Now that I have Told You I Sinned, What are You going to Do About It?

Righteousness imputed demands immediate life (so that you know and love the gospel and have gospel motives). See Romans 8:10 (“life because of righteousness”.)

How do I know I am elect and now justified? Because I believe the gospel. Did my believing the gospel cause justification to happen? No! Did God imputing the legal merit of Christ’s death to me cause me to believe the gospel? Yes.

Suppose the disciple Peter would say that he was operating out of legal fear when he betrayed Jesus. That doesn’t mean that Peter really was. Maybe he wasn’t. Well, you could say, he sure got bad results.

Peter ended up betraying the Lord three times. Some say he messed up so bad, because of his legal fears. But we all still sin. We are still all getting bad results. The justified elect are still habitual sinners. They are still not doing well in morality, when they are measured by God’s standards for morality.
My concern at this point is not only with the sinning, not even the big bad sinning, or even in sounding like you are really really sorry about it. My concern is if a person is understanding and believing the gospel of grace.. If a person is not thinking gospel, then she’s lost.
I know that the Galatians were not always being motivated by the gospel. But there is a before and after, a beginning to believing the gospel. We can’t say that we were born believing the gospel. We can’t say we were born justified.
There’s an in and out.. . What is the gospel, and do you believe it?
Advertisements
Explore posts in the same categories: liberals

Tags: ,

You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.

9 Comments on “Now that I have Told You I Sinned, What are You going to Do About It?”

  1. David Bishop Says:

    Separated by doctrine. I really like that. It relieves us out of some of those false mindsets; like the I’m-dumb-so-God-must-love-me-more view of 1 Corinthians. We can’t pretend to be dumb, and yet claim to be separated by doctrine. Dumb doesn’t understand doctrine.

  2. markmcculley Says:

    I am reminded of Galatians 3:28–neither male nor female, neither gentile nor Jew, neither circumcision nor un-circumcision, neither dumb nor smart. I meet a lot of “smarter than the Arminians” folks who accept Arminians as Christians in a patronising way, as if to say: excuse them because they are just too dumb to be equipped to read solid books like I do.

  3. Howard Carter Says:

    … we answer that we will not stay where we do not belong. Ecclesia means: called out, gathered together here from there, separated by doctrine.

    Beautifully stated!

  4. markmcculley Says:

    But it is not gracious … to keep them if they will not improve their performance.” “And even after our Spirit-wrought union with Christ, how deadly sin still is! How often I reach for the chalice to drink the poison that Jesus already drunk for me”—–Does that mean that even though the sins of Christians were imputed by God to Christ and Christ suffered wrath and death for those sins, Christians will still also suffer wrath for them? If not, what does it mean? http://www.reformation21.org/blog/2015/09/what-grace-isnt.php

  5. markmcculley Says:

    Why can’t preachers talk about getting legally joined to Christ’s righteousness, instead of talking about their own changed attitudes?

    1. Their attitudes have not changed as much as they think (now they judge a different group of people, now they are catholic legalists judging sectarian legalists)

    2. Our attitudes will keep changing, and we can have no assurance in emotional phases we go through.

    Conversion is about an in and out. The sheep follow the Shepherd and not the voice of strangers. They do not stay where we they not belong. Ecclesia means: called out, gathered together (here from there), separated by doctrine.

    Immediate regeneration after God’s imputation in the order of salvation means that no church has a monopoly on the “means of grace” so that conversion must come gradually after a period of sacramental preparation.

    John 20:23–“If you forgive the sins of anyone, they are forgiven if you with-hold forgiveness from anyone, it is with-held.”

  6. markmcculley Says:

    David Bishop—-John Stott’s little book, Men Made New has a good commentary on Romans 6. The death that Paul speaks of in Romans 6, is not like that of a corpse, in that I do not lose all sensitivity to sin in the way a corpse has no sensitivity to sight, sound, touch, smell and taste. As Stott points out, how can 1 John 1:9 be true if at the same time I have lost all sensitivity to sin?

