Sexual immorality abounds

[bevin]

Quote:

---

Norman - I was thinking he may be getting his ideas from porn...

---

This is a VERY distinct possibility...

Re: Earlier issues about him having a very different public and private persona. I have known other evangelists to have this trait. Being a good evangelist, like being a good car salesman, can exploit the ability to be very believable when conveying what ever message you have decided to convey - true or not.

/Bevin

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Hi Christine,

I say these things because I have been blessed with a keen sense of discernment. In the past I have told people things which offended them but in the end they turned out to be true.

I don't say these things to be cruel.

Norman

[cricket]

Norman,

I understand. I would not rule out the possibilities of the things you've suggested. However, it is extremely important to label assumptions and presuppositions as such; else, the assumption is interpreted as fact and is therefore, possibly a libelous statement.

As Bravus suggested, some of these ideas may have been things this man "learned" through viewing pornography. They may be something he's become fascinated with from overhearing "locker room" discussions. It might be something else entirely like having been sodomized as a child and now wanting to experience the act of his perpetrator.

The gift of discernment is not one to be taken lightly or without caution. Omniscience belongs only to our Lord.

Sincerely,

Christine "Chrys" Wall

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Hi Christine,

If this person's name were posted or if I knew the person, I would not have posted what I said, but would have contacted the person directly. No legal action can be taken under these circumstances. Basically my comments are made in a general sense, meaning that what I posted is the road to destrcution that many have taken. There are indicators that are evident and they are hard to miss. Just becuase others may not see this, it doesn't mean it is not so. Time will tell right and if I turn out to be wrong (which I hope I am) then you can tell me that I'm not wise to make such comments. Until then I would pray for that couple, especially him

Quote:

---

The gift of discernment is not one to be taken lightly or without caution. Omniscience belongs only to our Lord.

---

Yes, Omniscience belongs to our God, but what good is the gift if you don't use it to warn people. Taking this gift lightly would be to say nothing and then hear about tragedy that soon follows. Sometimes extraordinary actions need to be taken in extraordinary circumstances and this is one of those, especially since this is a sister & brother in Christ being tormented by Satan.

Sincerely,

Norman

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Hi Paula,

and everyone else, click on this link and listen to this program.

There's some good info about porn and why a man gets into it. There are five programs in total this is the sceond.

I think your friend would do well to listen to this. Then after both of them should listen to this would be very helpful. It's safe and they can do it in their own home and each program is only about 25 mins long.

http://www.familylife.com/fltoday/default.asp?id=7889&past=1

Click on the real player or WMP icon to listen to the program.

Here's a question that you'll be able to answer when you listen to the program. But before you do, post your honest answer here to see how you fair.

Why do men get hooked on porn?

Norman

[cricket]

Brother Norman,

To say that someone has done something that there is no hard evidence of is not right. Do you see that it is implying something as fact that simply might not be true?

Your statement, "this man has slept around..." changes the opinions of others when it is not preceded by the word "probably", or "likely".

Discernment can be used cautiously and responsibly at the same time. The warnings can be given just as heedingly if you are to use a statement explaining that the scenario is a likely one--not one necessarily borne of fact.

Have you ever read the book, The Life of David Gale? It portrays a scenario of murder and the suspect's life is taken from him because he is "proven" to be the murderer. Common sense and the gift of discernment were used to determine this man's guilt. In the end, it was discovered that this mis-use of discernment brought about the end of life for an innocent man.

Although this man is not named, he and others who might know him quite possibly may read these threads. People easily jump on band wagons and form opinions lightly.

Use caution in your words. Be discerning--not only for the accused but also for the accusers.

Sincerely,

Christine "Chrys" Wall

[Robert]

Quote:

---

bevin said:

You want someone who can stand up in front of a group of strangers and talk about how to make this gift of God a delight, not someone who treats it as a curse....Robert's "it is a trap of the devil, don't do it at all" and the other "it is God given, but I am too shy to talk about it in a practical manner".

---

Actually this is a very private matter and speaking of it openly among a mixed group is unwise. Private counseling is the best (but be careful here also).

Bevin, the thing you FAIL to realize is that everything has been affected by the fall...and that especially includes sex. Paul's advice is that it is better to marry, if one is weak sexually, then to burn in lust.

