? (Rom. 6:7, 18, 22; 8:2)
What did Jesus say He “put away” from you and cancelled? (Heb. 9:26) (Put away Greek definition: G115; cancel, disannul)
What did Jesus say He cleansed you from? (1Jo. 1:7, 9)
What did Jesus say He washed you from? (Acts 22:16; Rev. 1:5)
What did Jesus say He redeemed you from? (Heb. 9:12; Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:14
Was it said when Jesus came he would make an end of sins? (Dan. 9:24)

Above are my references that Jesus saved man from sin:

Below is your blasphemy and contradiction of scripture:
So sure, you are "saved" from sin, but you sometimes still sin.
Sure, your sins are "blotted out", but you sometimes still sin.
You are "free from sin", but you sometimes still sin.
You are "cleansed from sin", but you sometimes still sin.
You are "sanctified from sin", but you sometimes still sin.

Hi! Your post is contradictory.

#1. regibassman57 agrees that wrongdoing is sin ("I would agree", he states).
#2. regibassman57 states that "I believe any wrong doing is of Satan, but it’s not sin..."

Please note! #1 and #2 are CLEARLY contradictory!

First you agree that wrongdoing is sin (per Jas. 4:17).
Then you claim wrongdoing is of Satan, but is not sin.

So, until you can set forth a consistent theological position, we have no good reason to accept your viewpoint.

blessings...

 

[bibleguy]

what a shame you allowed emotion and name calling into this conversation I am done

Hi Dave,

Yes, that was a strong statement from regi...but that's ok! Sometimes I get a bit zealous too, and that's ok! So I think maybe I can see what's going on here....and I'm happy to give regibassman57 the room he needs to think through his position. I think my skin is thick enough to handle it...

And yes, he made some strong statements which I trust he believes are the logical consequence of the position he embraces. So, not that I want to defend him, but he is probably just trying to be consistent.

That's ok....it takes some patience to really expose the underlying misconceptions which sometimes lead us astray.

And, I think I've found a good step in helping regibassman57 realize he needs to modify his position.

It's by using James 4:17. James 4:17 says that wrongdoing is sin, and he even agrees that wrongdoing is sin, and even he admits that he sometimes does wrong.

But then he also says that wrongdoing is of Satan, but is not sin.

And he also says that he does not sin, even though he sometimes does wrong.

So there it is...we've caught him in TWO clear contradictions.

That's the best we can do, I suppose.

Now it's up to him to be honest with ALL Scripture (and the witness of the Spirit) and acknowledge that he must modify his viewpoint so as to resolve this problem in his viewpoint.

A contradictory viewpoint is ABSOLUTELY false. And we've caught him, now, in two contradictions.

Hopefully he will come around soon, so we can move more deeply into some VERY important issues which remain to be resolved in our chat here in this thread.

I sympathize with your frustration....but I've learned that planting seed, watering, and harvesting, is not always a quick process....some people need more time than others.

We (the Christian establishment) didn't arrive in our present state overnight, and I don't think we will be fully restored to truly authentic Biblical faith anytime particularly soon.

I expect it may well be a few more centuries before Dt. 30:1-8, for example, has a more reasonable chance of being substantially fulfilled.

But that's ok! We do our part in this generation...and then the next generation after us can move forward even further.

We live in exciting times!

blessings...

PS I might add that Jesus also called names (Mt. 23)....so name-calling is not technically sinful (or wrong!), in general.

 

[regibassman57]

Bibleguy,
Let me clarify for you seeing you are taking what I say out of context.
1. "I would agree; (It plainly says when a person does wrong it's sin) I am not agreeing that I or any believer sins) (James was speaking to "Jews" on their level in their terms) (1Co. 9:20). "They did not have the "revelation knowledge we have" today. This is why God’s Grace is sufficient."

2. I believe any wrong doing is of Satan, but it’s not sin in God’s eyes. (Why? because God is not imputing sin to believers)

3. As I’ve said, “sin is missing the mark.” Believers have no mark to miss, because we are not justified by the law.

If we will continue, please do not take what I say out of context.

Thank you

 

[bibleguy]

Bibleguy,
Let me clarify for you seeing you are taking what I say out of context.
1. "I would agree; (It plainly says when a person does wrong it's sin) I am not agreeing that I or any believer sins) (James was speaking to "Jews" on their level in their terms) (1Co. 9:20). "They did not have the "revelation knowledge we have" today. This is why God’s Grace is sufficient."

