The Wet Paint Principle (Freedom from sin)

[posthuman]

4 If I fail to obey the law, the Lord will not impute it to me as sin—Romans 4:8. Now I cannot sin because I am not under the law, am dead to the law, and am delivered from the law—and sin is the transgression of the law. Because where the law does not apply, there is no transgression. Romans 4:15, 5:13.

this is also false & dangerous teaching, contrary to scripture.

For unto the time of the Law was sin in the world​

(Romans 5:13, 1599 GNV)​

​

the presence of a law that condemns sin is not what the fact of sin depends on. sin was in the world long before the Law, and even if the Law passes away, sin is still present. this verse absolutely does not say that we 'cannot sin' just because we are no longer under the Law.
adultery is still adultery, idolatry is still idolatry. we are saved from the penalty of it, but that doesn't mean it isn't sin anymore.

or where no Law is, there is no transgression.​

(Romans 4:15, 1599 GNV)​

​

this does not say there is no sin. this says there is not transgression if there is no law.
sin & transgression are different things.
if i have a sign that says, keep off the flowerbed, and you trample my petunias, you are guilty of transgression. i had set forth a law.
if i have no sign, but you trample my petunias, you are guilty of sin -- even tho there is no law, you have sinned against me.

 

[posthuman]

Therefore I am perfect in Christ no matter what I do

we are not perfected in the sense the author of the OP argues.
the author of the OP denies the very existence of sin based on false understanding of Romans -- and the Bible calls the author of the OP a liar:

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and Truth is not in us.​

If we acknowledge our sins, He is faithful and just, to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.​

If we say, we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.​

(1 John 1:8-10, 1599 GNV)​

​

the Bible calls the author of the OP a liar, and says God's word & God's truth is not in him.

 

[posthuman]

Not commenting on the bumping.

But I have to admit...this OP is especially full of Scripture, at virtually every point, and more than the average post.
It does stand out in that sense.

just because someone mentions chapter and verse numbers doesn't make their position 'scriptural'
for example, the OP is essentially carnal gnosticism

 

[posthuman]

Because I am born of God I don’t want to sin and I don’t have to sin. Therefore I cannot sin

false equivocation.
just because your spirit doesn't desire sin and wars with your flesh which does desire sin, does not mean it is impossible for you to sin.
that doesn't follow.

such a statement is probably predicated from a poor understanding of 1 John 3:9, owing to the deficiency of the English language and not having been taught properly. here it is in Greek with interlinear literal word-for-word translations below:

Πᾶς ὁ γεγεννημένος ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἁμαρτίαν οὐ ποιεῖ, ὅτι σπέρμα αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ μένει· ​

καὶ οὐ δύναται ἁμαρτάνειν, ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ γεγέννηται.
[Anyone] [having been born] [of] [God,] [sin] [not] [practices,] [because] [seed] [of Him] [in] [him] [abides,] ​

[and] [not] [he is able] [to continue sinning,] [because] [of] [God] [he has been born]
​

ἁμαρτάνειν is in present-infinitive-active tense. it indicates an action that takes place and continues perpetually, not a one-time event. English doesn't make a distinction of this tense. also ποιεῖ means 'practice' not 'commit'
so John isn't saying we cannot sin at all - he's saying we cannot continue in sin. this is by virtue of our adoption and rebirth in Him: He will chasten us, He will lead us, and if we don't repent He will take our physical life in order to stop us -- like any loving Father, He will raise us up in the way we should go.

this is an elementary understanding that every Christian should be taught and i am always shocked when i meet people who run off with some crazy gnostic ideas about themselves, thinking they automatically have no flaws at all in their flesh just because atonement has been made for them. we are waiting for the redemption of our bodies, in the resurrection. see Romans 8:23 & surrounding text.

the scripture isn't English. idc how much you adore your kjv; it's something you have to come to grips with, and on certain points it becomes very important to realize.

 

[posthuman]

8 Now the wet paint principle of the law might take effect, if I begin to think that I am justified by the law. If I base my salvation on my performance rather than on the finished work of Christ on the Cross, then sin will take advantage of the law and I will sin in that thing wherein I base my salvation on my own obedience.

but OP said there's no such thing as sin for OP?
OP argues that because the Law has no jurisdiction over him, no amount of lascivious idolatry can be considered sin anymore?
and now OP argues they will sin by stumbling in their walk if they regard their works as meritorious towards salvation?
this is a contradiction of the OP's preceding points.

nevertheless:

whatsoever is not of faith, is sin.​

(Romans 14:23, 1599 GNV)​

​

if we think our salvation is by our behaviour, we sin because any such soteriology is not of faith.
whether it is self-imposed modification of behaviour, or whether natural growth into spiritual maturity consequently brings our walk closer in step with His ways, it is not our works that save us: it is Christ who purchased us and in His mercy grants us salvation according to our trust in Him.
that doesn't make us automatically without sin. that makes our sin, atoned for. He will redeem our bodies finally in the resurrection, and then we will be like Him, no longer able to be tempted, because we will not have anymore lust in our flesh, just as He, virgin-born Son of Man, spotless Lamb of God, could not be tempted. ((see James 1:14))

 

[posthuman]

9 But when I begin to understand that nothing can ever separate me from the love of God—not even my violation of the principle of the law—

IOW you can & do sin, but God's lovingkindness towards you is everlasting, and He remains faithful to forgive sin, if we confess it to Him.
thus contradicting your opening gnostic argument.