Now tell me, where does this lustful desire come from? Please don't tell me God put it there! It comes from the nature. The basis of all sin is lust/coveting. [see Rom 7:7-9]

A healthy sexual relationship ONLY involves a man and his wife. No hint or talk of another (old girl friends, etc.) should ever be introduced between the two....No play on jealousy...no kinky junk like sodomy (which by the way is a health issue).

Anyway, like I said, this really should be a private matter.

Rob

[Robert]

Quote:

---

...I cannot agree that this statement is telling us that Paul always viewed himself in that light otherwise he'd be stating that he was living after the flesh.

---

Look...the issue is never to condone known sin because that would deny one's need of Christ's righteousness.

Paul never lived after the flesh. In the latter part of Romans 7 Paul is discussing two things:

1] Trying to defeat the desires of the flesh [the law of sin] with our willpower [i.e., "the law of my mind"] and

2] that we are "falling short" of the Spirituality of God's law. That he discusses in Rom 7:7-14.

Let me prove my point:

• 1 Corinthians 6:7 The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already [i.e., that the flesh is at work]. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? 8 Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers. 9

  Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers [those who cheat] will inherit the kingdom of God.

  11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Please notice somethings here:

a] Paul warns the believers against lawsuits and cheating each other.

b] Then he exclaims that the wicked that do these things will not inherit the kingdom of heaven.

c] He doesn't put the believers in the same camp as the unbeliever. For example Paul has already told us that the believers in Corinth were cheating/swindling each other, yet he says of them:

"you were washed, you were sanctified [set apart], you were justified [i.e., justification by faith] in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."

My point? Believers sin...in fact they are never fully without sin (see Rom 3:23/1 John 1:8). That doesn't mean they should condone known sin.

Many of the believers in the Corinthian Church were cheating each other, yet Paul doesn't have them lost...Why?

1] The believer is not "under law"...

2] The believer is already perfect "in Christ"

3] As long as the believer acknowledges his/her sin, Christ will continue to represent him/her in Himself. And in Him we are perfect....That's the "in Christ" motif

So the issue of believers is do we acknowledge our sin...even though certain, besetting sins maybe repeated many times.

All of us have besetting sins...and, according to EGW, as long as life shall last there will be no stopping point that we can say we have arrived...that we are sinless...even perfect.

[bevin]

Quote:

---

Actually this is a very private matter and speaking of it openly among a mixed group is unwise. Private counseling is the best (but be careful here also).

---

It depends on how you talk about it. The mixedness of the audience might cause a slightly different spin - but I attend mixed paramedic classes and gender doesn't matter one bit once you get over a few initial hangups.

/Bevin

[bevin]

Quote:

---

Paul's advice is that it is better to marry, if one is weak sexually, then to burn in lust.

---

If you are going to quote Paul, then at least quote him correctly

[:"blue"]

1 Corinthians 7

1. Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.

2. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.

3. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.

4. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.

5. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

6. But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment.

7. For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.

8. I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.

9. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.[/]

Paul does NOT say "burn in lust".

Quote:

---

Now tell me, where does this lustful desire come from? Please don't tell me God put it there! It comes from the nature.

---

It comes from your imagination. Paul talks about normal sexual attraction to others - and yes, God put them there.

/Bevin

[Bravus]

I agree that we need to do a better job of talking about this as a church, but I can imagine few things worse than a checklist:

oral: yes

anal: no

porn: no

video only for yourselves: OK

positions other than the missionary: yes

toys: depends

including others: never

costumes: depends

whipped cream: only with glace cherries

I might agree or disagree with any elements on the list, but it's just not useful or healthy, and it also just doesn't work. (My own personal guideline is 'whatever both members of the couple find enjoyable that includes only the two of them', but your mileage may vary.)

What is needed is real talk about communication and respect, and about pleasure between a couple as being a good thing - and also a little basic physiology for the guys in the audience who just don't 'get it'. The realisation that the sexual relationship is an integral part of the couplehood relationship as a whole, and is not separate from other forms of consideration, acceptance, affection and flirtation outside the bedroom, would also be an idea we could share with one another.

Adventists should be in an awesome position to talk about this stuff because we understand the holism of body/mind/spirit. We are not dualists who separate the body from the mind and spirit.

Challenge is, of course, who would we get to do the talking? (And it should be facilitation rather than lecturing.)

[Derrell M]

Man, are you ever on track Bravus!

