The Weblog of Trenton & Nichole Adams

Sinless Perfection

On one hand, I've kind of always understood how people can believe in sinless perfection. On the other, I don't quite get it. Yes, it's sometimes unclear what the scriptures teach on things like this, because so many scripture indicate that if we sin at all, we will perish. Yet other scripture teach that we will not be completely redeemed, and will always have a war with the flesh, until Christ returns, and transforms us in the twinkling of an eye. Take this scripture for instance...

Galatians 5:16-18 (KJV) This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. 17For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. 18But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

After reading the context of the above passage, it's clear that our sin nature always remains, and that there is a fight between the flesh and the spirit. In fact, it even goes as far as to say that we are not under the LAW, immediately after talking about fighting against the flesh. Is Paul eluding to the fact that we may stumble now and then? I mean I think any true Christian understands that we should always strive not to sin, and seek the Lord for the ability to cease form sin. But are we unsaved because of stumbling? Are we destined to hell because of our sin nature, which God apparently didn't completely remove?

One key verse, that I've always seen as making sense out of all the confusion, is the following...

Romans 3:7-8 (KJV) For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? 8And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.

It may seem silly, but could someone mistake someone that preaches "Sinless Perfection" for someone who preaches "Sin that grace may abound"? Is that really possible? I don't think I've ever thought, for one second, that someone preaching sinless perfection was teaching that people should sin. How could anyone make that mistake? So wouldn't it make sense that either, those people that mistook Paul were really stupid, or Paul was preaching something that could sound like he was preaching that we should sin, so that grace may abound?

Then, there's a classic place where Paul really makes it clear. He's talking about striving against sin, and stumbling into doing those things he doesn't want to do. Now I know some people really think that Romans 7 is about the state of man before conversion. But I really think it's contrary to scripture to have that view, and I'll show you why.

Romans 7:19-25 (KJV) For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. 20Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. 21I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. 22For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: 23But 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. 24O wretched man that "I AM"! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? 25I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

It's very important here to see the context. If you can't see the context, you absolutely cannot see the point of what he's saying here. So, read everything before the passages above, and everything immediately after, such as Chapter 8. Now I ask a question. Why, for any reason, would Paul say that He thanks God through Jesus Christ our Lord, only to follow it with "with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin"?