Refuting Popular Pseudo-Biblical Excuses for Sin

by Dr. J. Patrick Johnston

Philippians 3:12 - The Apostle Paul, Not Yet Perfect?

A critical look at a popular interpretation of Philippians 3:12

To preach against sin successfully, we must be prepared to refute the many excuses for sin that sinners have. We must know how to tear down the walls behind which sinners hide. We must be equipped to expose the deception of any excuse for lack of perfect submission to Christ. Sinners anesthetize the ache of their consciences by self-deception, by perverting their perception of reality. But the application of truth to their minds will lift that haze of deception so that their consciences will sting them afresh. Jesus spoke to His disciples of the sinners which rejected Him, "If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin" (John 15:22). Jesus was a cloak-yanker! He exposed the wickedness of His critics and brought to naught their excuses for sin.

To preach against sin successfully in the churches among those who name the name of Christ, the man of God must be prepared to refute many popular "Biblical" excuses for sin. Unfortunately, hypocrites commonly appeal to the Holy Bible to justify their unholy lifestyles. Unthinkable! that one would appeal to a book inspired by the Holy Spirit, penned by holy men of God, in order to make the reader holy (II Timothy 3:16-17), to justify unholiness! A few such passages to which the hypocrite turns to comfort himself in his sins is Philippians 3:12, I Timothy 1:15, Romans 7:14-25, I Corinthians 3:1-3, and I John 1:8. We will deal with each of these in turn.

First let us examine Philippians 3:12. Here is the verse of controversy:

Philippians 3:12: Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.

____________________________________

Excuse #1: "If the Apostle Paul wasn't perfect in this life, then how can we expect to be perfect?"

____________________________________

With the assumption that the word "perfect" here refers to moral perfection, then this verse at face value would make it appear as though the author, the Apostle Paul, was not morally perfect but that he indeed had sin in his life. I believe a careful examination of the context will convince you that this assumption is false and this interpretation therefore is invalid. We will start early in the chapter and progress to the end of the chapter in order to get the entire context.

In the beginning of the chapter, Paul warns the church at Philippi to beware of "the concision", or the sect of Judaism who claims to be Christian and yet has been teaching that Gentiles must be circumcised and follow the ceremonial teachings of the law of Moses in order to become Christians. In the new covenant, God has done away with the rites and rituals of Judaism and now all must come into covenant with God through circumcision of the heart (Deuteronomy 30:6-8; Colossians 1:10-13; Romans 2:25-29). The Judaizers sought to glory in the flesh of their converts, while God was searching for holy hearts in which to glory, made holy by faith in His Son.

With this context established, let us begin in verse 4 of Philippians 3 where Paul testifies of his credentials as a Pharisee:

4. Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:

5. Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;

6. Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

It must be understood here that the righteousness that Paul had obtained as a Pharisee, when he was known as Saul of Tarsus, was only outward righteousness. Saul of Tarsus was inwardly wicked. He was not truly blameless in respect to commandments against inward sins, for he confesses in Romans 7 that he had transgressed the 10th commandment, which forbade covetousness (verses 7-14). Furthermore, the law also commanded the Jews to hearken unto the words of Christ when He comes (Deuteronomy 18:15-19), and as a persecutor of Christians Saul of Tarsus certainly did not do that. If he truly were righteous, he would have loved Christ, but he did the will of his father the devil instead (John 8:42-44).

Saul of Tarsus was of the highly religious class of Jews that Jesus rebuked in Matthew 15 and 23. He emphasized the details of the law and added his own traditions to it and thereby forsook the spirit of the commandments of God (Matthew 15:3). He outwardly appeared righteous unto men, but within was full of hypocrisy and iniquity (Matthew 23:23-28). He was not truly blameless in regard to the law of God.

Let us continue in Philippians 3. Referring to his hard-earned credentials as a Pharisee of Pharisees, Paul says,

7. But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.

8. Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ.

Paul forsook the limelight of Phariseeism for the shame and persecution of Christianity. He forsook the congratulations and the praise of his coveted seat of judgment for the dungeons, whippings, and spittle of Christian reproach. He exited the fellowship of the comfortable and joined the fellowship of His sufferings and was made conformable to Christ's death. He now reckons the luxuries of his former life to be like "dung" (feces) compared to the priceless prize of Jesus Christ.

9. And be found in Him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law [the outward ceremonial righteousness he had as a Pharisee - v.6], but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith.

10. That I may know Him, and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being made conformable unto His death;

In Christ, Paul found what he never obtained as a Pharisee - true righteousness! That is, the righteousness which exceeds the external requirements of the letter of the law and is within the heart of the individual. True righteousness can only come by faith (Romans 4; Hebrews 11). When Paul exercised faith in Christ, the prophesied One, and in His sufferings and death for his sins, only then could he truly conform to the law of God and be righteous. He became "conformable to His death", which he says in another epistle means to be completely dead to sin and alive unto God (Romans 6). He now loves Christ and keeps His commandments because He first loved him, not simply because God commanded it, not simply for fear of hell and want of heaven (I John 4:19). The sacrifice of Christ provided the loving motive that Paul lacked to be fully obedient to the law of God. The power of the blood is its ability to make sinners like Saul of Tarsus sinless (Hebrews 13:20-21). The power of His grace is its ability to successfully influence the recipient to deny ungodliness and live righteously and godly in this present world (Titus 2:11-14). The power of Christ's sacrifice is its ability to make us "dead to sin" and "live unto righteousness" (I Peter 2:24), to make us walk in the spirit and not in the flesh so that the righteousness of the law will be fulfilled in us (Romans 8:3-4). The power of Christ to save is His power to influence man to lay down his sins and sin no more, to be forever thereafter perfectly compliant with His law of love.

I hope you do not mind a brief tangent, but I am rather perturbed with the popular folly embraced by many that they can be righteous and unrighteous simultaneously, that they can sin and love God at the same time. True righteousness is nothing but sinlessness. After all, what is righteousness but the lack of unrighteousness? The Bible clearly says, "All unrighteousness is sin" (I John 5:17). So righteousness is the absence of sin. That Paul discovered righteousness by faith in Christ means that he found sinlessness by faith in Christ.

____________________________________

Excuse #2: "I am not righteous because of anything I have done. Jesus' righteousness has been imputed unto me. The Father sees me as righteous, although I sin every day!"

____________________________________

There is a poisonous deception afoot in the church of our day, which is fatally embraced by many. These use verse 9 (and other such passages) to say that Christ's righteousness is imputed or accounted unto us, and we are reckoned to be righteous by the Father even though there is still sin in our lives. To hell with this popular nonsense that Christ's blood covers our sins while we still remain in them, that our pardon is secured and we are considered righteous by God although we sin daily in thought, word, and deed. Nonsense! This is a perversion of the doctrine of Christ, a satanic invention. Do not be deceived by it! The Scriptures plainly contradict it:

Deuteronomy 25:16: All that do unrighteously are an abomination unto the Lord thy God.

I Corinthians 6:9-11: The unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God...

I John 3:10: Whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God.

I John 3:6: Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous even as He is righteous.

Acts 10:34-35: Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth Him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with Him.

Romans 2:18: For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men...

Romans 2:6-11: [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, [to them He will give] eternal life: But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, [to them He will give] indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; But glory, honour, and peace to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: For there is no respect of persons with God.

Romans 6:16: Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or obedience unto righteousness.

Matthew 13:41-42: The Son of man shall send forth His angels, and they shall gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity [which means lawlessness, or sin]; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous [those who do righteousness] shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.

The Bible plainly states that those who do unrighteously are hellbound, and those who live righteously are Christians. Let God be true and every man a liar!

Let us continue in Philippians 3. Paul said he left his luxurious life as a hypocritical Pharisee for the sinless life that comes by faith in Christ. He continues,

10. That I may know Him, and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being made conformable unto His death;

11. If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.

12. Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.

13. Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before.

14. I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.

What is that which Paul had not yet obtained? It is "the resurrection of the dead" (v.11)! Paul had not yet obtained the prize to be granted to him at the resurrection. The "high prize" which he had not yet obtained is not freedom from sin, but it is to rule and reign with Christ in power and glory for all eternity in a perfect, glorified body which will never die! That is what he had not yet apprehended. He had already apprehended true righteousness by faith in Christ (i.e. no unrighteousness in him; moral perfection). It is not a moral perfection that Paul had yet to obtain, for he says in the next verse,

15. Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.

____________________________________

Excuse #3: "We will never be perfect until we get to heaven."

____________________________________

Paul exhorts those who were already perfect to aim for the same prize as he. "Perfect" here means "complete". Moral perfection is complete conformity to one's moral obligation, which is to love God supremely and neighbors equally. The "perfect" Philippian saints were encouraged to have the same blessed hope as Paul, to forget the past and reach forward to the goal, to apprehend that for which they were apprehended, to press toward the prize of the resurrection of the dead. Not to strive for perfection of morality, which they must have already obtained by repentance and faith in order to become Christians, but the perfection of everything else.

Hear the words of Paul to Timothy at the end of his ministry:

II Timothy 4:6: I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand.

7. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:

8. Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love His appearing.

Here Paul is about to receive that which he had not yet apprehended, the prize which he had not yet obtained, the ultimate anticipation - not righteousness, but the "crown of righteousness". Not power over sin, but power to reign. Not moral perfection, but a perfect mind and body.

Let us continue in Philippians 3:

16. Nevertheless, whereunto we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us mind the same thing.

If Paul had not yet attained unto sinlessness, then how could walking by the same rule be acceptable unto God? What sin could one indulge in and simultaneously be walking by a rule that is acceptable to God? Adultery? Covetousness? Stealing? Cursing? Maybe lust? What rule could be acceptable to God that would tolerate a single sin? Any rule for living that finds a little sin acceptable is an impostor! The only rule for conduct is the law of God, which forbids ALL sin: "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law" (I John 3:4). The only rule by which righteousness and guilt should be measured is the law of God: "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all" (James 2:10). If a man will abide by the law of God, he will not sin.

Continuing in Philippians 3:

17. Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us as an example.

Here Paul boldly sets himself up as an example of morality that the Philippian saints should follow. He says to them in the next chapter: "Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do" (4:9). Paul also instructed the Corinthian saints to be imitators of him (I Corinthians 4:16; 11:1). Now, how could one set himself up as a moral example to follow if there were any sin at all in his life? What sin could be acceptable in the life of one who is a moral example worthy of imitation? Homosexuality? Lying? Extortion? Dishonoring parents? Pride? Hmmm? In order for Paul to be an acceptable example for others to follow, he must be sinless.

Paul claims that when the Thessalonians believed in Christ, they became followers of the messengers of the Gospel as well as followers of Jesus (I Thessalonians 1:5-6). To be an acceptable example to them, Paul must be blameless. According to the next chapter, Paul claims that he fulfilled this qualification among the Thessalonians:

I Thessalonians 2:10: Ye are witnesses, and God also, how holily, and justly, and unblameably, we behaved ourselves among you that believe:

11. As ye know how we exhorted and comforted and charged every one of you, as a father doth his children,

12. That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his kingdom and glory.

Let us also look at other claims of Paul the Apostle to prove that he was a holy example for those to whom he ministered.

I Corinthians 9:27: I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

Acts 24:16: And herein do I exercise myself to have always a conscience void of offence toward God, and toward men.