2. I believe any wrong doing is of Satan, but it’s not sin in God’s eyes. (Why? because God is not imputing sin to believers)

3. As I’ve said, “sin is missing the mark.” Believers have no mark to miss, because we are not justified by the law.

If we will continue, please do not take what I say out of context.

Thank you

Hi regi, I hope you know that I would not intentionally take what you say out of context....

That's why we sometimes need to state (and then re-state) our viewpoints multiple times in multiple ways, so that others clearly understand the point we are trying to communicate.

Now...back to your position: It's still contradictory.

Here's the problem we have now:

#1. regibassman57 says he sometimes does wrong.
#2. regibassman57 says that "when a person does wrong it's sin".
#3. regibassman57 sometimes sins (from 1 and 2).
#4. regibassman is "not agreeing that...any believer sins".

There it is....a CLEARLY inconsistent set of propositions.

#1 and #2 and #4 come directly from regibassman57's comments (so they can not be denied).

#3 LOGICALLY NECESSARILY follows from the conjunction of #1 and #2 (thus, #3 can ALSO not be denied).

So, regibassman57's position is ABSOLUTELY false.

He MUST revise his viewpoint to eliminate the contradiction.

He has still not eliminated the contradiction in his position.

We must continue to wait for him to do so...

regards....

 

[regibassman57]

Bibleguy,
We can leave it as is. My points qualify themselves. The Spirit of God will qualify truth in the hearts of those that love Him.

Did you get my post on 1John 3:9?

 

[bibleguy]

Bibleguy,
We can leave it as is. My points qualify themselves. The Spirit of God will qualify truth in the hearts of those that love Him.

Did you get my post on 1John 3:9?

Hi Regi,

Your points qualify as CONTRADICTORY!

So you don't even see the contradiction in your viewpoint? Well...I find that hard to believe.

More likely: You're simply ignoring Jas. 4:17 because it doesn't fit into your theological system.

That's not acceptable.

As Biblical Christians, we accept and integrate ALL SCRIPTURE into our viewpoint.

You are, thus, not behaving as a Biblical Christian ought to behave.

And if you do not bear the FRUIT of a Biblical Christian, well, then this leads to believe you are not a Biblical Christian.

Of course, I HOPE this is not the case...but we are given license to identify people in accordance with their fruits (Mt. 7:16).

CONCLUSION

1. Regibassman57 confesses that he sometimes does wrong (not right).
2. Jas. 4:17 states that wrongdoing is sin.
3. Regibassman57 sometimes sins (from 1 and 2).
4. Regibassman57 denies that he sometimes sins.

And, #3 and #4 are a blatantly contradictory.

I must call you out. You have opposed Scripture.

You have repeatedly refused to eliminate the contradiction from your viewpoint.

You have opposed the truth of Jas. 4:17.

You have been repeatedly shown that it is true that there is a contradiction in your viewpoint.

You have been repeatedly warned.

The Spirit of truth does NOT uphold contradictions!

Thus, you are exhibiting opposition to that very Spirit.

I'm not sure it is beneficial for us to continue direct dialogue, given your opposition to learning here.

After all, your ongoing rejection of the greater measure of truth I set before you will, in fact, merely incur upon you a greater measure of liability for even greater judgement (Lk. 12:48).

Why should I continue to set truth before you, if you will simply continue to reject and oppose it (without any justification for doing so)?

Sadly, it may be time to shake some dust off my feet.

It's better for me to leave you in the darkness of your own self-imposed delusion, rather than see you increase your lack of reward in future judgement by virtue of your greater rejection of the greater truth I continue to patiently set before you. Remember Mt. 10:14-16?

I may need to reserve the right, though, to offer general commentary directed at any other readers who may desire to read through this unpleasant discourse, lest others be misled by your persistent resistance to learning truths which contradict your interpretations.

 

[regibassman57]

@All Viewers

This post is about 1 John 1:

Who was John speaking to? (Gal. 2:7-9)

Verse 1: We know John was talking about Jesus Christ. John wrote the book of the Gospel of John.

Verse 2: The Jews (John’s Brethren) those who he was talking to did not know or have the understanding of Jesus Christ; this is why John was bearing witness (1Joh. 1:1) or proclaiming unto them Jesus Christ (John 20:19-23).

