Can you continue to knowingly sin and remain a Christian?

[Hopeful]

Right. But the answer was not an all-perfected moral state of being, but walking in the Spirit in daily submission and being progressively transformed thereby, growing in Christ-likeness over time.

We must certainly grow in grace and knowledge as we mosey along, but we start out from a perfect point.
Being reborn of God's seed, and being given a divine nature, eliminates a lot of ignorance.

Ephesians 4:13-15 (NASB)
13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.
14 As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming;
15 but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ,

1 Peter 2:2 (NASB)
2 like newborn babies, long for the pure milk of the word, so that by it you may grow in respect to salvation,

2 Peter 3:18 (NASB)
18 but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.

Colossians 2:19 (NASB)
19 and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God.

1 Corinthians 14:20 (NASB)
20 Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; yet in evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature.

Hebrews 5:12-14 (NASB)
12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food.
13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is an infant.
14 But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil.

All of these verses/passages speak of a process of growth toward spiritual maturity. But if such growth exists, it is a necessary corollary that there is a spectrum of change the born-again believer traverses from spiritual infancy and its attendant "milk-drinker" carnality (1 Corinthians 3:1-3) to spiritually-mature, Spirit-controlled "meat-eater." Along, then, with what I've already pointed out from the apostle Paul, your sinless-perfection belief is clearly false.

It is the starting point that we need to focus on.
Reborn of God.
The old man has been destroyed and a new creature was raised with Him to walk in newness off life.
Start pure, grow in grace and knowledge, end pure.

You have never left off committing sin

Wrong there, thanks be to God and the benefits of killing the old man and being reborn of God's seed.

- though, perhaps, you sin less often than you used to and in ways that are less obvious to an onlooker.

More sin would show my repentance from sin was a lie to God.
I can't forge a relationship with God that is based on lies. (1 John 1:6)
Those walking in darkness (sin) cannot say they have fellowship with God.

But sin you do; and you're certain to continue in sin, believing falsely as you do that you are sinless. In fact, in the act of declaring yourself sinless, you call God a liar and make of yourself a liar, as the apostle John explained. Both of these things are, of course, sin.

1 John 1:8-10 (NASB)
8 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.
9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.

Written of those still walking in darkness-sin.
Thanks be to God the alternative is walking in the light, which is God.
There is no darkness (sin) in God.
Or are you saying there is?

BTW, if we CAN be cleansed of ALL unrighteousness, why can't we say all our sin is gone?

 

[Hopeful]

I am certainly not declaring myself to be sinless. I have indwelling sin.

That is not the same as saying that I am bound to commit sin at any time in the future.

Sin can be rendered dead.

"sinless perfection" is a misnomer that is often applied to the doctrine of entire sanctification in order to create a straw man that is easily toppled by 1 John 1:8.

However, "entire sanctification" as a doctrine, does not proclaim that sin is eradicated from us, so that we are without sin; rather, it declares that the element of sin within us is rendered dead so that we aren't controlled by it any longer; and that therefore we can walk in freedom and victory, in righteousness and holiness, not after the flesh but after the Spirit, for an extended period of time; even for the rest of our lives (Luke 1:74-75).

Why not be reborn of God's seed ?
Then you won't have indwelling sin anymore ! (whatever that is)
God's children are pure.

 

[Hopeful]

This really should go without saying.

Only if they want to keep committing sin.
Jesus condemned sin, while in the flesh ! (Rom 8:3)
Take part in the victory !

 

[Hopeful]

"perfectly sinless" is a misnomer that you are portraying in order to create a straw man.

"entire sanctification" doesn't teach "sinless perfection".

Get your doctrine right.

What does "sanctified" mean to you?
To me, it means atoned for, consecrated, cleansed, set apart, made holy, and blessed.
Do any of those things happen to the servants of sin?

 

[justbyfaith]

1 John 1:8-10 (NASB)
8 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.
9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.
John made what he meant in verse 8 quite clear in what he wrote in verses 9 and 10. He did not mean a principle of sin, but sins committed that required confession. Making this doubly clear, he went on to write about the falsity of saying, not that one was possessed of a sin-principle, but of saying one had not committed sinful acts ("sinned" is a verb, not a noun).