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Hi Robert, (sorry I went long)

Quote:

---

Paul never lived after the flesh. In the latter part of Romans 7 Paul is discussing two things:

---

"Paul never lived after the flesh", was that a typo?

He persecuted and had Christians killed, that was living after his flesh even though he thought he was doing God's will. Then when the commandment came (love your neighbor as yourself, even your enemies) he died.

I am not saying that we must be sinlessness or that Paul was. I am saying that the condition described in Rom 7: 15-24 is not a converted person. Sure we will fall and we will never be sinless on this side of heaven but to live in wretched defeat till Christ comes is not the goal of the Gospel. Since you brought up EGW I have a quote as well,

The General Conference Bulletin, October 1, 1899, paragraph 9 Article Title: Christ Our Example

"Christ regarded the enemies of the human race as his enemies. In our behalf he overcame Satan, gaining an everlasting victory for all who will receive him. He engaged in the warfare, and did not give up, but resisted even unto death; and in dying he gained the victory for which he came to our world. Before he died he cried out, "It is finished." "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit." To his disciples he said, "Be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." Christ has left us a perfect, sinless example. His followers are to walk in his footsteps. If they are not transformed in character, they can never dwell with him in his kingdom. Christ died to elevate and ennoble them, and those who retain hereditary tendencies to wrong can not dwell with him. He suffered all that it is possible for human flesh to suffer and endure, that we might pass triumphantly through all the temptations Satan may invent to destroy our faith."

I could not say that the experience that is described here is a Romans 7:15-24 life. There's just no way.

Quote:

---

c] He doesn't put the believers in the same camp as the unbeliever. For example Paul has already told us that the believers in Corinth were cheating/swindling each other, yet he says of them:

---

The example you used in 1 Cor is not completely valid in this case. I say that because it is evident that not all in Corinth were taking their brethren to courts to sue them.

1Co 6:1 "If any of you have a dispute with another Christian, how dare you go before heathen judges instead of letting God's people settle the matter?" GNB

Again, this verse indicates that not all Corinthian’s were doing this; therefore he could not be addressing all believers. In Corinth there was a multitude of problems that Paul dealt with, but the key here is that these were babes in Christ. So that their behavior (not all though) was not going to be as mature Christians such as the Ephesians for example. (You can tell by the content and size of the two letters.)

See 1Co 3:2. 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 not carnal, and walk as men?

This would definitely fit the description in Romans 7: 15-24. But there comes a time in the "babes" life/walk when they must be transformed in character (growth) and no longer live in Romans 7:15-24 experience. This is possible on this side of heaven. It means living in a habitual desire to please the Lord and doing so except for certain failures at certain times, but I would not describe that as the Romans 7: 15-24 experience. No way, otherwise what do I do with my experience? I can't say it never happened and I have the testimony of others who saw the difference.

Oh yes I almost forgot,

Quote:

---

1] Trying to defeat the desires of the flesh [the law of sin] with our willpower [i.e., "the law of my mind"]

---

How can you say that the law of the mind is our will power when Paul says that he serves the law of God with his mind? If I used your interpretation that will power is the law of the mind, then that would mean that Paul serves God with his will power. How can that be? That's the life he used to live in the flesh.

Rom 7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then I myself with the mind truly serve the Law of God, and with the flesh the law of sin.

That doesn’t add up Robert.

Here's something else that I have found and you may have seen this too. We Christians, are too quick to call our behavior sin when sometimes is not sin. We tend to live in a self defeating cycle. Here's an example: let's say a person meets someone and he's thinking, "I should tell him about the Lord." Then for what ever reason he doesn't and then here it comes; guilt and the self downing thoughts.

It happens all the time. Now I bring this up in order to bring Rom 7:15-24 to light. Let's say this person does that over and over again. He thinks that he's failing but really he's not. I mean, maybe God did not want him to say anything to those people, because he's not ready. Now this person reads Romans 7 and thinks man that's me, but really it's not. He has created or let Satan fool him into thinking that he's living this way. But because he thinks this he's living this out. Now one day he finds out that God is greater than his conscience and that God knows all things about him. The burden is lifted and he sees that life is different. He now has joy and is truly living a life that is in harmony with the Bible. Then one day he goes back to Romans 7 and says "hmmm I don't fit that description anymore." "I can't say that this is me any longer, praise God." What has happened? Well nothing really except his perception of himself in God's eyes. Then he shouts,"(Rom 7:25) I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then I myself with the mind truly serve the Law of God, and with the flesh the law of sin." Before this he was serving God according to how he felt, by the flesh and he could never do anything right because his (fleshly) mind would not permit him to. Now he's able t talk to people about God because he loves Him and it comes out of a heart of love.

