I was once a Sinner - and I still Am!

The bigger question those same questions ask is:
If we are part of the Body of Christ, how can we still sin?

But we are in the Body of Christ, and we sin.

So, when we're in the body of Christ, either we're not sinners, and we don't sin, or we are sinners, and do sin.

Those verses do not support the idea that we are not sinners, but do sin.

 

Whosover is born of God does not commit sin. That's what it says.

 

But, you and I commit sin, and we're born of God, so that's clearly not what the context of these verse are. These verses are not saying that he who is born of God is no longer a sinner.

 

What is it saying then?

 

One topic at a time. Do you agree or disagree that the verses do not say a person who is born of God is no longer a sinner?

That was the assertion made, which I disagree with.

 

1John 3:9
Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

John 3:6
That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

 

A simple yes or no will do.

 

Can you add 2+2? What does the scripture say in no uncertain terms?

 

The sctipture you put forth clearly does not say that a person who is born of God is no longer a sinner.

So your answer, then, is "yes, I agree with your assessment".

 

1John 3:9
Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

Pretty clear.

 

Yep, it's pretty clear. That verse does not say that a person isn't a sinner anymore. You're making the honest mistake of confusing "does not commit sin" with "is not a sinner".

Now let me ask you, since I know that you still sin, and I know that I still sin, are you and I, according to the verse, therefore not born again?

 

If you do not sin, how can you be a "sinner"?

1John 3:9
Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

What part of you has been 'born again'?

 

That's the question I'm asking you. You sin from time to time, do you not? Anyone who says they don't sin is a liar. Hence if you can only be in a salvific state when you don't sin, are you saying that you're not saved when you sin? That's the assertion that Lady Eagle was making, that I disagree with.

Your spirit. (Flesh begets flesh, bt spirit begets spirit)

 

Probably more. Wretched man that I am! Sin that dwelleth in me, that is, in my flesh. My spirit, however, has been born again.

No.

 

That's exactly my point. I disagree with the assertion that born again believers aren't sinners. We still are, because we are still people of flesh. We're that way until we die. However, we're also spiritually born again. That part of us is the non-sinner new creation. But we are not spirit only. We're also flesh. We're that way so long as we live, until we cast aside out shells of flesh. In believe these verses are referring to our spirit nature, not our flesh nature. But, as a whole being, we're both, neither being devoid of the other.

 

BEEP! Wrong. That's NOT what I asserted. Go back and read it again, please.

I said I am no longer a sinner, I've been born again. And I did NOT say I do not sin and I did NOT say I never have sinned. Those things were wrongly and in error read and spun into my post by another person (who then proceeded to call me a liar, etc.,), but they did not come from this horse's mouth/post !!!!

I said there is a difference between being in a state of sin and actions of sinning, if I recall.

Please, Mr. Johnv, I implore you. Do not take what someone else wrongly interprets my posts to mean as being the original intent or verbage of what I posted. Thank you again.

 

It seems it is time for a lesson in systematic theology:

This is the original post:

"I'm not. I WAS a sinner but now I'm saved by grace. I'm a new creation. I am no longer a sinner and Satan is no longer my father. I am a Child of the King. No sinner here. Former sinner, yes. Present sinner, no."


There a several good things about it. There are several bad things about it.

"You DID say, "I'm not...I am NO LONGER (e.g. WAS) a sinner...no sinner,yes,...PRESENT sinner no."

Paul writes that he IS a a sinner (present tense) and chief among them.

The good things: It recognizes the new birth, the "recreated" part of us. It recognizes the legal status of being justified by grace through faith.

However, as Martin Luther said, we are both sinner and saint SIMULTANEOUSLY. The life of the Christian is modeled on the life of Christ. Jesus was fully God and fully man. All Christian confessions and creeds addressing this issue, based on Scripture, are very clear: A person is both fully sinner and fully saint SIMULTANEOUSLY. In the same way that the Incarnation rejects dualism, so do does this idea of the present STATE of the believer. We are not two persons in one, we are two PRINCIPLES in one mind. If we were of two minds in the sense of beign two persons, then that would be dualism. Dualism is not orthodoxy.

The believers STATUS or STANDING is a legal one: SAINT. His present STATE is SINNER. Only in the final stage of salvation "glorification" will that change.

"Sinner" likewise carries with it the same type of definitions. A sinner is "someone who sins." Therefore, whenever anybody sins, one IS a sinner.
We are "saints" as a matter of legal status before God. While we are sinners we are simultaneously saints. We are not one or the other, we are both AT THE SAME TIME.