Actually, the Greek word for "sins" in 1 John 1:9 is neither plural nor singular. "hamartia"

And therefore, it can be rendered as singular just as easily in that verse.

And I would say that it is more in accordance with the gospel to render it as singular.

For if I confess my sins, He is faithful and just to forgive me of my sins (those confessed)...what if I miss a few?

But if I confess my sin...that I have a sin nature...then He is faithful and just to forgive me of my sin nature...and to cleanse me from all unrighteousness.

If I am merely forgiven of "sins" but am not forgiven of my sin nature, then sin has not been dealt with at the core.

Nevertheless, that is what the Lord wants to do in each and every one of our lives.

Mat 23:25, Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
Mat 23:26, Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
Mat 23:27, Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
Mat 23:28, Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.

Not in a spiritually-healthy believer, no, it's not. But as Paul's letters reveal, even the Early Church was filled with truly born-again people who were spiritually immature, ignorant of Christian doctrine, and afflicted with false teachers. As a consequence, in his letters, he had to do a great deal of teaching, and criticizing, and even discipline of his fellow brothers and sisters in the Lord.

Paul often dealt with people who considered themselves to be saved who were not, in all actuality, saved.

He wrote accordingly, in order to motivate them towards salvation.

Carnal "believers" in all reality, their faith is nominal, shallow, or lukewarm.

Not salvational.

The kind of faith that is spoken of in Luke 8:13.

Okay. I don't.

Too bad for you, because it is the truth and in disbelieving it you are not believing the reality and the truth of the matter.

Struggling with sin and sometimes failing to overcome it is not being carnal; it is an unavoidable part of spiritual growth.

I was referring to Romans 7:14, where Paul says, "I am carnal; sold under sin."

The rest of Romans 7:14-25 defines carnality for us because Paul is attempting to win the carnal person to Christ utilizing the tactic in 1 Corinthians 9:22...which is the literary tactic of IDENTIFICATION.

Why not be reborn of God's seed ?
Then you won't have indwelling sin anymore ! (whatever that is)
God's children are pure.

Consider.

Rom 6:10, For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
Rom 6:11, Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

v.10 is qualified by 2 Corinthians 5:21. How did Jesus die unto sin? The answer is: He became sin for us...

In v.11 we are to likewise reckon ourselves to be dead indeed unto sin...that is, utterly sinful in the flesh (Romans 8:3)...

Of course, there is this...

Rom 6:7, For he that is dead is freed from sin.

So, in that we are dead, we are set free from sin...but in that we are (likewise) dead indeed unto sin...we become one with sin.

This is a mystery.

But the reality is that, when we reckon ourselves to be one with sin, and yet freed from sin, this is where true freedom arises.

What does "sanctified" mean to you?

It means that the element of sin within me has been rendered dead and no longer has any control over me.

 

[justbyfaith]

In Hebrews 10:1-3, it becomes clear that because the blood of goats and bulls doesn't take away sins, the sacrificing of them every year was a reminder of sin. Now we have the sacrifice of Jesus; which does take away sins (1 John 3:5); therefore those who have been purged do not any longer have any consciousness of sins.

I don’t see what this has to do with our discussion.

In that, if we no longer have any consciousness of sins, then clearly the Holy Spirit is not convicting us of sin. And this is speaking of those who have been purged from their sins...wholly sanctified.

 

[Deidr]

This is an important topic for Christians, as it's crucial to our Salvation. To continue in sin knowingly certainly results in a loss of one's Salvation.

I think the specific grace, or rather where grace is found is in Christ.

Now if one obeyed from the heart, in my interpretation meaning believed mentally that Jesus is Lord with intent to follow He has been delivered from the domain of darkness into the light.

Now what type of "salvation" is one speaking of. Because we know salvation means deliverence and such .

Well if we have been freed from sin by what Jesus did on the cross, then how is it we can loose deliverence.

And I'd say it's at the conscience level.
you can not be delivered from guilt if you are continuously committing a crime and even in that crime you are now committing.

So understanding that while Jesus death did one thing, which literally took the penalty of sin away.

Guilt says another thing, it says you still living in death even you been freed from it.

Therefore at the time you are in sin you are not delivered from guilt until you repent and God firgives you.

So yes you loose deliverence "salvation" from guilt when you are in sin.