Also, we can see where morally perfect Paul encouraged others to be morally perfect, and made it a goal to perfect others in holiness (Colossians 1:28 and II Corinthians 13:9,11; also see Colossians.1:20-22; 4:12; Hebrews 13:20-21; I Thessalonians 3:12-13; 5:23-24; Ephesians 1:4; Romans 12:1; Philippians 1:9-11; 2:14-16; I Corinthians 1:8; II Corinthians 6:18-7:1; II Timothy 3:16-17; I Peter 5:10; James 1:2-4; Jude 24-25). If he were not morally perfect himself, how could he make that a realistic goal for his flock without being a hypocrite? Did Paul teach, "Do as I say, not as I do?" No, he said, "Do as I do - Be perfect!"

Let us continue with the conclusion of Philippians 3:

20. For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ:

21. Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious body, according to the working whereby He is able even to subdue all things unto Himself.

Paul concludes the chapter again referring to the prize, the perfection which he had not yet obtained, when his vile body would be fashioned like Christ's glorious body. It should be clear to you now that the perfection which Paul had not yet attained was the resurrection of the dead, the bodily glorification which he would then receive, when that which was in part would be done away with and he would know as he was known.

He encourages the Philippians to look forward and press toward the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus even as he. "Let us, as many as be perfect, be thus minded", he says in verse 15. He says similarly in verse 20, that they look heavenward for the second coming of Christ. Look at what John says about those who are "thus minded":

I John 3:2: Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him: for we shall see Him as He is.

3. And every man that hath this hope in Him purifieth Himself, even as He is pure.

Even as He is pure - in this life! We see in Philippians 3 that Paul had this hope to see Jesus face to face and "be like Him" in all of His glorious perfection; hence he was Christ-like, he was morally pure, before that hope ever came to pass! We can be, too! We can morally Christ-like at this very moment, if we will set our sights on the coming King, when we will be like Him physically. Hallelujah! Jesus is coming soon! Then the perfect will be made perfect.

I Timothy 1:15 - The Apostle Paul, Chief of Sinners?

A Critical Look at a Popular Interpretation of I Timothy 1:15

Let us examine the verse of controversy:

I Timothy 1:15: This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

This verse at face value would make it appear as though the author, the Apostle Paul, was not morally perfect but that he indeed had much sin in his life. I believe that Paul was speaking of his sinfulness as a hypocritical Pharisee, not as the Apostle of Christ. As a Pharisee, he was chief of sinners. As an Apostle, he was an ex-sinner, loving God and his neighbor with such consistency that he frequently in his writings set himself up as worthy of emulation. The context makes this interpretation the only plausible one. Let us examine the context of this passage to see if this is indeed the case.

____________________________________

Excuse #4: "If the Apostle Paul was the 'chief of sinners' at the same time he was an Apostle of Christ, then how can any of us ever expect to live sinless in this life?"

____________________________________

Let us look at verses 5-7 of this chapter:

5. Now the end [goal or aim] of the commandment is charity [or love] out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned [or without hypocrisy]:

6. From which some having swerved aside have turned aside unto vain jangling:

7. Desiring to be teachers of the law: understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.

Here Paul addresses those "teachers of the law" who hold to the letter of the Mosaic law and yet do not fulfil the Spirit. He speaks to those who emphasize the details of the law, like tithing off of your spices, and yet omit the weightier matters of the law, like judgment, faith, mercy, and the love of God (Matthew 23:23; Luke 11:42). The goal of the law of God according to this passage of Paul is 1) love, 2) a good conscience, and 3) unhypocritical faith. Love is obedience to all the law, a good conscience is one which is not conscious of any offenses against the law and which would be tremendously sensitive to any transgression, and a faith which is without hypocrisy is a faith that is accompanied by obedience to the law (James 2:10-16; Romans 3:31; 8:3-4).

The sum of all of the law is to love God supremely and your neighbor as yourself

(Matthew 22:34-40; Galatians 5:14). If a man claims to love God, and yet does not love his neighbor as himself, he is a liar and the truth is not in him - he does not really love God at all. If a man truly loves God, he will love his neighbor as himself and not sin against God or his neighbor. If a man loves God, he will be compliant with the spirit of every single commandment of God. If you doubt these conclusions, see Luke 10:25-28; John 14:15,21-24; 15:9-12; Romans 13:8-10; I John 2:3-5,10,15-17; 3:4-17,23-24; 4:7-17,20-21; 5:2-4,18; II John 5-9; Revelation 12:17; 14:12; and 22:14; or, be patient and I will address this topic more thoroughly in the last section, "I John 1:8 - Sinless or Deceived".

Now that Paul has established that the goal of the law is love, a pure conscience, and an obedient faith, let us continue with the next few verses of I Timothy 1 where he continues to discuss the purpose of the law of God:

8. But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;

9. Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

10. For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

11. According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.

Paul makes it clear here that the law was not made for the righteous man, but for sinners. Why is this? One who loves God does not need the law to secure his obedience, but the sinner does need the law to secure his outward compliance and encourage an inward change of heart. For instance, I do not need to make commandments for my wife such as, "Do not kill me when I am sleeping", "Do not abuse my children", "Do not commit adultery with the mailman", "Do not curse me or slander me", etc. Why? Because she loves me, and therefore she is compliant with these commandments although they have never been verbalized or written down by me. She does not need the law to make her compliant with the sum of the law, which is love. The law was not written down for such as her.

The law and the judgments thereof were made for the wicked because they need an external restraint to prevent them from acting out their lusts. For instance, the law says, "Thou shalt not murder" and "He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death" (Exodus 20:13; 21:12). A wicked man needs this law and judgment to restrain him should he be tempted to murder. Without this restraint, he might deceive himself to think that he is justified in his selfish act, and be content to act out his lust if he thinks he can get away with it. All civil nations must have some sort of law such as this to restrain wicked men, otherwise anarchy and injustice would reign. The law was made for sinners.

The law is the schoolmaster of a wicked man to expose his wicked heart, magnify his guilt, show him his need for a Savior, and ultimately lead him to Christ (Galatians 3:24). If he does not love God and his neighbor, the law says that he will be eternally incarcerated in hell forever, and his pricked conscience agrees. The proper response of a sinner when confronted with the law of God is humility and the fear of God, which is the beginning of knowledge (Proverbs 1:7; Isaiah 66:1-2).

Often when preaching on the streets and on college campuses, I will use the law as Paul says in I Timothy 1 it should be used. I will preach the "Thou shalt nots" of the law of God and Christ, and then warn of the eternal judgment upon all transgressors. I do this to make man see his desperate need for a Savior and to make him keenly aware of that of which he must repent in order to be saved.

____________________________________

Excuse #5: "I am not under the law, I am under grace. The law condemns me for my sinful habits, but grace forgives."

____________________________________

It is a shameful fact that professing Christians are the most zealous critics of this method of evangelism. The law was designed for this purpose. It was made for sinners, and this lawful use is "according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God". If people who claim to be righteous feel guilty when I preach the law of God, then it is probably because they are guilty. I praise God, for the law is accomplishing its intended purpose: to expose sin, to magnify guilt, and to show sinners their need for a Savior. Only when a sinner recognizes this does he become a candidate for mercy, which is discovered through repentance and faith in Christ. As long as the sinner justifies himself and excuses his sin, then Jesus cannot save him.

If the Apostle Paul was still a sinner at the time of his writing of I Timothy 1, then according to verse 8-10, he is still under the law and not righteous, and has not been converted by the Gospel he preaches. ("Righteous sinner" is an oxymoron, like "honest liar", "Christian sodomite", or "wise atheist".)

Let us continue in I Timothy 1:

12. And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that He counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry;

Notice here that Paul was counted faithful before entering the ministry. Faithfulness was not some future goal for which he aimed in his Christian walk, yet was never able to reach in this life. He was counted faithful before he was chosen by God to be His Apostle. And when he claims that he is faithful, or full of faith, I think it is safe to assume that he was speaking "of faith unfeigned" mentioned two sentences earlier, the faith that is without hypocrisy, the faith that is accompanied with righteous works (without which true faith does not exist - James 2:14-26).

13. Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.

Here Paul proceeds to give his testimony. Notice that he says he was before a blasphemer, a persecutor, and injurious. As Christ's Apostle, he was not doing these things anymore.

14. And the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love which is Christ Jesus.

15. This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners: of whom I am chief.

It was not Paul the redeemed Apostle that was, literally and presently, the chief of sinners, but the "old Paul" better know as Saul of Tarsus, the Pharisee of Pharisees. Keep in mind the "faithful saying" in verse 15: "Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners." Before Saul of Tarsus repented of his sins, he was the sinner whom Jesus Christ came to save and had yet to save. But Paul the Apostle was no longer a sinner that Jesus had yet to save. Jesus had already saved Paul from his sins at the time of this writing - ALL of his sins! The Bible says Jesus "shall save His people from their sins", not in their sins (Matthew 1:21; see also I John 3:4-10; Titus 2:11-14; I Peter 2:24; Hebrews 13:20-21). What a weak salvation, and what a weak testimony it would be if Paul were still in his sins. The immediate context of verse 15 makes it clear that when Paul claims he is the chief of sinners, he is speaking of his past state as a Christ-hating Pharisee who had not yet been saved from his sins.

Even those who interpret verse 15 to mean that Paul was the chiefest of sinners at same time he was an Apostle interpret his statement to be a hyperbole. They do not take verse 15 literally themselves. Who dares to interpret this to mean that Paul was the biggest sinner alive, worse than Judas Iscariot, worse than Hymenaeus and Alexander (who are mentioned to have shipwrecked the faith a few verses later in the chapter), worse than the bloodthirsty idolater Nero, worse than the baby-raping, homosexual, cannibalistic serial killer on death row, at the same time he was an Apostle to the Gentiles? Will you? I don't think you will.

"The chief of sinners" was not Paul the Apostle but Saul of Tarsus. Saul was a blasphemer, a persecutor of Christians, and injurious. As one of the most religious men of his day, he was the biggest hypocrite alive! He was these things "before" he repented and believed in Jesus; he was not doing these things anymore at the time he was an Apostle of Christ.

16. Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on Him to life everlasting.

He obtained mercy so that the pattern of God's salvation might be manifest to all so that others would believe and be redeemed as he. What was that pattern? That he was still a blasphemer, a persecutor, injurious? No way! The pattern is God making wicked men righteous, sinful men sinless. The pattern is that Paul did those things "before", but now is a new creature in Christ with the old habits passed away (II Corinthians 5:17). The pattern is that now the spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set him free from the law of sin and death. Now Jesus has condemned sin in his flesh so that the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in him. Now he walks in the Spirit not in the flesh anymore (Romans 8:2-4). The pattern is that sin had dominion over him when he was under the law, but now that he is under grace, righteousness has dominion over him (Romans 6:12-23; Titus 2:11-14). The pattern is that the old man, Saul of Tarsus, that religious servant to sin, is dead and buried forever and the new Paul resurrected to newness of life (Romans 6:1-11)! This is the pattern that Paul exemplified. (Each of the passages cited in this paragraph were written by Paul to describe the salvation experience.)

