Do certain lifestyles keep one from being a Christian

BillyMac,

What matters is what YOU know!!!! It is sad, indeed, when others make us have to PROVE ourselves saved. We cannot, and should not, have to defend our salvation. Jesus took care of it for us--thank You, Jesus. Jesus knows your heart and you know your heart. Know that you ARE in the Father's hand.

 

BillyMac, thank you for your testimony. It is very similar to mine. Although, like you, I sometimes grieve over the past, it is reassuring to see that there are others who have been through what I have.

 

Terry, Billy Mac!

Terry, it's good to know that though we may disagree sharply in the Versions forum we can come together here as brothers and agree together to repudiate this falsehood!

I'm struck by something else as I contemplate 1 John tonight. John goes to great length to recap Jesus teaching about loving one another. I forgot to mention that another thing about the Gnostics that John was talking about as being the ones that left the church to whom he wrote, is that in sayng they had no sin, they were not only lying to themselves, to others, and to God, they were proving their sin by not loving each other; and, since they had been in that congregation, though not truly of it, they had proven themselves not of God, because they rejected Christ and rejected the church and its doctrine, and did not practice love for the church and just plain love and kindness for others. This too is a sign of the apostate.

This is to "love" the way the world "loves." The world loves selfishly, without God, rejecting the gospel, living in open rebellion against God and all the while claiming, "We have no sin in us." This is the type of person that is not a Christian. All of these things must be true to be the type of person about whom John writes here. This is what it means to be habitually practicing sin in such a way that one say of you that you are not a Christian.

I've noticed that whenever Christians start down this road where they say they have no sin in them and that they do not practice sin, they show their sin by not acting lovingly toward other Christians or other people. To say we love but show no love, to say we have no sin, but yet sin in this way (and to compound our sin by saying we have no sin in us) is in fact to partake of the sin of the apostate, though we are not apostate in that we do not reject the gospel or Christ Himself. In saying we have no sin and not acting lovingly, we show that we are, in fact, backslidden, though it may not be in a glaring manner. "It is the little foxes that spoil the vines," wrote Solomon. This letter thus, actually defines for us that there is such a thing as backsliding and what apostasy is. Here we find that there is a backslider, and there is an apostate. The apostate is not saved and never was. The backslider is saved, but living in sin and, while he may deny his sin, he knows the entire time that he is in sin and does not repudiate the gospel, that Jesus is God the Son, who paid for his sins, and rose from the dead, for he can not do so truly.

 

How anyone can think that the Apostle Paul, in Romans 7:14-25, is speaking of his, or anyone else’s, experience as a Christian staggers my imagination! But when I study the history of the interpretation of the Epistle to Romans, as I have been doing for 31 years, I see that that most abysmal interpretation crept into the Church very briefly in the 4th century but was denounced by the Church as an utterly false and disgusting doctrine.

It was not until the 16th century that that doctrine once again crept into the church, but by that time the Church was in such a fallen state that the doctrine got a foothold and has remained within some Christian circles, including some Baptist churches, right up to the present day. Nonetheless, as Adam Clarke wrote,

“It is difficult to conceive how the opinion could have crept into the Church, or prevailed there, that ‘the apostle speaks here of his regenerate state; and that what was, in such a state, true of himself, must be true of all others in the same state.’ This opinion has, most pitifully and most shamefully, not only lowered the standard of Christianity, but destroyed its influence and disgraced its character. It requires but little knowledge of the spirit of the Gospel, and of the scope of this epistle, to see that the apostle is, here, either personating a Jew under the law and without the Gospel, or showing what his own state was when he was deeply convinced that by the deeds of the law no man could be justified, and had not as yet heard those blessed words: Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way, hath sent me that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost, Act_9:17.”

And this, in reference to Rom. 7:15,

“Who, without blaspheming, can assert that the apostle is speaking this of a man in whom the Spirit of the Lord dwells?”

That Romans 7:14-25 can NOT be speaking of a Christian experience is obvious to the discerning reader for many reasons, but for now I shall mention just three of them.

• This passage begins with these words, “For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.” No Christian has ever been sold under sin. Indeed, all Christians have been redeemed from sin.

• This passage explicitly describes the plight of a man who is striving to keep the law. Paul, however, wrote in the previous chapter of the same epistle, “For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.”

• There is, in this passage, no mention of the grace of God or of the Holy Spirit. The context is exclusively Jewish.