 

[justbyfaith]

this doesn't follow; it's a false statement.
just because a man is forgiven doesn't mean he will never have anything to be forgiven of again.

proof:

Then came Peter to Him, and said, ​

Master, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I shall forgive him? Unto seven times?​

Jesus said unto him, ​

I say not to thee, unto seven times, but, unto seventy times seven times.​

(Matthew 18:20-21 1599 GNV)​

​

if a person having been forgiven no longer sins simply by the fact of their offense having been removed, then the answer to Peter's question would be 'one time only, and afterwards he will be perfect'
Q.E.D.

Look at the verse in question. it says that the one who is born of God does not sin and cannot sin.

While I think that being forgiven does not necessarily mean that a man will never sin again, I would say that in roder to be forgiven you must repent...and that means changing your direction 180-degrees away from sin, death, hell, and satan towards righteousness, life, heaven, and God. So, you would be generally walking in a different direction, away from sin.

Maybe try to interpret the statements that I make in the document as you would holy scripture.

So many people, when they read holy scripture, try to throw their own interpretations into it based on how their life is and their own understanding.

So, if you interpret the verse in the document the same way that you interpret 1 John 3:9, maybe the problem that you have with the statement will disappear.

 

[justbyfaith]

but OP said there's no such thing as sin for OP?
OP argues that because the Law has no jurisdiction over him, no amount of lascivious idolatry can be considered sin anymore?
and now OP argues they will sin by stumbling in their walk if they regard their works as meritorious towards salvation?
this is a contradiction of the OP's preceding points.

nevertheless:

whatsoever is not of faith, is sin.​

(Romans 14:23, 1599 GNV)​

​

if we think our salvation is by our behaviour, we sin because any such soteriology is not of faith.
whether it is self-imposed modification of behaviour, or whether natural growth into spiritual maturity consequently brings our walk closer in step with His ways, it is not our works that save us: it is Christ who purchased us and in His mercy grants us salvation according to our trust in Him.
that doesn't make us automatically without sin. that makes our sin, atoned for. He will redeem our bodies finally in the resurrection, and then we will be like Him, no longer able to be tempted, because we will not have anymore lust in our flesh, just as He, virgin-born Son of Man, spotless Lamb of God, could not be tempted. ((see James 1:14))

I suggest you read Wet Paint Principle 2:21; and that you also try to read the document as a whole before you try and pick it apart.

 

[justbyfaith]

IOW you can & do sin, but God's lovingkindness towards you is everlasting, and He remains faithful to forgive sin, if we confess it to Him.
thus contradicting your opening gnostic argument.

You're accusing my doctrine of being gnostic?

What argument in the OP is "gnostic"?

Was John teaching gnosticism when he wrote 1 John 3:4-9?

 

[justbyfaith]

but OP said there's no such thing as sin for OP?
OP argues that because the Law has no jurisdiction over him, no amount of lascivious idolatry can be considered sin anymore?
and now OP argues they will sin by stumbling in their walk if they regard their works as meritorious towards salvation?
this is a contradiction of the OP's preceding points.

You are not correctly understanding the points in the OP.

 

[justbyfaith]

but OP said there's no such thing as sin for OP?
OP argues that because the Law has no jurisdiction over him, no amount of lascivious idolatry can be considered sin anymore?
and now OP argues they will sin by stumbling in their walk if they regard their works as meritorious towards salvation?
this is a contradiction of the OP's preceding points.

nevertheless:

whatsoever is not of faith, is sin.​

(Romans 14:23, 1599 GNV)​

​

if we think our salvation is by our behaviour, we sin because any such soteriology is not of faith.
whether it is self-imposed modification of behaviour, or whether natural growth into spiritual maturity consequently brings our walk closer in step with His ways, it is not our works that save us: it is Christ who purchased us and in His mercy grants us salvation according to our trust in Him.
that doesn't make us automatically without sin. that makes our sin, atoned for. He will redeem our bodies finally in the resurrection, and then we will be like Him, no longer able to be tempted, because we will not have anymore lust in our flesh, just as He, virgin-born Son of Man, spotless Lamb of God, could not be tempted. ((see James 1:14))

While we are not saved by our behaviour; if we are saved, we will have a different behaviour pattern than previous to our salvation.