Paul uses present tense in I Timothy 1:15 for dramatic effect, like he does at the end of Romans 7. We each employ present tense speech in order to describe past events on a regular basis, so this is not an extraordinary explanation. As a matter of fact, I have used present tense verbs to describe past events throughout this tract, and you never thought a thing about it: "Paul refutes...", "Paul makes it clear...", "As Paul says...", "Paul proceeds to give his testimony..." The context convinces you that I am well aware that Paul did these things in the past. Why do you wrest with I Timothy 1:15, insisting that Paul was the chief of sinners at the same time he was an Apostle of Christ when the context refutes it? The context makes it clear that at the time Paul wrote his first epistle to Timothy, he was not presently and literally the chief of sinners, but it was the unconverted Saul of Tarsus, the blasphemer, the persecutor, the injurious Pharisee, the one who had yet to be saved, that was the chiefest of sinners.

Further evidence that it was the unconverted Saul of Tarsus that was the chief of sinners and not Paul the righteous Apostle can be seen where Paul claims in other Scriptures to be without sin (I Corinthians 9:27; I Thessalonians 2:10-12; Philippians 3:15-17; Acts 24:16). Furthermore, he frequently sets himself up as a moral example for his disciples to follow, which he could not do if he were still committing any sin that would make him a "chief sinner" (I Corinthians 4:16; 11:1; Philippians 4:9). What Christian pastor would dare propose that one who was the "chief of sinners" in his congregation or town be set forth as a moral example that all of his other parishioners should follow? That would be an insane and wicked proposal indeed! In order for Paul to be an acceptable example for others to follow, he must be blameless. (The references cited in this paragraph were quoted in the section on Philippians 3:12.)

Also, we can see where morally perfect Paul encouraged others to be morally perfect, and made it a goal to perfect others in holiness (Colossians 1:28 and II Corinthians 13:9,11; also see Colossians 1:20-22; 4:12; Hebrews 13:20-21, I Thessalonians 3:12-13; 5:23-24, Ephesians 1:4; Romans 12:1; Philippians 1:9-11; 2:14-16; I Corinthians 1:8; II Corinthians 6:18-7:1; II Timothy 3:16-17; I Peter 5:10; James 1:2-4; Jude 24-25). If he were not morally perfect himself, how could he make that a realistic goal for his flock without being a hypocrite? Did Paul teach, "Do as I say, not as I do?" No, he said, "Do as I do - Be perfect!"

____________________________________

Excuse #6: "No one is perfect but Jesus!!!"

____________________________________

"But nobody is perfect but Jesus!" goes the brainless rebuttal. As Charles Spurgeon said, there is so much dust on your Bibles that you could spell the word, "DAMNATION" across them. Men throughout the Bible were commanded to be morally perfect (Genesis 17:1-2; Deuteronomy 7:6; 18:13; I Chronicles 28:9; I Kings 8:61; Matthew 5:48; Exodus 22:31; 14:2,21; 26:19; 28:9; II Corinthians 13:9-11; I Peter 1:15-16); and many men such as Job, Noah, David, Asa, the parents of John the Baptist, and many others were mentioned to be morally perfect (Job 1; Genesis 6:9; Psalms 18:30-36; 101:2-3: I Kings 15:14; 20:3; Luke 1:6). That is not to say that they never sinned, but that they repented and became sinless.

I conclude that in the context of I Timothy 1 and in the context of all of Paul's writings, it can in no way be justly construed that Paul the Apostle was literally and presently the chiefest of sinners. If you are lukewarm, if you are still a "chief sinner", if you are a hypocrite, do not deceive yourself to think you can go and sit next to the Apostle Paul in heaven! Those who have a form of godliness but deny its power are deceived to think that they are in the same camp of "chief sinners" as the Apostle Paul! Until they become "ex-sinners" through repentance and by grace through faith in Christ, they have not followed the pattern Paul exemplified.

Romans 7:14-25 The Apostle Paul, Carnal and Sold Under Sin?

A critical look at a popular interpretation of Romans 7

Let me introduce the seventh chapter of Romans by noting an unfortunate observation. Few professing Christians can relate to the personal victory over sin found in the sixth and eighth chapters of Romans. However, they do relate to the conflict found in the man in the latter part of the seventh chapter. Therefore, they assume that Romans 7:14-25 must describe the life of the true Christian, for that is the only "Christianity" with which they are familiar. I must admit, that at face value, the latter half of Romans 7 appears to be a confession from Paul the Apostle that he is a chronically backsliding hypocrite who finds it impossible to abstain from sin and do right. But in order to hold to this interpretation of Romans 7:14-25, the passage must be taken out of its immediate context. Romans 6, the first half of chapter 7, and chapter 8, must be twisted and perverted in order to be reconciled to this popular interpretation of Romans 7:14-25, or else these passages are just ignored altogether.

Few contemporary evangelicals agree with the interpretation of the seventh chapter of Romans you are about to hear, but some church fathers that have held to this interpretation of Romans 7 include James Armenius, John Wesley, Adam Clarke, and Charles Finney.

Upon reaching this chapter in Romans, Paul has taught us about the salvation available to the sinner without the works of the law (chapters 3-4). He has also silenced all his critics who claimed that this teaching concerning grace was a license to sin. He made it clear that God's grace brings deliverance from sin and makes one a servant to righteousness (Romans 6 and also Titus 2:11-14). He has shown them how to be free from sin and warned them of the wages of returning to sin. Now Paul proceeds to show the purpose of the law and the fruitless desperation and discouragement of a convicted sinner who is under the law. He makes it clear that the law is powerless to do what Jesus Christ and the Gospel can do.

Let us get some things straight about rules of interpretation. One should always interpret language in light of the speaker's or author's subject of discourse. If a listener or reader loses sight of the topic, then speech or writing can be twisted in any way he wishes. Furthermore, we should always try to interpret a person's speech or writing to make him consistent with himself. It is by ignoring these simple rules of interpretation that the Scriptures have been tortured into the support of errors innumerable and contradictions unfathomable. In the latter part of Romans 7, we must assume Paul is being consistent with his teachings in the previous and the following chapters. Furthermore, we must keep in mind Paul's intention to get across to the reader the powerlessness of the law to destroy man's sinfulness, not the powerlessness of Jesus and the Gospel to destroy man's sinfulness.

In verse 1 of chapter 7, he sets the context of the entire chapter, "I speak to them that know the law". He is speaking to those who are well-skilled in both civil law (verse 2-4) and in the moral commandments of God. Let us look at the first four verses:

1. Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law), how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?

2. For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.

3. So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

4. Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to Him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

Paul uses the analogy of marriage to show the futility of the law now that Christ has called us into covenant with him. Believers are to die to the old system of the Mosaic law and approach God through the new and living way Jesus has made for us by His death on the cross. Believers in Christ do not live by the law, but neither do they transgress it. Believers live by the faith of the Son of God, which "works by love", and love is the fulfillment of all of the law of God (Galatians 5:6,14; Romans 13:8-10). This faith purifies the heart and renders us compliant to the moral law of God (Acts 15:9; Romans 3:31). Now we obey Christ, not simply because He has commanded that we do so, but because we love Him.

For instance, as I mentioned in the section on I Timothy 1:15, I do not need to make commandments for my wife such as: "Do not put cyanide in my food", "Do not maim my children", etc. What would that say about our relationship if I were forced to make such commandments for her so that she would not do these things? That would not be a very loving relationship, to say the least. Nevertheless, my wife does not harm us because of the love she has for us. Just like my wife does not "live by the law of her husband" as if my commandments were the sole moral influence which keep her treating me right, but rather she lives by love for her husband, so Christians do not "live by the law of God" but rather we live by the love of God. And as long as we do so we do not transgress God's law, for love is the sum of the law. The motive of the righteous to obey is not the law, but the cross. The written law was given because of wicked men. If men had loved God from the beginning, the written law would not have been necessary (I Timothy 1:8-11). The law cannot condemn those who have the first fruit of the Spirit, which is love (Galatians 5:22-23). Those who love God supremely and their neighbor as themselves do not sin against God or their neighbor, but are perfectly compliant with God's law (John 14:15,21-24; 15:10; Ps. 37:31; I John 2:9-11; 3:4-18; 4:7-8,20-21; 5:2-4).

We become married to Christ "that we should bring forth fruit unto God", and as Jesus said, Matthew 7:16: Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns or figs of thistles?

17. Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

18. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

19. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

20. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

I have heard it proposed that since good trees do bear some rotten fruit, then good Christians may also bear some bad fruit as well. So they come to the opposite conclusion: "Good trees can bear bad fruit! Righteous Christians do commit unrighteous acts." But as the example given in verse 16 says, grape vines do not produce even one thorn, neither do fig trees produce even a single thistle. "Good fruit" is not referring to ripe fruit and "bad fruit" is not referring to rotten fruit, as these assume. Good fruit refers to an edible species of fruit, while bad fruit refers to an inedible or toxic species of fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit"!

Matthew 6:24: No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, or love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon [worldly gain].

If one is serving sin, he cannot be serving God. If one loves sin, then he cannot love God, but actually he hates God! There is no acceptable lukewarm domain where one can be the friend of the world and the friend of God simultaneously, where one can bring forth both good fruit and bad (I John 2:15-17; James 4:4; Revelation 3:15-16). If one is not bringing forth good fruit, or if he is bringing forth bad fruit, then he is not married to Christ.

In verse 5, Paul summarizes the experience upon which he will expound from verse 7 to the end of this chapter:

5. When we were in the flesh the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.

What does he mean by "in the flesh"? Most of what is taught in the church today about what it means to be "in the flesh" is absolutely wrong. We all "walk in the flesh" in the sense that we live in human flesh on this earth. We have bad breath, physical infirmities, mental deficiencies, and we make mistakes involuntarily. We do things we cannot help, like misspell, misread, misunderstand, miscalculate, and we forget to buy toilet paper at the grocery store. Jesus was "in the flesh" in this sense. He was "in all points" just like us (Hebrews 2:14-18; 4:15). When "in the flesh" is used in this way, it is not sinful (II Corinthians 2:3-5). When "in the flesh" is used with a sinful connotation as it is in verse 5 and in Romans 8:1-13, then it refers to having our actions dictated not by God and by conscience, but by the desires of the flesh. This is a choice, a malicious crime against God. This is voluntary. So walking in the flesh in the sinful sense is a choice, not something which we cannot help.

How do the motions of sins use the law to bring forth death in one who walks according to the desires of the flesh? In the latter half of this chapter, he clearly shows us how sin employs the law to produce death. We will discuss this momentarily. But first let me emphasize the past tense of the sentence, "when we were in the flesh..." Let us continue in Romans 7:

6. But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

The "newness of spirit" he speaks of is the spirit of the law, or the law of love. A man serves in "the oldness of the letter" when he obeys simply because it is written that he must obey. The believer who serves in the "newness of spirit" has a different motive to obey. He obeys out of love which comes as a response to Christ's love toward us (I John 4:19). This new yoke under love is much lighter than the previous yoke under the law, and it is much easier to bear (Matthew 11:29-30). Take note that although we are delivered from serving in the oldness of the letter, we are constrained still to serve in the newness of the letter! Service has not been abolished. We are still obligated to love God, and love for God still constrains us to do His will and obey Him. Summarizing verses 5-6, we can safely say that Paul's present spiritual state can be described as the following:

1. He is no longer in the flesh,

2. The motions of sins no longer work in his members to bring forth death,

3. He is delivered from the law and his spiritually dead state under the law, and

4. He serves God in the newness of spirit.

Remember this about Paul as we continue to study the rest of chapter 7.

