quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: drmark

quote:

Disagree, we should TRY to behave righteously, it's not a 'must' because we are incapable as long as we live in our body.

Unfortunately, x0846, you will continue to disagree as long as you hold to this heretical doctrine of gnostic dualism. I pray God will open your heart to His truth in Matt 7:21-23, Gal 5:19-25, 1 Peter 1:13-16, and 1 John 3:4-10. Jesus, Paul, Peter, and John certainly did not think it incapable to behave righteously!!

quote:

But this begs the question. If we can reach such an entire state of sanctification that we are sinless, why did you ask about unintentional sins in the OP?

quote:

If we all agree that we are made righteous in deed and not just set apart for the purpose of living righteously and there is disagreement, then at least one of us has missed the mark(sinned).

quote:

ORIGINAL: drmark
Because sinning is properly defined as willful, deliberate disobedience of a known law of God. You are confusing the acts of sin with the sinful nature. Sins of ignorance cannot willfully be avoided because they are committed unintentionally. The sinlessness of entire sanctification can only be obtained for intentional sinning that results from our sinful natures; unintentional sins resulting from our human natures may remain after entire sanctification. Since we cannot acknowledge, confess and repent of actions we never knew we committed, how can the actions be forgiven? The answer to this question is the reason for the OP.

quote:

Gnostic dualism. Now there's one I've not heard of yet. I've heard of gnosticism, and dualism, but not the two together. Drmark, can you give me a brief definition or send me to a good link on this?

quote:

Gnostic Dualism. Historians gave the name Gnosticism” at first to a group of Christian heresies which appeared towards the end of the first century. These various and numerous heresies had in common
their rejection of the Old Testament and especially of the biblical doctrine of creation. The world is neither
created nor governed directly by God, but by inferior blind powers that do not know God. The Yahweh of
the Bible, creator of the world, is only the chief of these lower powers; he created without knowing the
true Good. The world is not of God (directly), and the soul, a spark of the divine, is not of this world. The
soul, enslaved in this world, can be freed, become conscious of its origin, and ascend to God only by grace
of gnosis, the supernatural knowledge brought by the divine Savior.

To some extent, therefore, the Gnostics attributed an origin to the world different from the soul's origin.
Moreover, they employed the Greek dualism of soul and matter. Yet they were not completely dualistic,
for according to them the Creator was somehow related to the true God, as one of His angels or as an
offspring in the genealogy of emanations. Besides, the true God, if He had not wished the Creation, had at
least permitted it. Thus their dualism was neither absolute nor systematic. It resided above all in a feeling
that the world is alien to God, and that there is between God and nature a gulf which cannot be crossed except
by God.

quote:

However, if "sinning is properly defined as willful, deliberate disobedience of a known law of God", then how can a person sin unintentionally?

quote:

Still, the application of Christ's atonement is the answer and remedy for all sin, intentional and unintentional.

quote:

ORIGINAL: drmark

quote:

If we all agree that we are made righteous in deed and not just set apart for the purpose of living righteously and there is disagreement, then at least one of us has missed the mark(sinned).

Far be it from me, Bluethread, to identify sin in someone else, because I agree completely with Doug that the Lord determines who has sinned. However, the very nature of your statement lead to a logical conclusion: if someone does not believe they "are made righteous in deed" then they are much more likely to be sinning (acting unrighteously) than someone who believes they are made righteous. I will leave the ramifications of that to you.

quote:

Then if someone were to stab you in the chest, you do not believe it would be necessary to tell him that is not appropriate? In fact, in context, this is what the "second great commandment" is talking about.

quote:

so they can become better persons

quote:

live more righteously ourselves

quote:

one is what one wants to become

quote:

ORIGINAL: drmark

quote:

Hebrews 9:6
When everything had been arranged like this, the priests entered regularly into the outer room to carry on their ministry.
9:7
But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance.
9:8
The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still standing.
9:9
This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper.
9:10
They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings--external regulations applying until the time of the new order.
9:11
When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation.
9:12
He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption.
9:13
The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean.
9:14
How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!
9:15
For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance--now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.

So, my opening questions for consideration are the following: How do we acknowledge, confess, and repent of sins we do not even realize we've committed? Is there a different application or mechanism of grace for forgiveness of sins done in ignorance between the OT Levitical system and the NT Atonement?

quote:

ORIGINAL: drmark

Well, as we discussed a few pages ago, the "plain as day-one sacrifice for all time and all sin" occurred 1200 years after Numbers was written. I doubt even a prophet as great as Moses understood completely what God would do through the future Atonement. What do you think?

quote:

What counted was their faith.

quote:

Can we truly say that we fully understand it even though we have the historical facts?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

Please, keep things in context! If Adonai is making us righteuos, then we must be less than righteuos now, otherwise He would not need to continue making us righteous. Therefore, to say one is righteuos when one is being made righteous is wishful thinking. This is an example of one thinking they presently are something they wish to become. Admittedly, this has some limited value, but as an absolute principle it is falasious.

quote:

ORIGINAL: drmark
Fully understand what, Doug? How God saves us or why God saves us? The latter is emminently understandable - 1 John 4:9-10. In fact, I suggest one cannot be saved without understanding why we are saved. To me that is an undeniable aspect of faith.

quote:

Why are you questioning this?

quote:

I don't think there is any such thing as unintentional sin.

quote:

ORIGINAL: drmark

quote:

Why are you questioning this?

Why are you questioning the one time historical event of Christ's death?

quote:

The end of the matter is that scripture itself says that all of the previous sacrifices pointed to Christ's sacrifice and that His sacrifice paid for ALL sin, intentional and unintentional; and ALL time, before and after the cross. Why are you questioning this?

quote:

Verse 26.
For then he must often have suffered from the foundation of the world - This supposes, 1. That by suffering once he atoned for all the sins which had been committed from the foundation of the world. 2. That he could not have atoned for them without suffering.
At the consummation of the ages - The sacrifice of Christ divides the whole age or duration of the world into two parts, and extends its virtue backward and forward, from this middle point wherein they meet to abolish both the guilt and power of sin.

quote:

ORIGINAL: drmark

Well, as we discussed a few pages ago, the "plain as day-one sacrifice for all time and all sin" occurred 1200 years after Numbers was written. I doubt even a prophet as great as Moses understood completely what God would do through the future Atonement. What do you think?