What is sin?

[dseusy]

Michelle,

I do believe our new bodies will be without the flesh that sins, but I don't know much else concerning our new bodies except that they will be immortal as 1 Corinthians 15 states. It will be nice to be freed from the "bondage of corruption" as Romans 8:21 puts it.

[Paidion]

Are we talking about physical flesh here? When Paul talked about "the flesh" in a negative way, he seemed to be referring to the self-nature, not the physical body. He believed that the physical body (albeit a changed body) will be saved when the Lord Jesus returns.

1 Thessalonians 5:23 Now may the God of peace himself sanctify you completely; and may your whole spirit, soul, and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus.

[dseusy]

Paidion,

The "flesh" Paul refers to is sarx, which is:

flesh (the soft substance of the living body, which covers the bones and is permeated with blood) of both man and beasts
the body
the body of a man

It is very much the physical body. This is congruent with the rest of scripture which speaks of this carnal and corrupt nature.

"Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption." 1 Corinthians 15:50


"For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places."
Ephesians 6:12

"For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh" Philippians 3:3

[Paidion]

From your response, dseusy, I take it you think the word "sarx" ALWAYS means physical flesh. If that were the case, then what would be the ramifications of the following passage?

Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. Romans 8:8,9

The following would follow from the passage:

1. Since all living human beings are in the (physical) flesh, none of them can please God.
2. If the Spirit of God dwells in you, you are no longer" in the flesh" and therefore no longer a physical human being but a spirit being.
3. If you are in the (physical)flesh, you do not have the Spirit of Christ in you, and so you do not belong to Him. Therefore no living human being belongs to Christ.

[dseusy]

Paidion,

What does it mean to be "in the flesh"? I think your presumption is that this means to physically reside in it. Although the flesh is physical, we as a new creation or born again spirit are hidden in Christ. I just posted a link to a picture for Michelle that helps illustrate my understanding of this (based on God's Word) at http://www.lovnmercy.blogspot.com. This chapter (Romans 8) is full of rich spiritual truths that are best understood from the foundation of the teaching about righteousness or word of righteousness (which Hebrews 5:13 references). If we are hidden in Christ, we are in the Spirit because we are not our flesh, but are our new spirit (Romans 7). I know that you and I have (or recently had) a different understanding of Romans 7, so this may be hard to swallow- but I believe that if we have the Spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9) we belong to Him and reside (spiritually) in Him.

This understanding draws a different conclusion than your three points.

1. All living human beings are not necessarily in the flesh (that is, those who are new creations in Christ are in the Spirit, not in the flesh), and can please God.
2. If the Spirit of God dwells in you, you are no longer in the flesh... you are a spiritual being, but-

"I have been crucified with Christ ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me."
Galatians 2:20

Those in Christ no longer live (in the flesh)... of course their spirits live. Christ lives in them and they in Christ. My understanding of this is that Christ dwells in our bodies and we spiritually dwell in Him.

3. If we are in the flesh (that is if we live by it) we cannot please God.

[dseusy]

Here are some related verses:

"In that day you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you." John 14:20 (see vs. 17 also)

"Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me." John 15:4 (see vs. 5 also)

"that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me." John 17:21 (see vs. 23 also)

[dseusy]

And more:

"Thus says the Lord: "Cursed is the man who trusts in man And makes flesh his strength, Whose heart departs from the Lord."
Jeremiah 17:5

"Watch and pray, lest you enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak."
Matthew 26:41

"Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born again.'"
John 3:5-7

"It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life."
John 6:63

"For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish."
Galatians 5:17

"For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh" Philippians 3:3

[dseusy]

Finally:

2 Corinthians chapter 5

[dseusy]

Sorry, I almost forgot:

"Therefore we do not lose heart, but though our outer man is decaying, yet our inner man is being renewed day by day." 2 Corinthians 4:16 (also vs. 18)

"For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ." Galatians 3:27 (we don't wear Him on the flesh as physical clothes)

"But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh. 17 For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please." Galatians 5:16-17

Ephesians 5:30-32

[benstenson]

it seems that you make reason the primary focus, whereas I am promoting that God's Word should be the primary focus.

This is a false dichotomy. God is reasonable, therefore His words are reasonable. A reasonable God wrote reasonable words for a rational creature made in his image.

I have been pointing out the fact that we both use reason to read books. When you read the bible and walk away thinking you understood something it is because you used reason to interpret the passage. This is true for everyone. This does not detract from the importance of the bible.

You have effectively written on top of the words of the bible by using faulty reasoning instead of sound reasoning in order to understand the bible. You have actually elevated your own faulty reasoning above the bible by calling your interpretations "God's Word" and not accepting a critique of your interpretations unless the critique is consistent with those same interpretations. You have thereby constructed a wall of infallibility around yourself. You may have changed your mind about passages here and there but you have shown a total disregard to sound judgment in this discussion because you treat logic as if it is fallible and you are not.