The Apostle Paul continues,

7. What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

Allow me to highlight here Paul's statement that the law is not sin. The law reveals sin for what it is, but it is not sin. If you even mention the word "law" or "commandment" in a positive light when preaching in your typical church today, you are likely to get labeled a "legalist" and a "heretic". But the law is not sin, and it is not sinful to preach the law in accordance with its lawful purpose. The written law was given to expose sin, and this is in accordance with the glorious Gospel of Christ according to Paul in I Timothy 1:8-11.

When the commandment "Thou shalt not covet" was understood by Paul when he was yet an unconverted sinner, immediately sin became "exceeding sinful". The commandment, "Thou shalt not covet" reminded Paul that he was disobeying God. It increased his awareness of his guilty state.

8. But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence [ungodly desires or lusts]. For without the law sin was dead.

9. For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

10. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

11. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived it, and by it slew me.

12. Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

Saul of Tarsus was not born spiritually dead. He said he "was alive without the law once". But when Saul of Tarsus sinned, he immediately died spiritually. God told Adam, that in the day that he sinned, he would die (Genesis 2:17). Yet Adam lived over 900 years after he sinned. But in the day that he sinned, he did die spiritually. So it was with Saul of Tarsus, and so it is with us. Spiritual death and sin go hand in hand. You cannot have one without the other. This truth is without exception, whether the transgressor be an angel or a man, a person in the Old Testament or a person in the New, a Christian or an unbeliever (Ezekiel 18:1-32). Sin is fatal to all and separates the transgressor from God (Romans 6:23; Isaiah 59:1-2; James 1:14-16; 2:10), for God is no respecter of persons.

When Saul sinned, rather than forsake that sin and walk in the light, Saul hardened his heart to the truth, would not come to the light lest his deeds be reproved, and his conscience became cold and his ignorance willful (John 3:18-21; Romans 1:18-22; Ephesians 4:18-19). Then the law was revealed to him. Once the law was comprehended, it exposed his sinful state and the judgments thereof foretold his agonizing destiny as a sinner. The commandment exposed Saul's state of spiritual death, but the law did not literally make him spiritually dead. God gave the law not to curse, but to bless man and give him a long, happy life:

Deuteronomy 5:29: O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear Me, and keep all My commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children forever.

Deuteronomy 10:12: And now, Israel, what doth the Lord require of thee, but to fear the Lord thy God, to walk in all His ways, and to love Him, and to serve the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul,

13. To keep the commandments of the Lord, and His statutes, which I command thee this day for thy good?

There are those who teach that the sole reason God gave the commandments to man was so that he would break them. That theory is unfounded and plain stupid! What kind of perverted justice is it to command someone to do the impossible and then condemn him to eternal torment when he doesn't do it? The law is holy, just, and good, not unholy, unjust, and bad. The commandment was ordained to life, not death. Just as America's laws are a reflection of the character of its citizens and legislatures, so the law of God is a reflection of the character of the Divine Lawgiver. With such nonsensical opinions as these going out from our pulpits and across the airwaves and through printed material, it is no wonder that unbelievers falsely judge God to be a tyrant. If He gave us a law that we cannot keep, then He is a tyrant!

____________________________________

Excuse #8: "God did not give the law so that we would keep it, but so that we would break it to exalt His grace!"

____________________________________

God makes it very clear that He ordained the law so that men might live in obedience to it and be blessed by it (Deuteronomy 5:29-33; 6:24; 8:1-3; 10:12-13; 11:26-33; 12:28; 27:14-26; 28:1-68; 29:9-28; 30:15-20; Psalm 119:1,44-45,93,165; Proverbs 7:2; Luke 4:4; II Timothy 3:16-17). The law provided the moral constraints by which man could live life to its fullest and reach his greatest potential for happiness in his life and his children's lives. Like the tracks of a train provide the beneficial restraints whereby the train can operate at its maximum potential, so the law of God provides the restraints whereby mankind can be happy, healthy, and free. Spiritual death and the curses of God come as a result of transgressions of the law, not from the law itself. The law was "ordained to life". We do not sin that grace may abound, we repent of sin and "Go and sin no more" that grace may abound (Romans 6:1-2; John 8:11).

The law not only exposed the wicked heart of Saul of Tarsus, but it actually provoked all manner of lust within him. Isn't that the way of a rebellious heart? I know a man who had a son who was hard-hearted and rebellious. Whenever the father gave a commandment for the good of the son, it only gave the son another opportunity to disobey and break his father's heart. If the father never said, "Do not eat cookies before supper", the boy would have been much less likely to raid the cookie jar than if the father did give the commandment. The law has a way of stirring up all manner of sin and disobedience when it is given to one who has a rebellious, wicked heart. So it is for all sinners. The law is powerless to produce obedience in one who has no love, who is not compliant already with the spirit of the law. It only stirs up more rebellion. The sinner must change his heart (repent) and die to the law as a means of relating to God and be married to Christ. Then, out of love, the redeemed sinner can do what he found too difficult to do "under the law".

Let us continue in Romans 7:

13. Was then that which is good [the law] made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

The holy commandment did not bring death; but his disobedience to it did. His sin, that it might appear sin, used the good law to make his sin "exceeding sinful" to him. The commandment simply increased his awareness of sin in his life, and magnified the exceeding sinfulness of his sin.

The rest of the chapter is the passage of controversy. From verse 14 to 23, Paul describes the battle between what he knows he should do and what he actually does. The writing style is quite confusing, but rightly so, for what he is describing is a very disturbed and frustrated state of mind. There is a war between his body and his mind, and the prize is his soul. Let us read it.

14. For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin..

15. For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.

16. If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.

17. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

18. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

19. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

20. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

The common interpretation of this passage is that the sinful nature of the Apostle is preventing him from being perfectly obedient to God. He wants to do right, they teach, but cannot.

21. I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.

22. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:

23. But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.

The common interpretation of this is that the Apostle wants to do right, but the war between the spirit and the sinful flesh ensures frequent defeat, and makes him a servant of his sinful flesh.

24.(Exclamation:) What a wretched man that I am!

(Question:) Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

25. (Answer:) I thank God through Jesus Christ my Lord.

(Summary:) So with my mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

His opening statement of the passage of controversy, "I am carnal, sold under sin" (verse 14), is the key to understanding the rest of the chapter. Superficially, it would appear that in this verse alone we see grave controversies with both the previous and the following chapter if he is saying that he is carnal and sold under sin at the time of his writing of the book of Romans.

According to the previous chapter, those who are "sold under sin" are under the sentence of eternal death. True Christians are free from sin and are servants to God.

Romans 6:16: Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to whom you obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness.

17. But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed that form of doctrine which was delivered you.

18. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.

____________________________________

Excuse #9: "It is impossible to be free from sin in this life!"

____________________________________

If Paul is confessing he is a servant to sin in chapter 7, verse 14, then he could not be the same servant of righteousness who is "free from sin" discussed in chapter 6! If he is "sold under sin" the same time he was the Apostle of Christ, death is his reward. Only if he yields unto obedience and is free from sin is he the servant of righteousness.

Continuing in Romans 6:

19. I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.

20. For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness.

21. What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death.

If the Apostle Paul was "carnal and sold under sin" at the same time he was the Apostle of Christ, and yielded to uncleanness and to iniquity, as many claim Romans 7:14-25 teaches, then he was "free from righteousness" and spiritually dead, and headed for the second death.

22. But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

23. For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Notice the order in these passages in verse 22:

1. Being made free from sin,

2. Become servants to God,

3. Bear fruit unto holiness, and

4. The end is everlasting life.

The former three are conditions necessary to obtain the gift of everlasting life. If the Apostle Paul was never free from sin during his life, but still served sin all of his days, and if he bore unholy fruit instead of holy fruit unto God, then he did not obtain everlasting life. Earning the wages of sin as a servant to sin, he was not a recipient of the gift of eternal life, but of eternal death.

Romans 8:6: For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

7. Because the carnal mind is enmity [hostility] against God...

Is the Apostle Paul walking in spiritual death, and not in the life of Christ at the time of his writing of the seventh chapter of Romans? Is he confessing to us that he, as an Apostle, is an enemy of God because of his carnality? It cannot be!

In the context of the surrounding passages, it becomes increasingly clear that Paul is not describing his experience as a mature Christian here in Romans 7:14-23, but he is speaking of his life trying to serve God under the law before his conversion experience. This is a description of Saul of Tarsus, Pharisee of Pharisees and persecutor of the saints; not Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles and writer of half the New Testament. This is a description of a man who is at war with God, not at peace with God, with a guilty conscience, not a clean conscience. This is a man who is a slave to sin, not a slave to righteousness. He is alive to sin, not dead to sin through Christ. Remember Paul's purpose: to show the powerlessness of the law to destroy the sinfulness of man, not the powerlessness of the Gospel to destroy the sinfulness of man. Although he spoke in the past tense up to verse 14 in referring to his state of bondage under the law, he is referring to the same state when he speaks in the present tense from verses 14b-25.

I believe that he speaks in the present tense in the last half of Romans 7 simply for dramatic effect. This might seem to be a rather far-fetched excuse for a tense change, but if we will carefully consider the context it clearly becomes the only plausible explanation. When I first began to consider this as an alternative interpretation, I began to realize how frequently I use this form of speech in daily conversation. We do it all the time. For instance, "Hey everybody, I got a ticket on the way to work today. It was terrible! I am driving along on route I-75, enraptured in worship while listening to Hosanna's new praise album and finishing the last of my McDonalds french fries, and I do not see the bright orange construction signs in front of me. I look down at the radio, and when I look up, there is this fellow with a STOP sign right in front of me with this look of terror on his face. Ahhhh! I swerve the fellow and hit the curb, then jump the lane and crash right into a police car as the officer spills his hot coffee all over his lap!" I spoke present tense to describe a past event, just like Paul did in Romans 7:14-25 and I Timothy 1:15 - we do this all the time.

The man the Apostle is describing from verses 14-23 is a miserable slave to sin and evil habits, despite his desires to do right. He claims that he cannot do what he should, and cannot stop doing what he shouldn't. As a Pharisee, Saul delighted in God's law with his mind, but he could not find within himself the moral resolve to do what he knew he should do. When his covetousness was revealed to him by the tenth commandment of the law, persistent failure convinced him of the power of sin over him inwardly. In this desperate state of failure he recognized that he needed deliverance from his wretched body of death and to be free from this overcoming power of sin: "What a wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from this body of death?" (verse 24). The law was a successful schoolmaster to awaken him to his guilt and need of a Savior (Galatians 3:24). However, Paul clearly illustrates for us here that salvation does not come through the works of the law. The law is powerless to deliver a man from inward sin and make his character righteous once he has sinned. The law can only point him to the Lawgiver for mercy, and reveal that of which he must repent to be pardoned. Under the law, Saul struggled hard to obey God, but could find no victory; his wicked heart prevented him and he continued serving the lusts of the flesh. Sin had dominion over him; therefore he was under the law and not grace at that point (Romans 6:14). He believed in God and trembled about judgment to come, but he believed and trembled like the devils do - faith without works (James 2:14-26).

____________________________________

Excuse #10: "We do not need to do anything to be saved. Jesus did it all!"

____________________________________

Saul of Tarsus wanted to live in obedience to God's law, but it is not enough to desire to obey God and do right:

I John 2:17b: He that doeth the will of God abideth forever.