 

I believe that the Bible is very CLEAR on this WE CAN NOT LOSE OUR SALVATION IF WE SIN. In fact, the book of 1 John was written to this point: "These things I have written to you who believe in the Son of God, in order that you may know that you have eternal life.(1 John 5:13)." Notice that the Apostle says you now have eternal life. We don't get eternal life after we die... we have it right now, when we believe.

If we know we have eternal life when we believe in Jesus, how long does eternal life last? Can you have eternal life for a year? A week? A day? If words mean anything at all, then eternal life must be eternal. It must last forever! Eternal life by definition cannot be lost.

Let's look at it another way. What sin is so big that Jesus' death could not atone for it? There is none that I know of (we'll exclude for the moment the passage of Mark 3:28-30, as it really doesn't apply here). Every sin that man can commit against God and man, even the most heinous was dealt with at the cross of Calvary. If this is so, then what sin can be so bad that it would cause God to "unforgive" that which He has already paid for? Romans 8:38-39 explicitly states this, saying "For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." I am a created thing. The verse above states that created things cannot separate us from the love of God, therefore I cannot separate myself from the love of God, either!

Also, in John 10:29, Jesus tells us "And I give eternal life to them; and they shall never perish, and no one shall snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand." No one includes me! Notice the picture here. You are being held in Jesus' hand, and in the Father's hand. Cup one of your hands over the other, as you would hold a frightened bird. That is the way God holds onto you.

We believe as Christians that we are in a better position than before we were saved. Remember, there is nothing we can do to merit salvation, it's all a work of God. Also remember, God predestined us to our salvation (Eph. 1:4). Would God make a mistake? No, I think the evidence clearly supports the view that your salvation is secure and no sin that we commit will change that.

intojesus

 

I find it staggering that someone could read Paul say: I find, I do, I do not do. And then say that Paul was not speaking of himself.

Paul was describing his struggle with the flesh - as it contantly wants to reassert itself. He recognised that when he sinned (however often, I do not know) that it was the old sin nature trying to revive itself and not his reborn spirit that was sinning. He also said the Jesus would save him from this. That is why Paul said in other places that he (the flesh, the old sin nature) had to die daily.

There is nothing blasphemous in what I have said. And if I am wrong, I am willing to change and accept the truth. So, you need to get off your high-horse.

 

Which is what I said in my first reply to Freeatlast.

Which I alluded to in the first post and others following. I may not have been as clear as I could have been, but who here is perfect?

 

The man in Romans 7 is expressing a lament over sin. He is expressing his internal struggle. Christians struggle with sin. NonChristians do not struggle with sin. They may struggle with sin because "they weren't reared that way," but they do not struggle with sin spiritually, as the struggle in Romans 7 clearly is. The same man who cries "Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death (of this body of death)?" also cries, "Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord. . . . There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus" (7:25-8:1). This man is not convicted under the weight of his sin's condemnation. he is groaning as a regenerate man convicted under the weight of his remaining condition of sin. He cries out to Jesus Christ for help because he wants to be free from the condition of indwelling sin. If this man was unregenerate, there would be no lamentation of his condition, and this passage clearly takes on the form of a lamentation begining at verse 14. He does what he does not understand. He does what he hates. These are not the words of an unsaved man. An unsaved man does not hate sin or lament bondage to it.

Horatius Boner wrote: "This is not the language of an unregenerate or half-regenerate man. When, however, he adds, "I am carnal, sold under sin," is it really Paul, the new creature in Christ, that he is describing? It is; and they who think it impossible for a saint to speak thus, must know little of sin, and less of themselves. A right apprehension of sin; of one sin or fragment of sin (if such a thing there be), would produce the oppressive sensation here described by the apostle--a sensation 20 or 30 years progress would rather intensify than weaken. They are far mistaken in their estimate of evil, who think that it is the multitude of sins that gives rise to the bitter outcry, "I am carnal." One sin left behind would produce the feeling here expressed. Who can say, "I need the Word less and the Spirit less than I did 20 years ago''?

The language itself does not support your interpretation. Romans 7:7-13 is in first person, past tense. We can thus say confidently that when Paul writes, "For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body, to bear fruit for death, this describes the Christian in his pre-conversion/unregenerate state. There is a shift in Romans 14-8:4 to first person PRESENT tense. "But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter." The shift from the past pre-converted state of every believer in 7:5 to the present converted state in 7:6 is illustrated by Paul's personal experience in 7:7-13 and 7:14-8:4 respectively. The man of 7:14-8:4 is described in the first person, present tense. He is Paul as a Christian. (Malone). If your assertion is correct, then it fails to account for the use of the present tense in the passage in question. Your objection also fails to account for 1 Cor. 3:1-3 in which the same term "carnal" is used for Christians and not non-Christians.