Verse 3: Again John was declaring and announcing to these Jews knowledge of Jesus Christ, that they may have “fellowship” with Him as well as God His Father. If a man does not have fellowship with the Son, they do not have fellowship with the Father (Joh. 14:6; 1Jo. 1:3; 2:22-24; 2Jo. 1:9).

Verse 4: John realizes his brethrens need the joy of The Lord; without Christ they have no joy (we are not talking about the joy of the world) (Joh. 16:20, 21; 17:13).

Verse 5: John begins to thoroughly explain to these Jews what the message is concerning this God and His Son Jesus whom they have not known. John teaches them that God is light and there is no darkness (sin) in Him at all. This is the second time John expresses declaring something unto these Jews (because they didn’t know). This was done because these listeners are not saved. This is John’s witness to get them born again.

Verse 6: John explains a man cannot say they have fellowship with God or His son and walk in darkness (sin); they’re lying; (John just said “verse 5,” there is no darkness (sin) in God at all); they are not doing or telling the truth.

Verse 7: John starts to reveal to these Jews what they need to do in order to have fellowship with God and His Son. If they walk in the light of Jesus Christ is light, they can have fellowship with God, His Son and with John (Joh. 8:12; 12:46). This is how their joy can be full; and the blood of Jesus will cleanse them of “all” their sins. A man cannot be in the body of Christ with sins (there is no sins in Jesus); this is why Jesus will cleanse a man first before placing them in His body.

Verse 8: If a man says they have no sin they’re deceiving themselves. A believer can say they have no sin without deceiving themselves. Jesus just told these Jews, He will cleanse them of “all” their sins. Once these Jews are cleansed they “can say” they have no sin. An unbeliever can never say they have no sin and they will be deceiving themselves because have not been cleansed (Heb. 10:11, 12, 14, 17, 18). Verse 7 does not specify a time of how long the cleansing agent last, but Hebrews 10 does.

Verse 9: John explains to these Jews the cleansing process whereby they can say, they have no sin. If they confess their sins God is faithful and just to forgive them of "all" their sins and cleanse them of "all" unrighteousness (1Jo. 1:7; Rom. 10:9, 10)

Verse 10: If a person says they have “not sinned,” (past tense for believer, present tense for unbelievers) they make God a liar and His word is not in them (Rom. 3:4; 3:23).

 

[bibleguy]

@All Viewers

This post is about 1John 1:

Who was John speaking to? (Gal. 2:7-9)

Verse 1: We know John was talking about Jesus Christ. John wrote the book of the Gospel of John.

Verse 2: The Jews (John’s Brethren) those who he was talking to did not know or have the understanding of Jesus Christ; this is why John was bearing witness (1Joh. 1:1) or proclaiming unto them Jesus Christ (John 20:19-23).

Verse 3: Again John was declaring and announcing to these Jews knowledge of Jesus Christ, that they may have “fellowship” with Him as well as God His Father. If a man does not have fellowship with the Son, they do not have fellowship with the Father (Joh. 14:6; 1Jo. 1:3; 2:22-24; 2Jo. 1:9).

Verse 4: John realizes his brethrens need the joy of The Lord; without Christ they have no joy (we are not talking about the joy of the world) (Joh. 16:20, 21; 17:13).

Verse 5: John begins to thoroughly explain to these Jews what the message is concerning this God and His Son Jesus whom they have not known. John teaches them that God is light and there is no darkness (sin) in Him at all. This is the second time John expresses declaring something unto these Jews (because they didn’t know). This was done because these listeners are not saved. This is John’s witness to get them born again.

Verse 6: John explains a man cannot say they have fellowship with God or His son and walk in darkness (sin); they’re lying; (John just said “verse 5,” there is no darkness (sin) in God at all); they are not doing or telling the truth.

Verse 7: John starts to reveal to these Jews what they need to do in order to have fellowship with God and His Son. If they walk in the light of Jesus Christ is light, they can have fellowship with God, His Son and with John (Joh. 8:12; 12:46). This is how their joy can be full; and the blood of Jesus will cleanse them of “all” their sins. A man cannot be in the body of Christ with sins (there is no sins in Jesus); this is why Jesus will cleanse a man first before placing them in His body.