Matthew 7:21: Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the Kingdom of heaven, but he that doeth the will of My Father which is in heaven. (See also I Peter 1:22 and Hebrews 5:8.)

Saul of Tarsus had the desire, but lacked the obedience. The conviction of the Holy Spirit was evident in Saul at this time, but we see no inner change. He was not yet born of the Spirit. The wretched condition that the Apostle describes here occurs before his experience on the road to Damascus.

____________________________________

Excuse #11: "I want to live right and to please the Lord, and this is proof that I am saved."

____________________________________

What he wants to do and what he does differs greatly because of his selfish heart, also called the old man, the body of sin, or the body of death by the Apostle; some may call this the "sinful nature". I do not mind labeling this "old man" the "sinful nature" as long as we understand that this wicked nature is acquired, not inherited.

____________________________________

Excuse #12: "I was born a sinner because of Adam's sin."

____________________________________

Man is not born a slave to sin. Man becomes a slave to sin by his own free choice to commit sin (John 8:34; Romans 6:16-19), to do what he knows he should not do (James 4:17). They forsake the right way (II Peter 2:15). They go astray of their own free will (Isaiah 53:6). They are trained in greed (II Peter 2:14). They become servants of corruption when they are overcome by their temptations (II Peter 2:19). They teach their tongues to sin (Jeremiah 5:5). They become unprofitable (Romans 3:12). They become vain in their imaginations, and their hearts become darkened (Romans 1:18-21). Men become sinners when they choose to sin and refuse to know God of their own free will.

Men are not born sinners, but are born innocent. An "innocent sinner" is an oxymoron. Sin and guilt are inseparable, you cannot have the former without the latter. If babies are sinful, then they must be guilty, and if they are innocent, then they cannot be sinful.

If God made men sinners, then He would have the ultimate responsibility for sin, and not man; God would be the criminal and man the victim of God's cruelty. But "God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions" (Ecclesiastes 7:29). God is not to blame for man's sin, and I pity the fool that makes that excuse before the Great White Throne on Judgment Day!

Neither did Adam make his posterity sinful and spiritually dead. Adam brought sin into the world and into the human race, but "death passed upon all men, for all have sinned", not "for Adam sinned" (Romans 5:12). Sin is not passed down by fathers. Sin is not genetic. Sin is not a congenital disease. Sin is a choice that only the individual can make. No one can make the choice to sin or not to sin for another. God made it clear that children cannot be guilty of their father's sin (Ezekiel 18:1-32). Babies are innocent, and children cannot be sinful nor guilty until their consciences are developed and they are able to sin, and then they choose to sin. Jesus said in Matthew 18:2-4 and 19:4 that men must become like little children in order to enter the kingdom of God. If children were sinful and alienated from God from birth, we would not be commanded to be like them to be saved, and the kingdom of heaven would not consist of such as these. We each intuitively know that babies are not sinful. The doctrine of original sin makes great strides against the consciences of men and the testimony of nature to insist that babies have a sinful nature and are sinful. It makes further strides against the teachings of the Bible to say that those sinful beings will go to heaven without repentance and faith.

Paul speaks of a "law of sin" in his members which dominates over the powerless wishes of his mind. What is this law of sin? It is described in Romans 6:16: that unto whom a man yields, he gives power to enslave him, whether of sin unto death or obedience unto righteousness. So, in essence, his "indwelling sin" is nothing but an evil character which he has manufactured himself by submitting to the desires of his flesh unlawfully his entire life and developing evil habits. Ultimately, Saul of Tarsus forged his own chains through a life-long habit of making selfish choices in the pursuit of self-gratification.

____________________________________

Excuse #13: "We need to crucify our flesh every day, not once for all."

____________________________________

Furthermore, the acquired "sinful nature" can be put to death and buried forever in this life.

Galatians 5:24: And they that are Christ's have [past tense] crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.

Romans 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.

7. For he that is dead is freed from sin.

8. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him:

9. Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more: death hath no more dominion over Him.

10. For in that He died, He died unto sin once: but in that He liveth, He liveth unto God.

11. Likewise [in the same way] reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

____________________________________

Excuse #14: "I sin because I have a sinful nature, and I will always have it until I die."

____________________________________

Just as Christ died for sin one time, and now lives unto God, so we should die to sin once for all, and then reckon ourselves dead to sin thereafter and henceforth live unto God.

John 8:34: Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant to sin....

36. If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

If committing sin makes us servants to sin, what is implied in being set free from sin? Does it mean that we sin less? What kind of counterfeit emancipation is that? What would the black slaves have thought about Abraham Lincoln's "Emancipation Proclamation" in 1863 which abolished slavery in the Confederacy if it had actually decreed that the black slaves still had to serve their slavemasters, but only less?!? Would they have considered that true emancipation, true liberty? No way! Jesus is the Great Emancipator! He came to set us free indeed! Those who are set free from sin do not commit sin. Whatever "indwelling sin" that mastered us as sinners, we are freed from as saints. Whether you call it the "body of sin", the "old man", or the "sinful nature", it is critical that we understand that the Scripture says it can be forever slain and buried with Christ in this life.

Some say that the inherent natural desires for self-preservation and self-gratification are evidence of the sinful nature. If this is true, then wild animals have a sinful nature. It cannot be. The involuntary biological desires that are inherent within man are not sinful in and of themselves, although they will be a means to temptation. This becomes evident when you consider that each of these involuntary desires can be lawfully fulfilled within the confines of God's law, in the will of God. For instance, the desire for sex is not sinful in and of itself, but can become a means to temptation and sin. This desire can be fulfilled in holy matrimony, so it cannot be literally sinful. A sinful desire could never be lawful and compatible with God's will.

However, should that natural, God-given desire be unlawfully gratified, it could be said to be a "sinful desire", but this could only be true in a metaphorical sense. Literally, the natural, God-given desire is innocent in and of itself; the sin consists in the choice to gratify that desire unlawfully.

In Romans 7:17, 20, and 23, Paul personifies sin as a tyrant which dwells inside him making him do what his mind does not want to do and preventing him from doing what his mind wants to do. He is the tyrant's prisoner. What he poetically refers to as "sin living in me" is simply his tendency to disobey, the power of habit, the force of his acquired evil nature. Although the flesh and the appetites thereof do appear to take on a power of their own when the lusts of the flesh are unrestrained, in reality, sin is not a substance or power in the sinner, but rather, sin is a choice of the individual to gratify himself unlawfully. Paul appears to describe an inability to obey, but literally he had not an inability to obey but an unwillingness to obey. A man does not forfeit his free will once he sins. The sinner can do what he should do during any given temptation. But as long as his heart is wicked, he cannot make a clean break with sin. It is impossible for him to obey as long as the "old man" lives. But it is within his power to repent and believe and in so doing, put that old man to death. The law was unable to put that old man to death and bury him forever, but the cross of Christ had the power to win the love of the sinner (including that hard-hearted Pharisee on the road to Damascus), and make him perfectly compliant with God's law.

The man described at the end of Romans 7 had a wicked character and sinful habits that dominated him; his acquired sinful nature had yet to be crucified with Christ. Therefore, he served sin. He cried in desperation, "Who shall deliver me from this body of death?" The "body of death" is synonymous with the "old man" and the "body of sin" mentioned in Romans 6. "Who shall deliver me from sin's dominion?", "Who shall give me victory in this war?", "Who shall save me from this cruel slavemaster?", he cried. Then he answered his own question, "Jesus Christ!" (verse 25a). Christ is able to do what the law could not do! When Saul of Tarsus turned to Christ and was born again and became Paul, the sinful man died with Christ, was buried, and the new man resurrected to walk in newness of life. Then he stepped out from underneath the condemnation of the law so prevalent in the conscience of this man described at the end of Romans 7 into the life of the Spirit mentioned in Romans 8.

____________________________________

Excuse #15: "There is no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, no matter what they do!"

____________________________________

Let us take account of Romans 8, where Paul begins to contrast his post-conversion freedom from sin and walk in the Spirit with his pre-conversion slavery to sin and walk in the flesh (7:14-25).

Romans 8:1: There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

When Saul of Tarsus walked in the flesh as described in Romans 7:14-25 he was not "in Christ Jesus" and was condemned.

The word "therefore" in Romans 8:1 indicates the connection of this thought with the previous chapter. Recall in chapter 7 how when Saul walked in the flesh, the motions of sins used the law to bring forth the fruit of death and condemnation in him (verse 5). "Now", as opposed to then, there is no condemnation for Paul in Christ, because he is in Christ and walks after the Spirit and not after the flesh anymore. Nor will he ever walk in the flesh again if he continues to live in the Spirit and walk in the Spirit:

Galatians 5:16: Walk in the Spirit and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.

Galatians 5:25: If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit...

Now that Paul has been born of the Spirit and bears the fruits of the Spirit, the law does not condemn him (Galatians 5:23). Those who are in Christ live in the Spirit and walk in the Spirit, and the spirit of the law, which is love, is fulfilled in them because the Spirit of the law dwells in them (Romans 8:9). However, if any man walks in the flesh like the man described at the end of chapter 7, be not deceived, he does not live in the Spirit and the Spirit of God does not dwell within him.

____________________________________

Excuse #16: "But we are by nature children of wrath, not by choice!"

____________________________________

The Apostle Paul testified in Ephesians 2:

Ephesians 2:2: Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

3: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature (acquired, not inherited nature) the children of wrath, even as others.

4. But God, who is rich in mercy, for His great love wherewith He loved us,

5. Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ....

In Romans 7, Paul's walk is after the flesh; according to the course of this world, yet in Ephesians 2 he claims that the days of walking in the flesh are past. He is no longer by nature a recipient of God's wrath. From this we can logically deduce that Paul in the latter half of Romans 7 is testifying of his past miserable state as a convicted sinner walking in the flesh under the law. Paul's days of walking in the flesh came to a close when the great love of God quickened him from his state of death in his sins and he was born again. Thereafter he walked in the spirit, not in the flesh, and was no longer under God's condemnation.

The reason for this removal of condemnation is spelled out in verses 2-4 of Romans 8:

2. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

3. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

4. That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

The righteousness of the law was not fulfilled in Saul of Tarsus because he walked in the flesh; the "law of sin" in his members enslaved him as he claims in chapter 7, verses 21, 23, and 25. "Indwelling sin" had dominion. He was ashamed of it, but he was a lawbreaker whom the law condemned. The law was made for such an one as this (I Timothy 1:8-11).

____________________________________

Excuse #17: "Jesus died for me so that I would not have to keep the law. He kept the law for me, so that I could break it and still be forgiven!"

____________________________________

But the righteousness of the law was fulfilled in Paul when he died to self and sin and ceased to walk in the flesh and began to walk in the Spirit. In essence, he was made obedient and blameless in respect to the moral law. This is what the law could not do - kill the old man and make man righteous. The law convicted of sin, but could not motivate Saul to fully obey. But what the law could not do, Jesus did! Now sin, personified in chapter 7 as the cruel slavemaster which held Saul captive, had met its match! Christ condemned that tyrant in Saul's flesh and destroyed its power over him. The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus freed him from the "law of sin" in his members. Now the law no longer condemns Paul because the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in him as he walks after the Spirit. He is led of the Spirit, so he is not "under the law" (Galatians 5:18). He is married to another, so that he might bring forth fruit unto God (Romans 7:1-4).