Logic is not fallible because it is an attribute of God's own mind which He has shared with us. Our underlying assumptions are fallible, but when logic is used properly, it only has one primary rule, don't contradict yourself. The bible says, "As surely as God is faithful, our word to you has not been Yes and No." Not contradictory. What would be wrong with their word being yes and no if holding someone accountable for blatant contradictions can just be shrugged off and belittled as worldly wisdom? So to interpret the bible, which requires using logic whether one admits it our not, and then to reject logic, which bible-reading actually depends on, when a contradiction appears between one's interpretation and sound judgment itself - that is truly a contradiction, a Yes and a No.

The rational mind provides knowledge even if there was no bible. But the bible is useless to a creature that has no rational mind. One person said "The bible was made for the mind, not the mind for the bible." This is obvious. God did not author the bible for rocks and plants to read it. God designed the bible for rational creatures to rationally understand it. Reason or rational thought is more fundamental than communication. God was rational before He became the author of scripture. Likewise people are rational before they understand the scripture. I am not devaluing the scripture. I am saying that rational thought is like a bible itself that God has written into our minds.

For example, if we put Romans 2 into more modern language: When people "which have not the bible, do by nature the things contained in the bible, these, having not the bible, are a bible unto themselves: which show the work of the bible written in their hearts"

If the testimony of our own minds was not trustworthy then we could not know for certain if we were actually reading the bible or not. Maybe we are actually reading some spy novel while our faulty minds are telling us that it is the bible. This is the ridiculous and inevitable logical result of denying the validity of the human mind as a source of accurate information. If the human mind is such a poor source of information then maybe anything could be true. This is a complete rejection of knowledge and truth altogether. Unless someone accepts that the human mind is a valid source of information, they can by no means accept that the bible is a valid source of information, because no man can read the bible unless he first has a mind that can faithfully accumulate knowledge. Bible only is not even a biblical view, especially in light of Romans chapter one.

If we label love as benevolence and base our theology on that definition alone, we miss out on all that it entails and all that is required by God's law.

This is a two-edged sword. If you say that love is more than a state of the will then you add to God's word, create a stumbling block, and a false gospel.

If the Bible is a light and a lamp, we should use scripture to interpret scripture... context, references, and all.

The context of the bible is reality. We should interpret the bible with a regard to the context of reality.

God states to love. The world often tells us that love is a feeling. Is this true? How do I find out? What does the Bible state?

People know love is not just a feeling even without the bible. It is common sense. Universal moral obligation. Self-evident. Romans 1. Your idea of love would require intellectual and physical perfection because that is the only way to prevent a mistake that violates the letter of some biblical command. Jesus humiliated the Pharisees for their idea that the bible's commands are all meant to be understood according to the letter and not according to the spirit of the law. The only possible spirit of the law in your by-the-letter interpretations would be omniscience and omnipotence. Only an omniscient and omnipotent being could follow every command according to the letter - even then there are probably some kind of contradictions that would occur just as was the case with the commands that Jesus pointed out to the Pharisees. You give a whole new meaning to "the letter kills" by making God's ways out to be impossible. Your literal interpretations would have condemned Jesus Himself. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees using reason and common sense because they were naturally accountable to it and because He was full of the Holy Spirit, who is a rational and logical being. If the Pharisees had demanded "Where does the bible say it is lawful to "do good" on the sabbath?" They would have only been hardening their hearts in opposition to the truth. Jesus said "Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice." Whoever is already an acknowledger of truth will be receptive to the words of Jesus. You refuse to acknowledge the truth that mistakes are not morally evil. Even little children acknowledge it. But because you reject this truth you are forced to reject the gospel of Jesus as well, and instead defend a false gospel in direct opposition to the Holy Spirit. If someone rejects the obvious revelations given to the human mind apart from the bible then they should not be trusted with the bible.

I obviously have to use my reason to process His reason, but I cannot lean on my reason- I choose to subject my reason to His when they don't jive.

You use your own reason to come to the conclusion they don't jive. Your arguments have become circular as I have been pointing out. That is inevitable because the bible says, "There is no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the Lord." There is plenty of understanding against the false gospel you are teaching. There is plenty of good counsel against elevating the letter of the command above the intent of the law until the law becomes impossible.

I don't disagree with the definition of love... I just believe we should find it in God's Word.

"By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us" This statement shows intention. Intention is a state of the will. It is not the outward act itself of giving one's life that is love, as the bible says, "if I give my body to be burned, but don’t have love". It is the reason one gives their life, the reason one will do everything they can, their goal, intention, motive, purpose, commitment. This is love, not a feeling, not an outward action, not a train of thought, not flexing muscles, not being a genius, but a state of the will, a sincere dedication of the will, a sincere commitment of the will to the highest possible well being of someone.