This, my friend is what I went through and this is what Paul is talking about. Think it through for a while.

God bless,

Norman

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Hi Christine,

Quote:

---

To say that someone has done something that there is no hard evidence of is not right. Do you see that it is implying something as fact that simply might not be true?

---

Yes

Quote:

---

Your statement, "this man has slept around..." changes the opinions of others when it is not preceded by the word "probably", or "likely".

---

I doubt it Christine, people here have their own opinions and what I said will be taken accordingly. People will also look at my comments and say, "he's nuts where does he get off talking like that?" But they won't share in my opinion, it's too harsh and devoid of politcial correctness. (which I call, Satan's mercy)

Quote:

---

Have you ever read the book, The Life of David Gale? It portrays a scenario of murder and the suspect's life is taken from him because he is "proven" to be the murderer. Common sense and the gift of discernment were used to determine this man's guilt. In the end, it was discovered that this mis-use of discernment brought about the end of life for an innocent man.

---

I have never read this book. No one is on trial here for their life.

Quote:

---

Although this man is not named, he and others who might know him quite possibly may read these threads. People easily jump on band wagons and form opinions lightly.

---

I hope so, let everyone go to him and say that and watch what will happen.

Christine, I'm me, we all add variety to this club. If all were to be as others suggested or wanted, this would not be as good a club as it is. Not too long ago someone sentme a private message wanting to get a certain person censured if you will. I said no, because what happens if next year CA has a new folks that don't agree with us. then they will see the trend so to speak and may ask for us to be censured or what have you.

Having said that, you have made me think. It was probably not right to call him a pig. Also I am 99.99999% sure that he has slept around.

Norman

[Robert]

Quote:

---

bevin said:

If you are going to quote Paul, then at least quote him correctly: "But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn."....Paul does NOT say "burn in lust".

---

• RSV: But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.

  NIV: But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

Quote:

---

It [these sexual desires] comes from your imagination. Paul talks about normal sexual attraction to others - and yes, God put them there.

---

Oh, that's right...we evolved over millions of years and therefore God must have created all these passions and desires.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Bravus said:

oral: yes

anal: no

porn: no

video only for yourselves: OK

positions other than the missionary: yes

toys: depends

including others: never

costumes: depends

whipped cream: only with glace cherries

---

This is weird talk...Keep it in the bed room....

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Norman said:

"Paul never lived after the flesh", was that a typo?

He persecuted and had Christians killed

---

That was Saul....

Anyway, I'll talk to you later....

[bevin]

Quote:

---

For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.

---

See - when you correctly quote Paul, the word "lust" is not there.

Quote:

---

Oh, that's right...we evolved over millions of years and therefore God must have created all these passions and desires.

---

Smart move - when you are losing the debate, try to find a completely different topic to bring in others onto your side

The passion that Paul talks about is the healthy passion that God has placed in us to cause us to want to be bonded, and for that bond's strength to be enough to hold us together through many of life's miseries and problems.

Marriage is costly - sex is one of several benefits that make it more than worth the price

/Bevin

Marriage is a system whereby a man gives away half his food to have the other half nicely cooked

[Bravus]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

This is weird talk...Keep it in the bed room....

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

I did think carefully before posting the list, but this thread has already seen enough frankness and detail that people know what they're getting into. And one of the themes of the thread is the need for us to talk a little more openly about this stuff. I apologise if it offended you: among other things I was attempting to introduce a little humour...

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Hi Rob,

Yes you're right that was Saul

Norman

[cricket]

Bravus, et al,

The sub-title of this thread is, "Kids today ain't that bad, and yesterday weren't that good." I am concerned, quite frankly, about the possibility of children reading this thread.

In our home, we are very open with our children and will answer any questions they have openly, honestly and frankly. There are many families who reserve these talks for later on.

When monitoring the web-sites that children visit, many Adventist parents may allow visitation of this Adventist Forum--without close parental involvement.

Although I am in agreement in that these are things we need to discuss more freely, I would like to suggest that we take this discussion to another, private sector of this forum: a sector for adults only.