We must forsake that sin(s) and do our first works over by being cleansed in the blood of Jesus for the remission of sin. If we cling to that sin(s), we are fallen from grace and are considered backsliders.

Yes and maybe no
yes we must walk a narrow path-repent
The question is what grace have we fallen from?
The grace is that Jesus died for our sins that we no longer live in them.

So to fall from grace would mean to walk in sin. The opposite of the purpose. But not as one that cannot be restored. Thank God for Jesus.

Romans 6
[1] What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
[2] God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
[3] Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
[4] Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

nope, there is certainly no real life in sin...

[12] Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.

Don't chase after it

[13] Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.

Don't be in places that give you the urge...rather a physical place or
mental

[14] For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. (KJV)

Now why is this?
What does not under law but under grace mean.

To me it means you have a way out of sin.
Guilt can be removed.

I guess one would have to ask: under the law how did sin have dominion over them.

How did sin rule? Under the law...."Guilt"...Reminded every year

 

[justbyfaith]

To be born again, mere mental assent (nominal, shallow, or lukewarm faith) simply will not cut it.

It must be a radical heart faith that changes the way you live your life.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Perhaps because catering to visitors isn't a sin.

You need to start being more honest.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I don't consider pleasing visitors a sin.
Is it a sin to put the good towels, or china, out when company comes by?

That's not what Peter was guilty of:

11When Cephas came to Antioch, however, I opposed him to his face, because he stood to be condemned. 12For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself, for fear of those in the circumcision group. 13The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.

14When I saw that they were not walking in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, “If you, who are a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?” Galatians 2:11-14

Paul said he and Barnabas stood condemned in their hypocrisy and not walking in line with the truth of the gospel. Now, either Paul is right and they sinned, or, he is the one who is sinning here by falsely accusing them. Take your pick, Hopeful, justbyfaith , 07/07/07 . Let me know which one, Paul or Peter, sinned in the story.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Desires?
Won't the desires of God's fruit be different than the desires of satan's fruit?

Don't you have the mind set on the Spirit? So the thing you want to do is please God, and yet Paul says because of the flesh, which you acknowledge is present for both believer and unbeliever alike, is in conflict with the Spirit "so that you do not do what you want" Galatians 5:17.

He's not saying anything remotely close to believers being sinlessly perfect because they have the Holy Spirit and always walk according to it.

Hopeful ,07/07/07

 

[Tenchi]

We must certainly grow in grace and knowledge as we mosey along, but we start out from a perfect point.

Yes and no. Every born-again believer is "in Christ" and in him possessed of all the perfection that he is. This is the sole reason why God accepts any of us (Ephesians 1:6). In Christ, we are made "perfect" positionally, on a spiritual level fully justified, sanctified, and united with Christ in his death, burial and resurrection (1 Corinthians 1:30; Ephesians 1:1-14; Romans 6:1-6) but in our daily condition, our mundane, practical living, we are far from this perfection. Becoming spiritually-mature is the process whereby what is true of the born-again believer in their spiritual position in Christ more and more characterizes their daily, mundane condition. So yes, spiritually, the born-again person is "perfected" by being placed in Christ by the Holy Spirit who makes of the believer his "temple" (Titus 3:5-8; 1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19-20). In the Spirit, the Spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9), all the perfection of Christ is in the believer.

But the effect of the Spirit's presence within the born-again person manifests progressively, over time, in their living. To analogize: A man may purchase a new house to live in but he makes that house his home through a process that takes time and effort, the man moving his possessions into the house, arranging them as he likes in the various rooms of the house, putting up pictures on the walls, and drapes over the windows, and new paint on the walls. He may have to re-shingle the roof and put in new flooring; he may have to do some work on the plumbing in the kitchen, or repair the foundation of the house. The man being physically within the house is only the beginning of a process whereby he makes the house his home. So, too, the Holy Spirit when he takes up residence in the one who has trusted in Christ as their Savior and Lord. The Spirit "moves in" to the "house" that is the new convert and then goes to work on each "room" of their life, making them all, over time, reflect himself.