I chose to obey God and I failed to do it perfectly as is commanded.

Then you either chose to obey God for the wrong reasons, or chose for the right reason but then changed your mind in order to sin, or you you just noticed some involuntary shortcoming or immaturity that you had no control over and believed the devil that it was a sin. The third option is the only one that won't land someone in hell. The best case scenario is if you were accused and confused by the devil that your God-given human limitations are somehow sinful. But even so, you are still accountable to reason.

For example: What is sin? The Bible clearly states that sin is lawlessness. No more, no less.

The law is love. Love is a state of the will. Sin is transgression of the law. Therefore sin is a wrong state of the will.

I was constantly slipping off the narrow path. Not because of a lack of effort, but because I am wicked.

If you are truly wicked then your obedience was only legalism and failure inevitable. This is not what God calls us to. Obedience is not about legalism.

So, do I only get God's favor when I make myself righteous?

One sin unrepented of makes a man deserve hell. God only approves of the righteous. God only approves of "he who does righteousness".

Seems kind of funny that He would die for me while I was still a sinner (Romans 5:8), but now that I'm in the family I have to perfect myself to stay a member.

You have to stop sinning if you want to be a Christian. If you stop sinning and become a Christian then you go back to sin then you are no longer being a Christian. Whoever is sinning is not being a Christian. Whoever is being a Christian is not sinning. It is not complicated. If you are sinning and then you return to obedience, you are returning to being a Christian because that's what Jesus says to do.

He offers us all favor. Will we accept it or will we shun it in our pride to earn it?

Conditional approval does not mean you are earning the chance to be reconciled. Just because God freely gave us a second chance to live does not mean there are no conditions. It is not pride to earn God's approval by obeying Him. That is an oxymoron. It is pride to not earn God's approval by obeying Him. It is pride to say God's approval is not conditional. God's offer of mercy is made to all people regardless of their past. We didn't earn that offer. But entering into the offered reconciliation is conditional. God's present approval is conditional.

God "will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil"

I may be totally misunderstanding the Bible and therefore applying a totally wrong filter, one that makes me filter out logic and common sense some of the time.

You are morally accountable to logic just as you are to the bible. If you were not accountable regarding logic then you would not even be accountable regarding the bible. If you reject logic and sound judgment then you should repent of being unreasonable and of publicly opposing and misrepresenting the gospel.

My assumption that my filter is not based on totally flawed interpretation does make it impossible for me to be reasoned out of

If you are admitting that you will not be reasoned with, that you choose to not be reasoned with, then I hope you will repent of it.

I am willing to judge, scrutinize, and test my interpretations as God's Word reveals my errors.

Again this is all circular because your definition of "God's Word" simply means your own interpretation. So only your own interpretations can make you question your own interpretations. You are not accountable to sound judgment, common sense, reason, logic, rational thought. This is rebellion. Even people who have no bible are accountable to these things. God will judge people based on how they respond to the revelation He has written in their minds whether they have the bible or not. Furthermore you are teaching that God will not judge people according to their deeds in direct opposition to the gospel. The bible says, "though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." The bible clearly says that we are able to overcome sin, that God won't let us be tempted more than we can bear, that He is able to keep us from stumbling, that Christians don't sin, that whoever loves God's law has no cause for stumbling in him, that God will always provide a way for us to escape temptation, that His commandments are not burdensome or too heavy for us to bear, that He explicitly requires us to love Him with all of our abilities, not more than all of our abilities, that all of the law and prophets hang on this principle contained in the greatest commandment and NOT on a hyper-literal pharisee hermeneutic that makes God's law out to be ridiculous and impossible. When you interpret the bible according to the letter and not according to the spirit of the law you drag God's commands down into the mindset of the flesh. Greater gnosis, even omniscience, becomes required to avoid making mistakes, greater fleshly power, even omnipotence, becomes necessary in order to avoid mistakes. Love fulfills the law, not omniscience and omnipotence. According to your interpretative principles love means never falling asleep in order to continue praying non-stop. You interpret and teach the commands of the bible according to the flesh and not according to the spirit. You interpret and teach them according to the letter and not according to the spirit. A spiritual person is also a rational person because love itself is rational - only rational creatures are capable of virtuous love. The bible should be interpreted spiritually, rationally, according to the intent of the law, the spirit of the law, not according to the flesh or the outward letter of the law.

The bible of your own conscience does not tell you God's law is impossible, it judges you based on the fact that you are able to obey God's law. I hope you will turn from your infallibility and accept the truth. You can and should.