Your objection is merely a presuppositional objection, an a priori objection, a blik, nothing more. It simply refuses to to allow the passage as evidence of the Christian life, and it sets Scripture against Scripture by arguing that "no Christian could be sold under sin, unless it be a description of his unregenerate life." However, similar language with regard to the term "carnal" is used, as I already pointed out in 1 Cor. 3 with regard to Christians. Additionally, if expressed as a structured first person present lament, it takes on a meaning entirely contrary to your objection. There is no mention of God's grace and the Holy Spirit, not because he is writing as a Jew, but he is writing about his own personal struggles and feelings, very much like David often did in the Psalms before he speaks of God's mercy and grace, which Paul takes up within a very few verses. The passage makes sense as being "Jewish" in the same way that a Jewish lament makes sense as it begins with a personal lament and ends with rejoicing in God's grace. Paul is writing very much like David wrote.
Furthermore, verse 25 begins with a statement of thanks to the Lord Jesus and then describes the two principles at work within him, the spiritual and the fleshly. This is not dualism, it is simply the idea that there is a new nature dominated by the spiritual mindset, but with the corpse of a dead man still hanging upon him, the flesh, dead but present, and weighing him down. Thus he has lamented in the previous verses, but is now rejoicing that, despite his struggles, he is grounded in Christ and is actually free!


Regardless, the topic here involves whether or not homosexuals can also be Christians. Freeatlast argues using 1 John, and, IMO, falls very short in his understanding of it. Christians can backslide grievously and often do. Apostates were never saved to begin with. This is a doctrinal position held by the majority of Arminians and Calvinists alike, and one that freeatlast has missed and applied very wrongly.

 

Anyone, and I am speaking of Christians, if they are totally honest with themselves, must admit that they are capable of doing anything and everything a lost person does. Paul in his epistles talked about the struggle with the flesh that we have as Christians. He talked about Christians having carnal minds and following after the flesh rather than the Spirit. He also talked about the fruit that would result if we choose to follow the flesh rather than the Spirit. He also gave instruction in Galatians 6 as to how to deal with a sinning brother, along with a warning to be careful that the confronting brother did not fall into the same sin. Every believer, whether they will admit it or not, is capable of any sin.

I like what JV McGee said in regards to the prodigal son----He said "He may of fell into the pig pen, but he did not stay in the pig pen, because he wasn't a pig, he was a son".

We may go into sin, but we will not remain in sin, because we are His and He is continually calling us back to Himself.

Bro Tony

 

Paul NEVER said such a thing! The very concept that Paul could have said such a thing is contrary to the very nature of what it means to be a Christian. Some new Christians, however, might possibly be confused by this passage in the KJV if they read it carelessly:

1Cor. 15:30. And why stand we in jeopardy every hour?
1Cor. 15:31. I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily.
1Cor. 15:32. If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die.

For such individuals a very basic translation might help,

1Cor. 15:30 And why do we always risk our lives
1Cor. 15:31 and face death every day? The pride that I have in you because of Christ Jesus our Lord is what makes me say this.
1Cor. 15:32 What do you think I gained by fighting wild animals in Ephesus? If the dead are not raised to life, "Let's eat and drink. Tomorrow we die." (CEV)

For those who prefer the KJV, perhaps these words from Rom. 6 will help clarify the matter, unless one really wants to justify sinning everyday:

Rom 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
Rom 6:2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
Rom 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
Rom 6:4 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.
Rom 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Rom 6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
Rom 6:7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.
Rom 6:8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
Rom 6:9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
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.

 

Amen!

 

Excellent post

 

I am not 'justifying' sinning every day. I said we all 'sin' daily. There is a difference.

I don't know too many people that do not claim I John 1:9 on a daily basis...

Paul fought against the flesh daily - as we all do.

 

Actually, scripture states that one cannot sin at all and inhierit the Kingdom of God, since the wage of sin is death. This means that not a single one of us will inhierit the Kingdom. However, Jesus pays the price for our sin. We still sin, even though we're saved. None of us is more worthy of the Kingdom than another, not one of us is any less of a sinner than another, and none of us is any more repentant than another.

I'm not justifying the sin of fornication (including same-sex intercourse, adultery, etc). But, I would not be adhereing to scripture if I used the topic of homosexuality to think that my sins are somehow of less weight than theirs. That would make me akin to the pharasees who pray "Lord, thank you for not making me like that sinner over there".