This is an immutable characteristic of those "in Christ Jesus", in whom "the righteousness of the law" is fulfilled. They walk in the Spirit, not in the flesh. They bear the fruit of the Spirit, and do not do the "works of the flesh" (Galatians 5:19-24). The righteousness of the law cannot be fulfilled in those who choose to walk according to the flesh.

____________________________________

Excuse #18: "But that's Old Testament! That doesn't apply to me."

____________________________________

Ezekiel prophesied these words from the Lord about the new covenant,Ezekiel 36:27: And I will put My Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in My statutes, and ye shall keep My judgments, and do them.

Each of the Old Testament prophecies of the new covenant say that the law of God will dwell within the heart of the believer in this covenant (Jeremiah 31:31-34; 32:27-41; Ezekiel 11:18-21; 36:25-28; Hebrews 8:8-10). Indeed, obedience to God is the characteristic of those within the new covenant. This is what it means that the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in the believers. By faith, they obey the law and do righteousness.

How did Jesus do in us what the law was unable to do? How did he influence us to be obedient so that the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us? By the work of His love. In the soul-stirring display of love seen in the sacrifice of the Father's own Son upon the altar of Golgotha's hill, the resolution for man to obey was finally available! Through His selfless sacrifice, He is able to win our hearts completely and free us from this overcoming power of sin by the greater power of His love. Now, we love him because He first loved us (I John 4:19). Because we love Him , we keep His commandments (I John 4:19; John 14:15,21-23). Our response of love to His sacrifice of love is all the motivation we need to destroy our acquired "sinful nature" and bring us fully under His authority. Those who love as He loved fulfill the law (Romans 3:31; 13:8-10; Galatians 5:14; 6:2; James 2:8).

Let us continue in Romans 8:

5. For they that are [following] after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

6. For to be carnally [or fleshly] minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

Think about this! What is the difference between the carnal mind which chooses to act according to the desires of the sinful flesh and the spiritual mind which chooses to act according to the instructions of God Almighty? A change of mind! This is the definition of repentance! A change of mind which results in a changed way of life! Paul has clearly shown us that "to be carnally minded is death" in his testimony at the end of chapter 7. But it must be understood that when he experienced godly sorrow and repentance over his sin, his carnal mind was changed, his "old man" or "body of death" was crucified, and the chains of sin were destroyed.

Would to God that He deliver us from those prowling wolves who teach that there is a vague gray area where a man can be "carnally minded" and "spiritually minded" at the same time; a man can be "righteous" and "walk in the flesh" simultaneously.

7. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can it be.

The miserable man described in the latter half of chapter 7 was definitely not subject to the law of God. He wanted to obey God in his mind, but his actions were determined by his carnal mind which was hostile toward God's law. However, a "spiritual mind" is subject to the law of God, and in the spiritually-minded, the righteousness of the law is fulfilled.

8. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

Saul of Tarsus did not please God because he walked according to the lusts of the flesh. The desires of the flesh became his slavemaster when he refused to restrain them by the law and the Spirit of God. Righteousness pleases God, but walking according to the lusts of the flesh is displeasing to Him. If one could be righteous and walk in the flesh simultaneously, that person would be pleasing God and displeasing Him at the same time! That is not logical. Christ's sacrifice does not make up for our deficient repentance. His grace, that is, His favor is not bestowed on us if our hearts are evil. Do not be deceived; to have a mind that is carnal or controlled by the desires of the flesh is to severely displease God as one of His enemies! God's enemies will not be able to hide behind a make-believe righteousness on the day of God's fierce judgment. They are under the sentence of death and will not escape the condemnation of His holy law. For that reason, the "carnally minded" must repent and be "spiritually minded" and then "life and peace" will be their reward.

9. Ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His.

A man who has the Holy Spirit dwelling within him cannot walk in the flesh. The spirit-filled "spiritually minded" person naturally walks in the Spirit. The law of the Spirit has freed him from the law of sin which dwelled in his members and dominated him as a sinner. If you see a man walking in the flesh, be assured of the fact that he is devoid of God's Holy Spirit and he is not Christ's.

____________________________________

Excuse #19: "As long as we live in this human flesh, we are bound to sin!"

____________________________________

12. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.

13. For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

Saul of Tarsus was a debtor to the flesh; he was a slave to the tyrant of sin. But neither Paul nor any other saints are debtors to the flesh. The sinful nature is dead and buried without a tombstone, henceforth to be forgotten. Why should we walk in the Spirit and not walk according to the flesh anymore? Because those who walk after the flesh will die spiritually (verse 13). Only if man mortifies the sinful deeds of the flesh will he live and not die. Christians owe the flesh nothing. We owe Christ, our loving Savior and Master, our humble obedience every moment of the rest of our lives!

The Apostle Paul writes to the backslidden Galatians, Galatians 5:7: Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

8. For he that soweth to the flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.

Corruption in this verse means destruction or annihilation. If a man sows to the flesh as did the man described in the latter half of Romans 7 by doing the works of the flesh, he will reap eternal destruction in the lake of fire. Only if a man sows to the Spirit and hence does not fulfill the lusts of the flesh will he reap everlasting life (Galatians 5:16,19-24).

____________________________________

Excuse #20: "Yes, I still sin but at least I'm sorry for my sins."

____________________________________

There are multitudes of professing Christians who can identify well with the slave to sin described in the latter half of Romans 7, because they themselves are slaves to sin. They know the goodness of the law of God and his ways, but they continue committing the same old sins. They serve God with their intellect, but they serve sin in their bodies. They desire to do the right thing, but they do not. They are sorry for their sins, but impenitent. "Indwelling sin" has dominion. They are alive to sin, and therefore they are spiritually dead. They are hypocrites. They are headed for the lake of fire! Most are intoxicated with the traditions and doctrines of men, which comfort them in their sins. They have believed the oldest lie in the Book, that same lie that Satan told Eve in the Garden of Eden, "Hath God said that if you eat of the forbidden tree you will not die? You shall not die..." They have embraced the same cursed lie, that a man can sin and not die spiritually.

In Paul's exegesis from verse 14-23, he describes his way of life as Saul of Tarsus - a convicted, awakened sinner, not a converted Christian. If a man professes faith in Christ but identifies with the awakened sinner Paul has described in Romans 7:14-25, he is a false convert and has actually not been brought to true repentance and faith in Christ, or else he has repented of his repentance and forsaken his First Love. This hypocrite might believe in Christ with his intellect, but it is dead faith and unable to save because it lacks the accompanying righteous works (James 2:14-26; Rom.3:31).

In summary, according to the conclusions of both chapters 6 and chapter 8, the man being described in chapter 7, verse 14-25, has an unregenerate, carnal mind and wicked character. He is a slave to sin, an enemy of God, and under the condemnation of the law. He walks in the flesh and not in the Spirit. This is the pre-conversion state of Saul of Tarsus under conviction but unrepentant.

I conclude then Romans 7 in no way contains valid proof that Christians are bound to sin because of their indestructible, immutable "sinful nature" or their human flesh. If a professing Christian's carnal mind has not changed, and his "sinful nature" that is bound to sin has not been nailed to the cross and buried, then that professing Christian is an impostor and a liar and the truth is not in him (I John 2:3-4). The sinful nature is not an acceptable excuse for persistent sin in the life of the professing Christian. And if a professing Christian finds comfort in Paul's words in the latter part of Romans 7, his mistake is a fatal one.

Corinthians 3 - Carnal Christians, Reality or Oxymoron?

A critical look at a popular interpretation of I Corinthians 3

Many have taken Paul's mention of "carnal Christians" in chapter 3 of his first letter to the Corinthians to prove that one can be carnal and heavenbound simultaneously. Let me address this preposterous proposal. Paul sets up his reproof of these "carnal Christians" in chapter 2.

I Corinthians 2:

14. The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they [the spiritual things] are spiritually discerned.

15. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

16. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ.

Chapter 3:

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

2. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

3. For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye yet carnal, and walk as [natural, carnal] men?

4. For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?

When he reproves the sin in the Corinthian church, he is not accusing every single professing Christian in the church of sin. He addresses them as a corporate body. It is not uncommon to reprove sin among a body of people, and all the while it is perfectly understood that not all being addressed are guilty. "There is among you envying, and strife". He points out a few chapters later, that there are other sins "among them" as well:

I Corinthians 5:1: It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you.....

____________________________________

Excuse #21: "Look at those carnal Corinthian Christians - some of them are fornicators, others are full of envy and strife. This is proof that we can sin and still be Christians."

____________________________________

The question we need to be asking is, what does Paul say about these sinners "among them"? Are they right with God or not, righteous or unrighteous? Are they heavenbound or hellbound? Are they true saints, or imposters? (The word saint, let it be understood, is the Greek word hagios, which means "blameless ones".)

Notice also that he does not call them babes in Christ in I Corinthians 3, but says he must speak to them as babes in Christ. It is acceptable to address babes in Christ as babes in Christ, but there is something wrong if you have to address saints whose maturity is overdue as "babes in Christ". It is abnormal for even baby Christians to resist maturity. Maturity is growth in knowledge and wisdom, not growth in obedience (Hebrews 5:12-14). Paul cannot address the corporate Corinthian church as spiritual men with Christ-like minds, but as natural, carnal men. This is an important point because some of these professing Christians are bringing forth evidence that they are not in Christ at all! Paul's words serve as a rebuke (albeit a mild rebuke) to these men because their maturity is long overdue; they should have moved to meat by this point. "I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able." Do you sense his frustration? "There is a problem here," he is trying to say. "This is not the way it should be if you are truly Christians." That these professing Christians "receiveth not the things of God" reveals their carnal, natural, fleshly minds, as opposed to spiritual, Christ-like minds which they should have if they are truly in the faith.

____________________________________

Excuse #22: "I sin daily because I am just a babe in Christ."

____________________________________

Paul claimed in another place,

Romans 8:6: To be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity [or hatred] against God....

The carnal minds of some of the Corinthians prove that they are spiritually dead and are at enmity with God. If they were "spiritually-minded" and bearing the fruits of life and peace, they would have received the things of God from Paul's lips and moved on to meat by then.

It is not his purpose to comfort the sinners in the congregation by addressing them as "brethren" or "babes in Christ", but he is trying to do the exact opposite. I believe he is bringing up evidence to question the profession of faith of these sinners "among them". A carnal Christian is a contradiction in terms, and that, my friend, is exactly his point. As Jesus said, a good tree cannot bring forth bad fruit (Matthew 7:15-20). These professing Christians were bringing forth bad fruit, which reveals to us that they are bad trees. Paul was judging them by their fruits as Jesus commanded.

"Are you yet carnal?" he asks. He points out envying, strife, and divisions "among them" - all works of the flesh, leaven in the congregation. Regarding these sins, Paul says in another epistle,

Galatians 5:29-21: Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: ... fornication,... variance,... strife,... envyings,... as I have told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

This is an important point. Paul rebukes the Corinthians of sin that he says in his epistle to the Galatians will keep men from the kingdom of God!

Paul rebukes the church in general in I Corinthians 5 for tolerating the grossest of sins within the church fellowship. They did not judge righteous judgment as Christ commanded (John 7:24, Matthew 18:15-18). He does not accuse them of sin for not judging the sinners "among them", for this lack of church discipline could very well be the result of ignorance and immaturity, not necessarily sinfulness. He instructs the church to take the unrepentant "fornicator" that calls himself a brother, as well as the "covetous", the "idolater", the "railer", the "drunkard", and the "extortioner", and cast them out of the church! He instructs them not even to eat with such wicked hypocrites (I Corinthians 5:1-13)!