As it is not in my power to authorize a move or an edit, I am requesting that an administrator please take the suggestion and act upon it.

Sincerely,

Christine "Chrys" Wall

[Bravus]

I've changed the title of the thread, and if everyone follows up to this post rather than to earlier ones in the thread that title will stick, giving a better sense of the content of the thread. (The 'kids' title was itself a change signalling one of the thread's many changes of direction, by bevin if I recall correctly, that just stuck.)

I hear what you're saying, Chrys, but (a) I suspect it'd be a pretty determined kid who read through the 20 pages of posts in this thread looking for anything explicit and ( we don't at this point have an 'adults only' forum, so it would mean creating a whole new forum... and I kinda shudder to think about what the content of that forum would end up being in the longer term.

Frankly, after AIDS and Clinton, there's not much in this thread that hasn't been on the evening news...

[Dr. Shane]

Sister Paula, I can share my experience but I am no expert in sex addiction. I had a step father that was a sex addict and he went to Sexaholic Anonymous while my mother went to the support group affliciated with them.

It doesn't sound like your friend's husband is a sex addict although he could be borderline. I am of the opinion that anything done between a husband and a wife is not sinful unless it is done forcable or involves a third party sexually (that includes pornography). His issues with pornography is what may qualify him as a sex addict however since he is not keeping it a secret that tends to throw a wrench in things.

Sex addicts are trying to achieve nonsexual goals through sexual means. For example a man may be trying to boost his masculinity, pride, self-esteem or acceptance through sex. Or a woman may be trying to do the same. Sex addiction is not about people with high labidos. It is about people with emotional problems looking to sex to solve them. The problem is they cannot achieve what they want through sex.

Sex addicts typically lead double lives. The typical addict that is religious would not be doing anything kinky with his wife. He may not even be engaging in oral sex with her. With the wife he would be perfectly victorian while he indulges in pornography, prostitution, affiars or homosexuality in secret. If and when the wife finds out she is totally caught off guard because she never had any reason to believe or suspect her husband had any sexual perversions.

I don't think we need to assume her husband got the idea of threesomes, swinging or anal sex from pornogrpahy or affairs. Television and movies are so bad today he could have gotten such ideas from an episode of "Friends" or "Sex In The City". It would do him a world of good to go to a Christian counselor on his own and sort things out. If he is a sex addict, the counselor would direct him to treatment. For sure, the wife should go on her own if she is willing to do so.

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Hello Rob,

By your response this morning, I am going to venture out and say that you’re going to tell me that Saul was an unbeliever (I agree) and that when he became Paul that this is the experience he was having in Romans 7: 15-25. That I agree with only in part. He had the flesh always with him and so he could say that in him, (that is to say in his flesh dwelled no good thing). But there’s no way he ever lived like that when he became Paul till the day he died. I say this again I have experienced otherwise and I’m certainly not anything compared to Paul who loved the Lord and knew more than I’ll ever know. (I have only gone to the first heaven; in a plane)

Let’s take someone else in the Bible who we know was not converted and see what his behavior was like. I take you to Peter the mighty, in Luke

Luke 22:31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: 32 But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren. 33 And he said unto him, Lord, I am ready to go with thee, both into prison, and to death. 34 And he said, I tell thee, Peter, the [censored] shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me.

Let’s start with verse 33 in order to get Peter’s mind set and life experience. He told Jesus basically that he was ready and willing to do anything for Him. In other words, I will do what is needed Lord. Peter said that he would do the good that he wanted to do. He had no idea of the commandment and its spiritual meaning. He was living after the flesh, there’s no doubt. Then Jesus told him that he would not be able to do the good that he wanted to do, which was the sum of Peter’s life. Not only would he not be able to do the good that he wanted to do, but he would reveal enmity towards Christ. It was impossible for Peter to be in subjection to the law of God, which is, love God with all your being and your neighbor as yourself. Peter is exhibit “A” for Rom 7:15-24 Just before Peter’s declaration of love and loyalty, Jesus said to him, “you are not converted Peter, but when you are, share this experience with your brothers.” Jesus tells us what an unconverted person is like in addressing Peter. The description goes like this; a person (in this example a Christian) who wants to do good but cannot. A person who thinks he can do good but ends up doing evil by denying his Lord. It is a person who has no strength to overcome the sad state of wretchedness. Surely we can agree on this definition for the unconverted Christian, which is exactly what Peter was.