 

[posthuman]

10 When I begin to understand that I am that blessed man to whom the Lord will not impute sin—the wet paint principle is then dealt with because its power lies in the condemnation that the law brings to the one who is not counted as forever perfect in Christ.

if ye do not forgive men their trespasses,
no more will your father forgive you your trespasses.
(Matthew 6:15, 1599 GNV)​

​

​

Now to him that worketh, the wages is not counted by favor, but by debt:​

But to him that worketh not, but believeth in him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.​

Even as David declareth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works:​

Blessed they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.​

Blessed the man to whom the LORD imputeth not sin.​

(Romans 4:4-8, 1599 GNV)

​

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and Truth is not in us.​

If we acknowledge our sins, He is faithful and just, to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.​

If we say, we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His Word is not in us.
(1 John 1:8-10, 1599 GNV)​

​

please read carefully @justbyfaith

John says we are a liar and Truth does not dwell in us if we say we have no sin or that we have not sinned.
Paul shows us that David says God doesn't impute sin to the person whose sin is forgiven.
John says He is faithful to forgive our sins if we acknowledge them but if we pretend we don't have sin or that we don't commit sin, Christ is not in us.
Jesus says if we don't forgive others, God does not forgive us.
Paul says the righteousness imputed by God to those who receive Him is by faith, by putting our trust in the One who justifies the ungodly.
--- that means

1. we have to acknowledge our sinfulness, confessing that we are ungodly, and that He is our only hope
2. we have to forgive others as well
3. John speaks to believers saying what he says, so even after we have believed, we still have to do these things.

​

 

[posthuman]

I suggest you read Wet Paint Principle 2:21; and that you also try to read the document as a whole before you try and pick it apart.

if the foundation is faulty, the whole structure collapses.
if it cannot bear scrutiny it isn't worth being read.
i'm working my way through it in the way it was presented.

did you write this? or copy-paste someone's pamphlet?
i.e. am i talking to the author or one of his disciples?

 

[justbyfaith]

John says we are a liar and Truth does not dwell in us if we say we have no sin or that we have not sinned.

And of course, I am neither saying that I have not sinned and nor am I saying that I have no sin.

 

[justbyfaith]

i'm working my way through it in the way it was presented.

You're seeking to pick it apart instead of reading it as a whole first.

 

[justbyfaith]

did you write this? or copy-paste someone's pamphlet?
i.e. am i talking to the author or one of his disciples?

To the author.

Although, I authored it some 33 years after I read it; for I believe that it was sent to me back in time.

I had forgotten that I had even read it when it came from my psyche; but later, after it was printed out on paper, I remembered that I had read it on a similar paper. And that it was an exact duplicate of what I had read when I first wrote out the document.

 

[justbyfaith]

And of course, I am neither saying that I have not sinned and nor am I saying that I have no sin.

Before the eyes of the Father, it is a different story; for when He looks at me He sees the blood and imputed righteousness of His Son.

 

[justbyfaith]

sin & transgression are different things.

No (see 1 John 3:4).

 

[justbyfaith]

we are not perfected in the sense the author of the OP argues.
the author of the OP denies the very existence of sin based on false understanding of Romans -- and the Bible calls the author of the OP a liar:

If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and Truth is not in us.​

If we acknowledge our sins, He is faithful and just, to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.​

If we say, we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.​

(1 John 1:8-10, 1599 GNV)​

​

the Bible calls the author of the OP a liar, and says God's word & God's truth is not in him.

You have misrepresented me here.

I pray that the Lord will abundantly bless you and receive you as a son (Hebrews 12:6).

 

[posthuman]

17 But grace has as its effect in my life deliverance from sin—and sin is the transgression of the law.

one of the major errors in your premises is that this is the only definition of "sin"

as you put,

I cannot sin because I am not under the law,

((pure gnosticism, exactly what John wrote his little epistles to refute))

but as i have already put previously, and now add to,

• Romans 5:13 clearly establishes that sin exists apart from the Law. transgression depends on the existence of a law to be transgressed, but sin does not.
• Romans 14:23 tells us that everything that is not of faith, is sin. any lack of faith, is sin, regardless of its status as transgression.
• Romans 3:23 tells us that all falling short of the glory of God is sin. in whatsoever we do not glorify Him, we sin.
• Romans 14:14 tells us that even though a thing may not be sinful in and of itself ((by extension, by transgression of law)), to whoever considers it sin, it is sin.
• immediately Romans 14:15 tells us that it is sin for us if we cause such a person to sin against their conscience, even apart from transgression of any law
• but do we not have such a law? in John 13:34 our Lord commands us to love one another even as He loves us. so anything that is not done in love, no - greater still! anything not done in love as He loves, is sin.
• 1 John 3:4 tells us that sin is lawlessness

so you see Victor, we are not "sinlessly perfect" while we dwell in these tents just because we have accepted His atonement for our sin and been baptized into His death, so that 'the Law' ((specifically a reference to Torah, see Romans 7)) has no more authority over us.
"to be sure, sin was in the world before the Law" - Romans 5:13 NIV
sin did not disappear when we were taken out from under the Law. transgression was removed, but our flesh is still fallen, for now. and guess what your brain is made of? flesh. but there are many more things called sin, apart from breaking the Law of the Sinai covenant with the Hebrew people.
we are covered by His blood, interred with Him so that we will rise with Him, even on that day He comes back to snatch away His bride, and redeem our bodies. Romans 8:23.