I Corinthians 5:13: Put away from among yourselves that wicked person..

Paul rebukes the church further in I Corinthians 6 for not judging properly. Then in verses 9-11, he warns them that sinners such as this fornicating "brother", a carnal man "among them" are not heavenbound. He also lists "idolaters", "covetous", and "revilers" as sinners who will not inherit the kingdom of God.

These are important points to remember in our evaluation of I Corinthians 3:1-3. True, he addresses them as "brethren", but what does he say about these carnal men "among them"? They are hellbound! They are "false brethren" in their midst, of whom Paul speaks in other places (Galatians 2:4; II Corinthians 11:26).

Furthermore, in Paul's second letter to the Corinthians he expresses fear that some in the church are still sinning and that the church is not judging them, not fully complying with his rebukes in his first letter:

II Corinthians 12:20: I fear, lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, and tumults:

21. And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed.

Paul fears their impenitence. This carnal behavior observed in the Corinthian church by the Apostle could only be present because of carnal, unrepentant minds "among them".

Speaking of these sins, James says,

Jam.3:14: But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth.

15. This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish.

16. For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.

Where such sin as that found among the Corinthian saints prevail, there are devils and every evil work!

Furthermore, in Romans 16:17 Paul tells the saints to mark those who would cause divisions and avoid them. These backslidden "carnal Christians" were subject to be disfellowshipped from the Corinthian church unless they repented (changed their minds from natural and carnal to spiritual and Christ-like). They would have done well to forsake any security they had in their salvation and examine themselves, whether they be in the faith, and repent of their carnal behavior, their envying, their strife, and their ungodly divisions, which will cause one not to inherit God's kingdom (II Corinthians 13:5).

____________________________________

Excuse #23: "On Judgment Day, I will only be rewarded for my good works, not judged for my sins. All of my sins will get 'burned up' before the Judgment Seat!"

____________________________________

Verses 13-15 of I Corinthians 3 are more verses to which many commonly appeal in an attempt to justify the hypocrite.

Let us examine this controversial passage:

13. Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

14. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

15. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

Some claim this passage teaches that the carnal believer's evil works will be "burned up" on judgment day but the man will come out unscathed and saved because he believed in Jesus. The unbeliever will go to hell for his sins and for not believing on Christ, say they, but the believer will not be condemned for his sins because he believes in Christ and he will be ushered into heaven in spite of his persistent wickedness.

____________________________________

Excuse #24: "People are not cast into hell because of their sins, but only because they rejected Jesus. Unbelief is the only sin that will send someone to hell."

____________________________________

First of all, this interpretation makes God a respecter of persons. The Bible makes it overwhelmingly clear that He does not exercise favoritism in judgment, but judges all men, whether they be saints or sinners, by their works (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14; Ezekiel 18:20-32; Matthew 25:31-46; Romans 1:18; 2:6-11; and II Corinthians 5:9-11; Revelation 20:11-15). These passages plainly refute the idea that the sin of unbelief is the only sin that will send one to hell. God judges and condemns man for all of his sins, not just the sin of unbelief, and He does not judge with respect to persons. He universally condemns judging with respect to persons, or with favoritism (Leviticus 19:15; Deuteronomy 16:18-20; Proverbs 24:25-25). He will not judge the Christians by a different standard than the rest of humanity. What is that standard by which He will judge all? His law. What will he judge? Not just our hearts, but our works - even every idle word will be scrutinized (Matthew 12:36-37).

____________________________________

Excuse #25: "Sin will not affect my eternal destiny. All that matters is that I believe in Jesus!"

____________________________________

Secondly, faith in God and sin against God are mutually exclusive. The faith that saves the soul is the faith that purifies the heart, and sin is impossible as long as the heart is pure (Acts 15:9; Mark 7:20-23; Matthew 7:16-20; I John 3:4-10). The faith that saves is more than an intelligent affirmation of a grocery list of facts about God and Christ. The faith that saves is a whole-hearted trust in God, which is incompatible with rebellion against God. The faith that saves implies repentance, which is forsaking sin. If a man disobeys God, and yet professes to believe in God, the Bible compares his faith with the faith of devils (James 2:14-26). Even Satan believes in God and trembles, yet he is not heavenbound. Obedience to God accompanies faith in God without exception (Romans 3:31). Faith without righteousness is dead faith, and it cannot save you anymore than a dead lifeguard can.

Thirdly, we can examine the context of this passage to refute this pseudo-Biblical excuse for sin. Let us start in verse 5 of I Corinthians 3:

5. Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man.

6. I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.

7. So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.

8. Now he that planteth [Paul] and he that watereth [Apollos] are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.

9. For we are labourers together with God: ye [the church at Corinth] are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.

10. According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation [Paul started the church at Corinth], and another [Apollos] buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

11. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Let me summarize his thoughts here before we move on. Paul planted the husbandry of Christ in Corinth, Apollos came and watered what Paul planted. Paul laid the foundation of the church in Corinth, which was Christ, and Apollos built upon that foundation. They were not in competition in any way in their ministries - they were one, they were laborers together with God. But each man will receive his own reward according to his own labor. Paul and Apollos both labored to build "God's building" in Corinth, and they labored to do it upon the single foundation, Jesus Christ. This is said in the context of the division in the church at that time where "one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos". Paul is trying to lay the axe to the root of this sectarian mindset trying to prevent a "church split".

Paul continues,

12. Now if any man build upon this foundation [Jesus Christ] gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

13. Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

14. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

15. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

In order to interpret verses 12-15 correctly, we must maintain consistency with his previous statements and definitions. Who is the foundation? Jesus Christ. Who is the building? The church of God at Corinth. Who is building upon that foundation? Paul and Apollos, and other ministers as well. Their ministry on that foundation can consist of gold, silver, precious stones, for which they will be rewarded, or wood, hay, and stubble, for which they will not be rewarded. If we maintain consistency with his previous definitions, we will avoid absurd interpretations of this passage.

What kind of ministry would consist of wood, hay, and stubble? If Apollos had come to Corinth and attempted to build his own ministry in competition with the Apostle Paul's and not build upon the foundation that had already been laid by him, his efforts could actually have been destructive to the church of Corinth in the long run. Or, if Apollos had come to Corinth and taught erroneous doctrines which inadvertently caused division and justified sin in the church, his diligence in teaching would not have been worthy of reward. On Judgment Day, Apollos' work would have been made manifest for what it was. He would not have received a reward for his work in Corinth because his work would not be able to endure the fire of judgment. He would suffer loss. However, he himself shall still be saved if he endured the fire of judgment, that is, if his motive and his character was blameless. It is possible to do ministry for the Lord that is unprofitable to the Kingdom and teach destructive doctrines because of ignorance, tradition, or poor training, and yet be sinless in your effort. Doubtless, there will be many saints in heaven who lived blameless lives and yet will not necessarily be rewarded for their ministry in "God's building" for these reasons.

It is possible that there is an inference here that Apollos' doctrine might have actually been partly to blame for the divisions in the church. Priscilla and Aquilla, who traveled with Paul before, had privately counseled with Apollos in Ephesus and expounded "the way of God more perfectly unto him" (Acts 18:18,24-28). What they said to him, we are not sure. Perhaps Paul is implying in I Corinthians 3 that even if Apollos is in error on some minute point, or if perhaps his doctrines are partly responsible for the envy, strife, and division in the Corinthian fellowship, we should let God deal with that on Judgment Day and strive to keep the unity of the faith.

We see now that in the context of I Corinthians 3, it is erroneous to interpret this to mean that the Christian's sinful deeds will be "burned up" and they will be rewarded for their good deeds on Judgment Day. Any attempt to pervert this passage to mean that hypocrites who do not forsake their sin before they die will still be forgiven by God is dishonest and dangerous. One is only forgiven after he confesses and forsakes his sin, and forgiveness of sin will not be extended to any transgressor after death (Ezekiel 18:5-32; Proverbs 28:13; I John 1:9; Hebrews 9:27).

Further evidence of this fact is found in the next two verses of I Corinthians 3:

16. Know ye not that ye [the church in Corinth] are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

17. If any man [Paul, Apollos, another minister, or any hypocrite] defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are [church of Corinth].

God will destroy not just the works of the man who defiles the temple of God, but the very man! We can see similar words from the Apostle in his severe rebuke of the professing Christian who was fornicating with his father's wife in I Corinthians 5. Paul said that this wicked fellow had indeed defiled the temple with his leaven, and that the leaven should be purged out. Paul even instructs the church to join together in judgment against this fellow, and in Jesus' name deliver this hypocrite up to the devil for the destruction of his flesh so that his soul may be saved! Oh yes! He that defiles the temple, him shall God judge and ultimately destroy! That goes not just for those indulging in incestuous relationships, but all other sinners as well (I Corinthians 5:9-11; 6:9-11). Thankfully, God does not immediately send destruction upon His children who sin against Him, but rather He patiently chastens them to bring them to repentance and holiness. But if they resist the Holy Spirit and refuse to confess their sin in repentance and faith, then they will not be forgiven and should be excommunicated (Hebrews 12:1-17; Proverbs 28:13; I John 1:9; 2:1-4).

I fear the context of this same passage which so many quote to justify hypocrites might condemn them on Judgment Day, for they defile the holy temple of God with their sin. Full of all types of leaven, and they are unashamed in admitting it. "We are carnal Christians," say they, "and we will not cease to sin until we go to heaven, and yet we are still forgiven!" They make no intention of forsaking all of their sins because they do not think that such a thing is possible. Such hypocrites should not be tolerated in the church. They should be excommunicated. If they do not repent, then on Judgment Day God will judge them according to their works and cast into hell forever! Woe be unto these carnal professing Christians!

Many true Christians unfortunately extend pardon and mercy to such impenitent "false brothers" and tolerate leaven in the church of God contrary to the teachings of Scripture. We should be taking up the scourge and purifying God's temple of sin and hypocrisy (as did Christ in the temple of His day), but the damnable doctrines so popular in the church of Jesus Christ are a hindrance to us doing so. The word of God is made of none effect by our traditions. These sin-excusing doctrines of men hinder others from fearing God and fight with the Holy Ghost who is trying to produce a spotless, blameless Church. Rather than command the hypocrites to repent and excommunicate them if they do not, we comfort them. Oh, God help us purify your church!

I John 1:8 - Sinless or Deceived?

A critical look at a popular interpretation of I John 1:8

When preaching on the streets or on campuses, or when witnessing to another about salvation in Christ, it is very common to hear one quote I John 1:8 to vindicate himself and comfort himself as he is warned of the wages of his sin and commanded to forsake sin. These readily admit that they are sinful, but they reject the fact that they are damned for it. They might confess their sins, but they do so not with remorse and repentance, but with excuses. I John 1:8 brings comfort to them:

I John 1:8: If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

I must admit, taken out of the context of the immediate chapter and the entire epistle, this passage seems to say that we are deceived if we ever say that we have no sin. Let us examine the context more closely to see if this interpretation is indeed valid and holds up under contextual scrutiny. In its context, I John 1:8 would not bring comfort to the sinner, but conviction. Let us begin by examining the immediate context, starting with verse 5 of the same chapter.