 

To the topic question;
ANY lifestyle can keep you from being a christian if that life style is self motivated.
Folks remember why the moniker "christian" was applied to Jesus' followers in the 1st century. It was because they followed HIM.
Therefore, as Paul rightly points out, to live any way other than in obedience to Jesus is NOT christian but CARNAL.
You may be a believer and carnal, but to BE christian is to be OBEDIENT to Jesus.
That's my take on this whole issue, and I think the Scriptures make this abundantly clear to they who would let the SCRIPTURES answer questions of this nature.
In His service;
Jim

 

I agree to a point Jim. But there is no denying the fact that we have a lot of carnal Christians.

This does not mean they are not saved - as some would have us believe...

 

The man is Romans 7 is NOT expressing a lament over sin. That would be entirely out of the context of the argument that Paul is presenting in Rom. 1 - 8. He is illustrating for his readers that the Law is incapable of making a sinner a righteous. No matter how hard a Jew may attempt to live a righteous life through keeping the law, he is going to find himself doing the very thing that he hates (Rom. 7:15).

Some years ago I had a Jewish friend that had for almost eight years resisted the temptation to compromise his Jewish faith for a huge monetary gain. The spiritual battle had been intense, but he had fought and fought the temptation and did not give into it. But one afternoon I discovered that he had finally succumbed to the temptation that he had been struggling against, and I paid him a visit. This Jewish man was so ravaged by his guilt that his entire countenance and demeanor had radically changed. He had succumbed to a temptation from Satan and the weight of guilt upon his soul was manifest to the extreme. At first he tried to deny what he had done, but learning that I knew for a fact that he had done it, he tried to justify himself to me. But in a matter of just a few minutes he realized that there was no justification for what he had done, and that I knew it as well as he did.

The consequences of this Jewish man’s sin were enormous! Our friendship was destroyed because my very presence reminded him of his sin, but much more than that, the lives of thousands of innocent people were forever changed for the worse!

In Rom. 7:14-25 Paul is using the rhetorical I in the present tense for its dramatic effect on the Jewish portion of his readers, taking them back instantly to their own personal experience of being a Jew caught up in the spiritual battle between righteousness and sin.

I do not believe that after Paul wrote Rom.7:13 be instantly became an apostate from the Christian faith and reverted back to being a Jew under the law struggling to obey it, only to repent of his apostasy after writing Romans 7:25 so that he could write Rom. 8.

In the last two verse of Rom. 7 we find these words,

24. Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?
25. Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.

In verse 24 there is that cry from the heart of the Jew like my Jewish friend who, as much as he wanted to obey the Law that he loved and which was an integral part of who he was as a Jew, found himself to have broken that law. The wretched anguish is beyond words and he cries out, “Who will set me free from the body of this death?” The wretched anguish is so extremely great, so intense, that Paul himself speaks out, “Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!” But this Jew of whom Paul has been writing has not yet been set free in Christ, and Paul summarizes his condition, continuing to use the rhetorical “I,” “So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.”

Having made his argument that the Law cannot justify or save anyone, not even a Jew who loves the law and seeks to obey it, Paul writes,

Rom. 8:1. Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.
2. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.
3. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,
4. so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus because a new law, the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, has set them free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law could not do because of the weakness of the flesh, God did! God did it by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to die in our place for our sins, thus condemning sin in the flesh, so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who as a consequence do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

I shared this good news with my Jewish friend, but he refused to accept it and continued to live the life of one who has been sold unto sin rather than redeemed by the Lord Jesus Christ.




[ October 22, 2004, 04:40 PM: Message edited by: Craigbythesea ]

 

And so it is that the dilemma of this thread is. How can one be an obedient Christian and walk in holiness and yet be carnally based and walk in sin???

To be carnal is to enjoy (to excess?) the sensuality of the flesh. To be carnal is to be either an adulterer or a fornicator or lover of ones flesh (seems like that is a quote of a scripture). Anyway, without getting too graphic how can there possibly be one who is called a "carnal Christian" unless that one would also be known as a sinning Christian.

Do you see the essence of my question??? If one is carnal, it seems, they are also IN sin. To be IN sin is to be non Christ-like.

The term carnal Christian then sounds like an oxymoron which in turn brings us back to that proverbial question and the topic of this thread:
"Do certain lifestyles keep us from being a Christian?".

 

There's no such thing as a carnal Christian.

 

"And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ."
1Cr 3:1

A carnal Christian is one who does (or has not) grown spiritually. Thus they must be treated as 'baby Christians'...