Verse 8: If a man says they have no sin they’re deceiving themselves. A believer can say they have no sin without deceiving themselves. Jesus just told these Jews, He will cleanse them of “all” their sins. Once these Jews are cleansed they “can say” they have no sin. An unbeliever can never say they have no sin and they will be deceiving themselves because have not been cleansed (Heb. 10:11, 12, 14, 17, 18). Verse 7 does not specify a time of how long the cleansing agent last, but Hebrews 10 does.

Verse 9: John explains to these Jews the cleansing process whereby they can say, they have no sin. If they confess their sins God is faithful and just to forgive them of "all" their sins and cleanse them of "all" unrighteousness (1Jo. 1:7; Rom. 10:9, 10)

Verse 10: If a person says they have “not sinned,” (past tense for believer, present tense for unbelievers) they make God a liar and His word is not in them (Rom. 3:4; 3:23).

Hello all....

Regi writes: "A man cannot be in the body of Christ with sins..."

My response: And at the same time, Christians sometimes still sin.

Here's the proof:

1. Christians sometimes do not do what is right. [regibassman57 agrees]
2. Not doing right is sin (Jas. 4:17).
3. Christians sometimes sin (from 1 and 2).

Just wanted to point that out....

Thanks....

 

[regibassman57]

@Dave M, @bibleguy, @Ivar,

Do New Covenant believers miss the mark?

What is missing the mark (sin) under the Mosaic Law?

From the Cambridge Dictionary: To fail to achieve the result that was intended:

Are believers required, under the New Covenant, to achieve any standard of living that was imposed upon the children of Israel, through justification of the law (1Cor. 15:56;Rom. 7:6, 8)? Which if not fulfilled would result in immediate judgment because of “sin” or “missing of the mark?”

Paul said, “I had not known sin but by the law (Rom.7:7). What law was Paul referring to?

Hebrew definition of sin:

H2398 (sin)
châṭâ'
A primitive root; properly “to miss”; hence (figuratively and generally) to sin; “by inference to forfeit,” “lack,” expiate, repent, (causatively) lead astray, condemn: - bear the blame, cleanse, commit [sin], by fault, harm he hath done, loss, miss, (make) offend (-er), offer for sin, purge, purify (self), make reconciliation, (cause, make) sin (-ful, -ness), “trespassive”

Greek definition of sin:

G264 (sin)
hamartanō
Perhaps from G1 (as a negative particle) and the base of G3313; properly “to miss the mark” (and so not share in the prize), that is, (figuratively) to err, especially (morally) to sin: - for your faults, offend, sin, trespass.

Under the Mosaic Law, Israel had to obey every commandment that was given unto them by The Lord. Any commandment Israel unintentionally or intentionally did not keep, “sin” was imputed unto them because they failed to achieve God’s requirement through keeping His commandments. THEY MISSED THE MARK (Num. 15:28, 29). Israel was under/justified/married to/bound by the Law of Mosses (Rom. 3:19; Deu. 27:26); New Covenant believers (the Church of Christ) is not; because believers in Christ do not miss the mark nor sin.

Because of man, God treated JESUS as if He missed the mark for every man that has ever lived; and sentenced Him to die for the "sin" of the world; from Adam unto the cross (Heb. 9:15; Joh 1:29).

God imputed all man's sins upon Jesus, and equally imputed the penalty that fit the crime for man's sins; which was death.

On the cross when Jesus said, it is finished, and He died giving up the ghost, sin and death were equally condemned. (Rom. 8:2; 1Pet.2;24;Isa.53:4,5,8-12; 2Cor. 5:21) Neither sin nor death can resurrect themselves as Jesus did on the third day.

Every believer that confesses they still sin has resurrected sin in their heart and their mind refusing to believe that sin and the penalty for sin has been crucified and condemned on the cross equally (Rom. 8:2. 3).

Because of sin and death having been condemned in the sight and mind of God, he has stated He will not impute sin to man because He has imputed it unto His Son Jesus Christ. In God’s mind sin and the penalty is condemned. Unless man sees life as God sees it, they will continue to walk in a fleshly mindset (Rom. 3:4; 8:5).

 

[Ivar]

@regibassman57
In the grand scheme of things my expectations is no and here is why;

1Jn 5:16 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
1Jn 5:17 All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.
1Jn 5:18 We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those three verses above seem to imply that whoever is born of God not sin a sin unto death.

Also

2Pe 2:9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:

1Co 10:13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.

Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
Gal 5:23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
Gal 5:24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
---------------------------------------

There are those that Ancient of Days will consider blameless, perfect, and upright in their generations and have no sin.
However we ourselves cannot say that we ourselves have no sin because that is a sin. "If that makes sense"
Those that have no sin will be those that are striving towards perfection in faith and works of God. "In my opinion"

Luk 1:37 For with God nothing shall be impossible.
------------------------------------------------

In the end their is only one judge who decides who is missing the mark or not.

Jas 4:12 There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even if one commits a crime; if one is pardoned for a crime legally is that person considered a criminal?
so for now that will be my answer but it possibly adapts depending on the scriptures that come my way.

 

[regibassman57]

@Ivar,
1Jo 5:17 All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.

1Jo 5:18 We know that whosoever is "born of God" "sins not"; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one touches him not.

G264 (sin)
hamartanō
Perhaps from G1 (as a negative particle) and the base of G3313; properly “to miss the mark” (and so not share in the prize), that is, (figuratively) to err, especially (morally) to sin: - for your faults, offend, sin, trespass.

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

"Double negative"
A double negative is a grammatical construction occurring when two forms of negation are used in the same sentence. Multiple negationis the more general term referring to the occurrence of more than one negative in a clause.

 

[regibassman57]

@Dave M, @bibleguy, @Ivar,
I'm done with the sin topic. I'll look at some other subjects and see what interest me.
Thanks, I enjoyed the fellowship on the sin topic.

 

[Ivar]

@Ivar,
1Jo 5:17 All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.

1Jo 5:18 We know that whosoever is "born of God" "sins not"; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one touches him not.

G264 (sin)
hamartanō
Perhaps from G1 (as a negative particle) and the base of G3313; properly “to miss the mark” (and so not share in the prize), that is, (figuratively) to err, especially (morally) to sin: - for your faults, offend, sin, trespass.

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

@regibassman57
I noticed you had nothing in verse 16 highlighted and you omitted verse 15.
How does verse 15 and 16 play an overall role in 1 John 5 and it's understanding?

1Jn 5:16 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
1Jn 5:17 All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[bibleguy]

@Dave M, @bibleguy, @Ivar,

Do New Covenant believers miss the mark?

What is missing the mark (sin) under the Mosaic Law?

From the Cambridge Dictionary: To fail to achieve the result that was intended:

Are believers required, under the New Covenant, to achieve any standard of living that was imposed upon the children of Israel, through justification of the law (1Cor. 15:56;Rom. 7:6, 8)? Which if not fulfilled would result in immediate judgment because of “sin” or “missing of the mark?”

Paul said, “I had not known sin but by the law (Rom.7:7). What law was Paul referring to?

Hebrew definition of sin:

H2398 (sin)
châṭâ'
A primitive root; properly “to miss”; hence (figuratively and generally) to sin; “by inference to forfeit,” “lack,” expiate, repent, (causatively) lead astray, condemn: - bear the blame, cleanse, commit [sin], by fault, harm he hath done, loss, miss, (make) offend (-er), offer for sin, purge, purify (self), make reconciliation, (cause, make) sin (-ful, -ness), “trespassive”

Greek definition of sin:

G264 (sin)
hamartanō
Perhaps from G1 (as a negative particle) and the base of G3313; properly “to miss the mark” (and so not share in the prize), that is, (figuratively) to err, especially (morally) to sin: - for your faults, offend, sin, trespass.

Under the Mosaic Law, Israel had to obey every commandment that was given unto them by The Lord. Any commandment Israel unintentionally or intentionally did not keep, “sin” was imputed unto them because they failed to achieve God’s requirement through keeping His commandments. THEY MISSED THE MARK (Num. 15:28, 29). Israel was under/justified/married to/bound by the Law of Mosses (Rom. 3:19; Deu. 27:26); New Covenant believers (the Church of Christ) is not; because believers in Christ do not miss the mark nor sin.

Because of man, God treated JESUS as if He missed the mark for every man that has ever lived; and sentenced Him to die for the "sin" of the world; from Adam unto the cross (Heb. 9:15; Joh 1:29).

God imputed all man's sins upon Jesus, and equally imputed the penalty that fit the crime for man's sins; which was death.

On the cross when Jesus said, it is finished, and He died giving up the ghost, sin and death were equally condemned. (Rom. 8:2; 1Pet.2;24;Isa.53:4,5,8-12; 2Cor. 5:21) Neither sin nor death can resurrect themselves as Jesus did on the third day.