1:5: This then is the message that we have heard of Him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all.

How much darkness is in Christ? None.

6. If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

7. But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from ALL sin.

If there is no darkness in Christ, then if we are to fellowship with Him, there can be no darkness in us either. If someone says that He fellowships with Christ, who is the light, and that person walks in darkness or sin, then he is a liar. He is not really fellowshiping with Christ, for "what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing: and I will receive you" (II Corinthians 6:14-17).

If one is to fellowship with God, he must first leave his darkness and "come out from among them" and "touch not the unclean thing". If he insists on holding onto his unclean things, then he will not be received by Christ into His kingdom. This is in perfect conformity with the teachings of Christ, who made it clear that a man must forsake ALL and put Him first to follow Him to eternal life (Luke 14:33; Matthew 16:37-38).

One who walks in the light has had ALL of His sins cleansed by the blood of Christ (verse 7). Not some or most, but ALL of his sins! And the sins are not "covered" as if they remained inwardly but were still forgiven. Christ's blood is not like white paint that covers the stain while the dirt remains, but it cleanses from sin. It takes the sin away. All sin! As John says later in the same epistle, Jesus came to take away our sins (I John 3:5; also Titus 2:11-14; Matthew 1:21). Not some or most, but ALL sin!

____________________________________

Excuse #26: "But if we say we are without sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us!"

____________________________________

8. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

9. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just 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.

In the context of the verses 5-10, verse 8 could simply mean, "If we who say we fellowship with Him, but walk in darkness, say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves..."

Or it could be synonymous with verse 10, "If we say that we have not sinned [past tense], we make Him a liar..." Verse 8 could simply mean that those who insist that they have no sin in their past are liars.

It cannot mean that no one can ever say that they are without sin at the present time, because the verse before and the verse after contradict it, saying that we are cleansed from ALL our sin when we confess our sins and walk in the light.

For instance, let us say I am leading a sinner to Christ. He experiences godly sorrow over his crimes against God and his neighbor and cries out, "What must I do to be saved?" I command him, "Repent and believe the Gospel" and share I John 1:9 with him, telling him that he must confess His sins in humble repentance and God will be faithful to pardon and cleanse him of ALL his unrighteousness. He does so that very moment, confessing his sins to the Lord. He then gets up off of his knees and cries with tears of joy, "I'm free! I'm cleansed from ALL my sins! Hallelujah! My sins are all gone! I feel so clean!..."

Then you come along, armed with I John 1:8, to crash his party, "Whatdya' mean, pal? Don't you know that the Bible says that he who says he is without sin deceives himself, and the truth is not in him?" Can't you see that this interpretation is contradictory to both the verse before and the verse after, which says that we are cleansed from ALL of our sins when we confess our sins and walk in the light (verse 7 and 9)?

____________________________________

Excuse #27: "I am still heavenbound when I sin, because I am covered in the blood of Jesus!"

____________________________________

The commercial claims that Dawn dish detergent takes grease "outta' your way". Is it not safe to assume that if this is true, then once the detergent has been applied to the greasy frying pan, then all of the grease will be removed and you will then have a squeaky clean, greaseless frying pan? Wouldn't you feel cheated if you discovered that a little grease remained on every dish after washing them with Dawn? Yes, you would. The commercial said it takes grease "outta' your way", and if some grease remains, then they are guilty of false advertising. Well, then do you not think that the blood of Christ is more efficacious at cleansing the repentant, sin-stained soul of sin than Dawn is at cleansing your burger pan of grease? Has not God advertised that He will cleanse us of ALL our sins? Are the claims of Scripture true, or not? Or is God guilty of false advertising and Christ's blood just cleanses us of some or most of our sins? Is sin more powerful than the cleansing blood of Christ? If Christ's blood cleanses of ALL sin as the Scriptures claim, then is it not safe to say that we are sinless after being washed? Yes. Those thus cleansed are sinless.

I find it amazing that of all the verses the hypocrite memorizes in the Book of First John, it is chapter 1, verse 8. If there is any book in the entire Bible that teaches man can, should, and better live sinless, it is First John. That the professing Christian grasps onto this verse to comfort himself in his sin and closes his eyes to the rest of the book is evidence of his bias. He doesn't want to know the truth, he only wants to justify his sin. Shameful!

Let us look at some other passages in I, II, and III John to see what the author says about sinless living, to see if the author's teachings on this topic throughout his epistles are consistent with the common view held by most professing Christians today, or my view, which is that man can live sinless and that he is hellbound if he is not living sinless. Let us begin in chapter 2 of First John:

2:1a: My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not....

The purpose of the writing of this epistle is given in this verse. He wrote the epistle so that the readers would not sin. This is his goal. Success for the Apostle is that he achieves his goal, and that his readers "sin not". I John 1:8 must be kept in this context.

Let us imagine that one of John's readers does fulfill his stated purpose here, and lives without sinning for, let's say, an entire day, and claims: "Hallelujah, Pastor John, I went all day without sinning for the glory of God just as you taught us to do!" Do you think the Apostle will be sad or glad? Do you think the Apostle will reprove his bold parishioner, "You are deceived, and the truth is not in you!"? Of course not. He would be very glad if his readers fulfill his purpose and "sin not".

2:1b: ...and IF any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

2. And He is the propitiation for our sins: and not for our's only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

____________________________________

Excuse #28: "God doesn't condemn me for my sins, because I have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ!"

____________________________________

Notice the passage says "if" we sin, not "when". Sinning is not an inevitable fact of life. We do not have to commit sin against God.

But IF we do sin, the passage says that we have an advocate with the Father in Jesus Christ. But why does one need an advocate with a Judge? It is because he has broken the law, and is in danger of judgment. Those who have sinned need an advocate with the Father because they have broken His law and are consequently in disfavor with Him. I have spoken with professing Christians who took comfort in the fact that they had an advocate with the Father although they were in sin. But notice that verse 3 says that Jesus not only is an advocate for the Christian who sins, but he also of the unbeliever. And all unbelievers certainly are not heavenbound. Indeed, right now hell is full of people for whom Christ died! So just because you have an advocate with the Father in Jesus Christ, that does not mean that you are automatically forgiven for any sin should you commit. I John 1:7 and 9 says that you must confess your sins in repentance and walk in the light (cease to walk in darkness) in order to be pardoned. This is how the services of the Advocate are rendered unto men. He does not pardon the impenitent.

Some insist, "But I am forgiven of all of my sins, past, present, and future!" This is nonsense! How can one be forgiven of a sin before he commits it? Only if and when we confess our sins does Jesus forgive us of our sins, and cleanse us from all unrighteousness (I John 1:9). That Jesus is our advocate with the Father in no way implies that we are automatically forgiven of all our future crimes against His majesty. What foolishness! What a slander of King Jesus it is! And to think that those teachers of such folly call this "grace"! Insanity! This is not the true grace of God which overcomes sin (Titus 2:11-14), but it is the granting of a license to sin without retribution. If Jesus came to give us a license to sin without sanction, then Jesus would be the greatest traitor and enemy of His Father in His promotion of lawlessness and anarchy in His government!

WARNING!!! WARNING!!! WARNING!!! Take heed all anti-nomians! Take heed all ye who believe that Christians have no obligation to keep the law of God because they are under grace! Please do sit down before you read the following passages. It might also be in your best interest to sit next to the phone as you read the rest of my tract. If you begin to experience chest pain as you peruse such phrases as "keep the commandments", please do dial 911 immediately! You might wish to keep some of Chuck Swindoll's or Charles Stanley's books on grace nearby with which to comfort yourselves between I John passages, just in case the pain becomes unbearable! Or of course, you may wish to call your pastor, who more than likely will set up an appointment with you as soon as possible in order to calm your troubled conscience and convince you that you are saved in spite of your transgressions and I am an heretic and a legalist for quoting those troublesome passages which claim that you are not!

3. And hereby we do know that we know him, IF we keep His commandments.

4. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

5. But whoso keepeth His word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in Him.

Often, when preaching open-air on a college campus, a professing Christian will confront me and claim that the law of God which I preach is impossible to keep, and that no one keeps it, and that they are saved in spite of their transgressions of it. I will often respond with two questions and a verse.

Question 1: "Do you know God?"

Site Navigation

Refuting Popular Pseudo-Biblical Excuses for Sin

by Dr. J. Patrick Johnston

Philippians 3:12 - The Apostle Paul, Not Yet Perfect?

A critical look at a popular interpretation of Philippians 3:12

Excuse #1: "If the Apostle Paul wasn't perfect in this life, then how can we expect to be perfect?"

Excuse #2: "I am not righteous because of anything I have done. Jesus' righteousness has been imputed unto me. The Father sees me as righteous, although I sin every day!"

Excuse #3: "We will never be perfect until we get to heaven."

I Timothy 1:15 - The Apostle Paul, Chief of Sinners?

A Critical Look at a Popular Interpretation of I Timothy 1:15

Excuse #4: "If the Apostle Paul was the 'chief of sinners' at the same time he was an Apostle of Christ, then how can any of us ever expect to live sinless in this life?"

Excuse #5: "I am not under the law, I am under grace. The law condemns me for my sinful habits, but grace forgives."

Excuse #6: "No one is perfect but Jesus!!!"

Romans 7:14-25 The Apostle Paul, Carnal and Sold Under Sin?

A critical look at a popular interpretation of Romans 7

Excuse #8: "God did not give the law so that we would keep it, but so that we would break it to exalt His grace!"

Excuse #9: "It is impossible to be free from sin in this life!"

Excuse #10: "We do not need to do anything to be saved. Jesus did it all!"

Excuse #11: "I want to live right and to please the Lord, and this is proof that I am saved."

Excuse #12: "I was born a sinner because of Adam's sin."

Excuse #13: "We need to crucify our flesh every day, not once for all."

Excuse #14: "I sin because I have a sinful nature, and I will always have it until I die."

Excuse #15: "There is no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, no matter what they do!"

Excuse #16: "But we are by nature children of wrath, not by choice!"

Excuse #17: "Jesus died for me so that I would not have to keep the law. He kept the law for me, so that I could break it and still be forgiven!"

Excuse #18: "But that's Old Testament! That doesn't apply to me."

Excuse #19: "As long as we live in this human flesh, we are bound to sin!"

Excuse #20: "Yes, I still sin but at least I'm sorry for my sins."

Corinthians 3 - Carnal Christians, Reality or Oxymoron?

A critical look at a popular interpretation of I Corinthians 3

Excuse #21: "Look at those carnal Corinthian Christians - some of them are fornicators, others are full of envy and strife. This is proof that we can sin and still be Christians."

Excuse #22: "I sin daily because I am just a babe in Christ."

Excuse #23: "On Judgment Day, I will only be rewarded for my good works, not judged for my sins. All of my sins will get 'burned up' before the Judgment Seat!"

Excuse #24: "People are not cast into hell because of their sins, but only because they rejected Jesus. Unbelief is the only sin that will send someone to hell."

Excuse #25: "Sin will not affect my eternal destiny. All that matters is that I believe in Jesus!"

I John 1:8 - Sinless or Deceived?

A critical look at a popular interpretation of I John 1:8

Excuse #26: "But if we say we are without sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us!"

Excuse #27: "I am still heavenbound when I sin, because I am covered in the blood of Jesus!"

Excuse #28: "God doesn't condemn me for my sins, because I have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ!"