The Holy Spirit must clean out a lot of "junk" that has accumulated in the new convert's life; but where a homeowner has free-reign to act as he likes in his newly-purchased house, the Holy Spirit waits upon the born-again believer to agree to his transformation of the "house" of their life. The Spirit will not kick in the doors of each "room" of a believer's "house" and forcefully change what's in it. Only when the believer has agreed to his entering and altering the rooms of their life - submission - will the Spirit transform them to reflect his ownership. For some believers, this process may take decades; really, there is no believer who ever comes fully to the end of the transformation process this side of the grave.

Many believers, for example, don't know anything about "walking in the Spirit," and so, in a stumbling, frustrated and exhausting effort try to produce for God from their own fleshly power what only He can produce. Many believers don't realize how much they've compromised with the World, the flesh and even the devil, and so, live in a double-minded way, a friend of the World and a prisoner to their flesh, while trying to be a child of God, too. Taught badly, and neglectful of God's word, and blinded by their sin, they have little awareness that they are actually double-minded and far from the life of communion with God that they could have. Many believers have no idea who they are in Christ, what their spiritual inheritance in him is; and so, they live as spiritual paupers, though they are co-heirs with Christ. For all of these reasons (and many others) the born-again believer, truly indwelt by the Holy Spirit, may not bear the "Fruit of the Spirit," but live in spiritual and moral squalor, ignorant and bound.

And so it is that we read in Scripture of the carnal babes in Christ in the Corinthian church (1 Corinthians 3:1); and the believers in Galatia migrating into fleshly legalism (Galatians 3:1-3); and the brethren in the church at Rome ignorant of their co-crucifixion with Christ and so "living in sin that grace may abound" (Romans 6:1-3); and the Ephesian Christians participating in the "unfruitful deeds of darkness" (Ephesians 5:1-13); and the seven churches in the apostle John's Revelation most of which were badly corrupt, complacent, spiritually lukewarm, and fouled by false teaching (Revelation 2-3).

 

[Tenchi]

Wrong there, thanks be to God and the benefits of killing the old man and being reborn of God's seed.

No, I'm not. And I have God's word in support of this assertion, as I've shown. Like the rest of us, you really have no idea what God's holy perfection is and so cannot claim to live in it. If you were actually living in genuine, holy communion with God, what you would understand more and more keenly with each passing day is just how holy God is and how very far from His holiness you are.

Those walking in darkness (sin) cannot say they have fellowship with God.

But you walk in such darkness so long as you claim to have no sin! How amazing your blindness to this is! Yikes.

Written of those still walking in darkness-sin.
Thanks be to God the alternative is walking in the light, which is God.
There is no darkness (sin) in God.
Or are you saying there is?

Darkness in God? Hah! No, there is only darkness in you. And, at present, that darkness is very great, concealing from you the plain truth of God's word.

 

[Tenchi]

Actually, the Greek word for "sins" in 1 John 1:9 is neither plural nor singular. "hamartia"

And therefore, it can be rendered as singular just as easily in that verse.

Which is why I understand John's words in verse 8 in their immediate context which prevents a singular understanding of "sin." As John himself indicated,

1 John 1:9 (NASB)
9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

1 John 1:9 (KJV)
9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

1 John 1:9 (ESV)
9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

So bound to your view are you that you would defy the translation work of many experts in biblical Greek - from both the KJV translators and more modern ones - and insist that John had a singular construction of the word "sin" in mind. That's a dangerous interpretive myopia you've developed, brother.

Carnal "believers" in all reality, their faith is nominal, shallow, or lukewarm.

Not salvational.

Paul disagrees with you. See 1 Corinthians 3. So does John. See Revelation 2-3.

Too bad for you, because it is the truth and in disbelieving it you are not believing the reality and the truth of the matter.

I disagree. And you've offered nothing that causes me to think otherwise.

I was referring to Romans 7:14, where Paul says, "I am carnal; sold under sin."

The rest of Romans 7:14-25 defines carnality for us because Paul is attempting to win the carnal person to Christ utilizing the tactic in 1 Corinthians 9:22...which is the literary tactic of IDENTIFICATION.

This is all eisegesis. Paul was speaking to fellow believers of his own struggle. Nothing in Romans 7 gives me reason to think otherwise. To have to resort to another letter entirely to justify eisegetically imposing your "literary identification" upon Paul's words indicates to me how...thin your reasoning is.