Every believer that confesses they still sin has resurrected sin in their heart and their mind refusing to believe that sin and the penalty for sin has been crucified and condemned on the cross equally (Rom. 8:2. 3).

Because of sin and death having been condemned in the sight and mind of God, he has stated He will not impute sin to man because He has imputed it unto His Son Jesus Christ. In God’s mind sin and the penalty is condemned. Unless man sees life as God sees it, they will continue to walk in a fleshly mindset (Rom. 3:4; 8:5).

H2398 and G264 are the SAME WORD (with same meaning! Just different languages). That's WHY the LXX translates H2398 as G264 in, for example, Ex. 20:20.

You wrote: "Every believer that confesses they still sin has resurrected sin in their heart and their mind refusing to believe that sin and the penalty for sin has been crucified and condemned on the cross equally (Rom. 8:2. 3)."

Then YOU must have resurrected sin in your heart! (Of course, I don't believe this. I'm simply showing the logical consequences of the incorrect theological viewpoint you embrace, with the hopes that you will modify your viewpoint to properly account for Jas. 4:17).

Remember?

1. Regibassman57 said he sometimes does wrong (not right).
2. Not doing right is sin (Jas. 4:17).
3. Regibassman57 sometimes sins (from 1 and 2).
4. Regibassman57 says he does not sin.

So, #3 and [HASH=631]#4,[/HASH] here are clear contradictions.

And, so, I still have no clue why you refuse to resolve this internal inconsistency in your theological viewpoint.

And, given Jas. 4:17, it follows that you sometimes sin (and, thus, sometimes miss the mark, if you will), even though you are functioning under the New Covenant.

After all:

1. Sin is violation of Torah (Is. 42:24).
2. Torah passes into the New Covenant (Jer. 31:33).
3. When we eat pork (violating Lev. 11 of the Torah), we sin.

Do genuine Christians among us eat pork? Sure they do! And, they are largely ignorant of the fact that they should not be doing so.

Thus, Christians sin (often in ignorance) all the time.

You wrote: "Israel was under/justified/married to/bound by the Law of Mosses (Rom. 3:19; Deu. 27:26); New Covenant believers (the Church of Christ) is not; because believers in Christ do not miss the mark nor sin."

My response: Nonsense. TORAH PASSES DIRECTLY INTO THE NEW COVENANT!!!!!!!!! (Jer. 31:33).

You can ignore this passage all you like....but it's still true!

So when a Christian eats pork (violating Lev. 11 of the Torah), he sins. (even though it may well be unintentional sin).

blessings...

 

[regibassman57]

@LIFE
What is it that believers are Righteous/innocent of after Jesus Christ’s death and resurrection?

Rom 4:25 Jesus was delivered for our “offences,” and was raised again for our “justification.”

G3900 (offences)
paraptōma
From G3895; “a side slip” (lapse or deviation), that is, (unintentional) error or (wilful) “transgression”: - fall, fault, offence, “sin”, “trespass.”

G1347 (justification)
dikaiōsis
From G1344; “acquittal” (for Christ’s sake): - justification.

Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man “sin entered into the world,” and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that “all have sinned”:

Rom 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made “righteous/innocent”.

G1342 (righteous)
dikaios
From G1349; equitable (in character or act); by implication "innocent," holy (absolutely or relatively): - just, meet, right (-eous).

Jesus came and judged the sin of the world (Joh.1:29; 12:31; 16:11; Rom. 8:2, 3). After sin was judged God found every man that believes in Him righteous/innocent.

 

[Ivar]

@regibassman57
I noticed you had nothing in verse 16 highlighted and you omitted verse 15.
How does verse 15 and 16 play an overall role in 1 John 5 and it's understanding?

1Jn 5:16 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
1Jn 5:17 All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@regibassman57
Correction:
I noticed you had nothing in verse 17 highlighted and you omitted verse 16
How does verse 16, and 17 play in the overall role in 1 John 5 and it's understanding?

 

[regibassman57]

@Ivar,
I'm not dealing with "sin" directly at this point. At least right now.
The answer is in the many post i've already written.

 

[Ivar]

@Ivar,
I'm not dealing with "sin" directly at this point. At least right now.

no worries. i am aware you moved on. however if you do decide to in the future; i made a correction of my previous post towards you to clarify.