That is the weakness with the statement. The final part, "PRESENT sinner, no." Is incorrect. We are presently sinners, even as we are also presently saints. All of us. In other words, the confusion is between status/standing and state. It is only "present" by way of our legal standing in the mind of God, it is not present by way of our current state, which is a new person with two principles at work in them. In that sense the best we can say is that presently we ar both saint and sinner. We can not negate EITHER term, in the strictest sense.

You said to me, in that thread that I was confusing the act of sinning with the state of being a sinner. That is incorrect. The act of sinning is part of what makes us "sinners." We sin because we are sinners. We are also sinners because we sin. Both are true. Therefore, if we sin, we show we are sinners. To say less is, as James Montgomery Boice says, is "to display a profound lack of understanding of the depth of human depravity." We must be careful as either believers or unbelievers to not have a view of our capacity for sin or our state before God than what we have. We must understand that our need for Christ did not stop at justification. It is and will be forever ongoing.

Striving for holiness is not the same as being holy. In order to be in a state of holiness one must be free of all sin. If we were holy, there would be no need to pursue lives of holiness. While it is true that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to the believer in the new birth, it is not true that the believer is in a state of holiness. S/he would have to be completely free of sin in order for that to be. This is manifestly true in that Christians can sin and still do. In fact, all of us are ruled by sin in at least one area of our lives. As I wrote before, Isaiah realized this when he saw the thrice holy God. He said, "Woe is me, for I am a man of unclean lips and I live among a people of unclean lips." In other words, Isaiah, the man that was prophesying God's word to God's people realized that in the one area of his life that he was charged with, the words he was saying were negating his message.

The same is true here. It negates the message to say "I am not a sinner...I was once a sinner...but not in a present sense." That is not true if left unqualified. That's the problem with the statement. It was left unqualified, though it went further later to rightly say there was a difference between the act of committing sin and being a sinner, but it failed to acknowledge that the precise reason we sin is because we remain sinners even after the new birth. In other words, we are both sinner and saint simultaneously, and we must be careful we do not view ourselves as one without carefully acknowledging the other.

Both are states of being, in a sense, but one exists only in the here and now in God's mind and as a legal status, it will not be our actual state in the practical outworking of history until we are actually with the Lord in the next life or at His return. Therefore, our STATUS is "saint...defined as a sinner saved by grace through faith in the substituitionary atonement of Christ, to whom has been a legal imputation of the righteousness of Christ as well as a satisfaction of the wrath of God and removal of the guilt of sin." It is a legal standing or status. The STATE of the believer (which is sometimes but rarely referred to as status in systematic theology, depending on the author), is "sinner." We remain sinners in this life. We are simply not condemned sinners.

Therefore, as Paul rightly says, he IS a sinner, and the greatest of them. So must we. He did not negate his standing/status legally in so saying, nor did that negate the power of God, as some say it would to say one is a sinner; his was a statement of gratitude and humility. Therefore, to borrow from Boice once more, "A penitent spirit is one of the hallmarks of Calvinism" (dare I say biblical Christianity..as R.C. Sproul says "biblical Christianity is Calvinism...but that's another thread ). The true Calvinist (Christian) is the man or woman who wakes up in the morning saying, "God have mercy on me, a sinner." (Luke 18:13). This daily confession brings with it healthy mistrust of one's own capacity for godliness and a corresponding dependence on God for His grace. It also enables the Christian to promote God's holiness with all humility and gentleness.

That to me is the heart of the issue. When we make such statements as was the original statement, are they said in a spirit of humility or a spirit of pride? Where is the penitence? What are the words that accompany them? What is their context? We may say that statement, but if we, no matte who we are, make unloving comments about other individuals, accuse them of things they do not believe or say, or of holding beliefs that they in truth do not believe, or refuse to even listen to what they or others have to say, then, in my opinion, we act in pride not in humility, and that is the test of the accuracy of our statement. We become Isaiah in that moment, who was standing for truth, but who realized that his words negated the things he was saying.

(A great deal of this has been lifted directly from my harmartiology and soteriology notes).

 

We had to do a study of this verse for an exam and I've also heard several sermons on it. It actually says that "no one who is born of God practices sin," meaning habitually practicing sin.

Robertson's Word Pictures says this about this verse:

Part of Matthew Henry's commentary on this verse:

Believers sin, but not habitually and not abiding in it, is what the verse is saying.

 

I'll stick with Bible study, comparing Scripture with Scripture.

1 John 3:9 is not difficult to understand when considered in light of other passages, as God instructs us to do.