 

[justbyfaith]

That's not what Peter was guilty of:

11When Cephas came to Antioch, however, I opposed him to his face, because he stood to be condemned. 12For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself, for fear of those in the circumcision group. 13The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.

14When I saw that they were not walking in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, “If you, who are a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?” Galatians 2:11-14

Paul said he and Barnabas stood condemned in their hypocrisy and not walking in line with the truth of the gospel. Now, either Paul is right and they sinned, or, he is the one who is sinning here by falsely accusing them. Take your pick, Hopeful, justbyfaith , 07/07/07 . Let me know which one, Paul or Peter, sinned in the story.

In Galatians 2:11, the ESV contradicts John 5:24 in its assessment that Peter stood condemned. The kjv is a better translation in this case. It says that he "was to be blamed".

Paul, whose ministry was to the Gentiles, took issue with Peter's action because it had an effect on his ministry to the Gentiles.

But Peter's ministry was to the circumcision; and he did not sin when he went over to eat with the Jews. He was being sensitive to their consciences as the Bible says to do in Romans 14, 1 Corinthians 8...in that he catered to their scruples about unclean foods.

Peter would have been better off if he had never gone to eat with the Gentiles. In crossing over to eat with the Jews, he entered into hypocrisy; because he had been eating with the Gentiles previous to that. He was not being upright according to Paul's gospel to the Gentiles; for in doing what he did, he in effect compelled Gentiles to live as Jews. This was Peter's "sin"...he was not being forthright to the gospel that Paul was preaching; and this was what Paul took issue with. But he was being forthright according to the gospel of the circumcision.

See Galatians 2:7.

 

[justbyfaith]

Paul disagrees with you. See 1 Corinthians 3. So does John. See Revelation 2-3.

How do those passages offer disagreement to what I have said?

This is all eisegesis.

It is exegesis. I have not interpolated my own thought into the meaning of the text; but I have drawn out the meaning from the text.

Paul was speaking to fellow believers of his own struggle. Nothing in Romans 7 gives me reason to think otherwise. To have to resort to another letter entirely to justify eisegetically imposing your "literary identification" upon Paul's words indicates to me how...thin your reasoning is.

Believe what you will. You can live for the rest of your life as a Romans 7:14-25 believer; and I do not say that in this, you will be saved on your day of judgment.

For while we are saved by grace through faith, we will be judged on the basis of our works.

 

[justbyfaith]

So bound to your view are you that you would defy the translation work of many experts in biblical Greek - from both the KJV translators and more modern ones - and insist that John had a singular construction of the word "sin" in mind. That's a dangerous interpretive myopia you've developed, brother.

Sometimes the translators of versions have it wrong.

The word "hamartia" in 1 John 1:9 is the same word that is used in 1 John 1:8, "sin"...there is no distinction between singular and plural and the rendering of it as plural, in 1 John 1:9, is based completely on the preference of the translator.

I have also given my biblical reasons for believing that it should be singular in that verse.

 

[justbyfaith]

Hah! No, there is only darkness in you.

See Matthew 7:1-5, Luke 6:41-42.

Usually, when we point our finger at someone else, we have three fingers pointing back at us.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

But Peter's ministry was to the circumcision; and he did not sin when he went over to eat with the Jews. He was being sensitive to their consciences as the Bible says to do in Romans 14

And, so you're saying the very person who penned Romans 14 called him out for doing Romans 14? Obviously, Peter was not exercising some kind of Romans 14 sensitivity. Peter was sinning. Don't try to rationalize this away.

 

[Free]

Sometimes the translators of versions have it wrong.

That is an incredibly prideful claim that really says it all. What qualifications do you have to make that claim? Every version I've looked at has the plural in 1 John 1:9, so clearly they know something you don't, such as the slight difference in ending--ἁμαρτίαν in 1:8 and ἁμαρτίας in 1:9. M. R. Vincent in his Word Studies in the New Testament says:

"Sins

Note the plural, as compared with the singular, sin, in the previous verse."

Not to mention that according to Wuest's Word Studies in the Greek New Testament, the Greek verb homologeō, "confess," is "present subjunctive, speaking of continuous action" (vol 2, p. 104). That fully supports the plural "sins."