So now we have to get a look at Peter after he was converted to see what the change was in order to determine what conversions looks like and to know what Paul is talking about. Well we know that Peter was rebuked by Paul for being a hypocrite, so that tells us he wasn’t sinless or perfect. So we can rule our perfection and sinlessness.

Let’s go to 2Pe 1:3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: 4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. 5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; 6 And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; 7 And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.

2Pe 1:8 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. 10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:

So Peter starts by referring to what I have heard some call, “Peter’s ladder,” where you’re adding Christian attributes to your experience. Now we know that whatever Peter is asking his flock to do he is surely doing himself. The last clause in the last quoted verse, “for if you do these things ye shall never fall:” means that if you do these things you will never fall away from Christ, it doesn’t mean we will never sin. This also tells us that Peter was not sinless or perfect. What it does tell us though, is that there had been a lot of growth from the time Jesus told him that he was not converted to this time. So what was Peter like?

A partaker of the divine nature, escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust, had faith, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness, and charity or agape (God’s love). That would be the kind of love that Jesus asked Peter about in John 21. That doesn’t sound anything like the Peter in Luke 22. There’s a huge change in Peter and the only reason he could change like this is due to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

In all respect, I find it an insult to God to say that Romans 7: 15-24 is talking about a converted person. In doing so we limit and actually bind the Holy Spirit from doing the work described in the Bible, namely sanctification. If the Holy Sprit can heal someone so that they are able to walk or see and be brought back to life, there’s nothing stopping Him from changing a willing Christian into a victorious Christian who is not living in the Rom 7 wretchedness. Jesus once ask, which is easier to say, thy sins be forgiven or get up and walk? He said that to signify that the Holy Spirit can make spiritual changes in us just as easy as physically healing us. The extent of the spiritual healing is just as effective as the physical. I understand the in Christ motif but that doesn’t mean that we will always be wretched and unable to do the good we want. If there were no Holy Spirit I would conclude that Rom 7 15-24 is Paul talking about his present experience. There is a Holy Spirit and Paul has given disclaimers to state that this was not his current experience.

In summary:

1.we see Peter unconverted: reflects perfectly the Romans 7:15-24 wretchedness

2.We see that Peter in conversion is not sinless or perfect

3.We see Peter in a converted state telling us how he is and what to aim for, but not saying be sinless or perfect

4.We see Peter as a Born Again a mature Christian living in the Spirit and encouraging us to live likewise.

Rom 8:12 So, then, brothers, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to flesh, 13 for if you live according to flesh, you are going to die. But if by the Spirit you put to death the practices of the body, you will live. 14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.

Norman

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Also, Rob

I take you quickly to Eph 5:13 But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light. 14 Wherefore he saith, “Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.”

Paul tells us that whatsoever makes manifest is light or truth. So that by your life, you will reprove the works of the ungodly. Then he quotes the OT, “Awake thou that sleepest and arise from the dead and Christ shall give thee light.” This light is given to us, in the form of the Holy Spirit to make manifest the works of darkness so they can be reproved. This is so that the ungodly will see their need of Christ and hopefully ask us of the reason for the hope in us. That's why in the previous verses we are told

Eph 5:3 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints; 4 Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. (We are never asked to be holy without a reason)

Question, how are the ungodly supposed to see anything different in us if we are living like Romans 7:15-24? (We are His witnesses) That's really no different than those who sin and repent sin and repent over the same issues. This is pretty much what the evangelical movement is like today, and a lot of them get their joy and get emotional from being forgiven rather that the victory that comes from the Lord.

Also I bring back the instability of our confidence these days. I have noticed in my life many times when I have thought that I ought to do certain things and haven't and then thought that I was not doing what I was supposed to. Therefore I was not doing the good that I wanted to do. This is a curse to us and I believe is a major problem within our church and others. Think of it, if you’re live like that aren't you going to naturally insist that Romans 7:15-24 is talking about converted people?

But if someone is getting angry all the time and can't overcome, then that person is not converted. Why do I say that? A converted person is living by the Spirit and has experienced the love of God. After that experience and living in it daily there's nothing that can get you mad on a continual basis because you understand why people get mad, they want to be in control and don't let God lead them.

Norman