    As Paul says in Romans 6:23 , the wages of sin is death. This includes my sins. The wages of my sins is death. The wages of the sins I sinned this morning, that I’m sinning right now, that I will sin tomorrow, the wages of my sins is death. Becoming a Christian does not change the fact that the wages of my sins is death.

    But the death Paul speaks of in Romans 6, the death that a Christian’s sins earn, is the death of Jesus. Because of my union with His death, I can say He has paid the wages for my sins. He has died the death my sins earned. But not just my past sins, not just my present sins, but also all the sins I haven’t even sinned yet. Hey, Jesus died 2000 years ago – all my sins were future sins, even the sins I’ve already sinned.

  7. markmcculley Says:

    http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AtLeastIAdmitIt

    ridges considers the root sin to be ungodliness: “living one’s everyday life with little or no thought of God, or of God’s will, or of God’s glory, or of one’s dependence on God.” Christians often live in this way, as if God is essentially irrelevant in their day-to-day lives.

    Bridges turns next to the common sins of anxiety and worry. Both are sin because both betray a basic lack of trust in God.

    Another sin that is widespread among Christians is the sin of discontentment, which arises from unchanging circumstances that we can do nothing about.

    Unthankfulness is also persistent among Christians, who sometimes do not realize how serious a sin it is.

    He examines the sin of selfishness, which can also manifest itself in different ways. We can be selfish about our interests in conversation, about money, about time, and we can demonstrate selfishness by simply being inconsiderate.

    Self-control, as Bridges explains, is “a governance or prudent control of one’s desires, cravings, impulses, emotions, and passions.” Lack of self-control is another common sin among Christians. Bridges offers as examples our lack of self control in regard to food, tempers, personal finances, and activities such as watching television. Bridges then looks at those sins closely related to anger, sins such as irritability, resentment, and bitterness. Sadly, these sins are often directed at those whom we should love the most, including our spouses and our children.

    Gossip is among the most prevalent “respectable sins” while at the same time being among the most destructive. Worldliness may require definition. It may be defined as “being attached to, engrossed in, or preoccupied with the things of this temporal life

    A word of warning is required when reading this book. If while reading you catch yourself thinking, “I really wish so-and-so would read this book,” then it is especially for you. We are all guilty of at least some of these sins some of the time. We all need reminding that every time we sin, we despise God (2 Sam. 12:9–10). Most of all, we all need reminding that Jesus died on the cross that all of our sins might be forgiven.

    http://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/respectable-sins/

    Reformed: Good doctrine is not magic. It is possible for someone to profess right doctrine and yet remain an unbeliever. That is called hypocrisy. It is also possible for one to live well and yet confess bad doctrine. That is blessed inconsistency. Neither Scripture nor history commends either option.
    mark: the soundbite sounds better than it is, because it does not define “hypocrisy”.
    1. Is it the case that anyone who does not believe the gospel does in fact understand the gospel? This is a real question. I don’t have the answer waiting. It does seem true that an unbeliever can understand some true things, something about sin and despair perhaps, and yet not understand the gospel?
    I am not suggesting that not understanding the gospel is an excuse for unbelief. Rather, I wonder if all unbelief entails not understanding the gospel. To not understand is to not believe, and to not believe is to not understand???
    Or should I simply say that we should stop saying that “inconsistency” is “blessed”?
    I can’t help but speak from my experience, as a lost “Calvinist” for years (a20 plus). Yes, I was a rebel against many things in God’s Word. I wanted the sovereignty of God without the justice of God. I gave priority to my own preferences. So my unbelief was not simply “intellectual ignorance” but morally culpable. I didn’t want to know the doctrine I didn’t understand.
    But. And I hesitate already, because this could just be one more excuse. But I was self-deceived. I did not say to other people I believed something I did not believe. (but don’t we do that every time we sin?)
    Put it this way, I myself was depending on the false gospel I was accepting from other people. I was “sincere” in that way. You might say–you were not a real Calvinist, you did not know what the gospel really taught, because if you had you would have know than the truths are not optional extras but part of the gospel itself.

    • markmcculley Says:

      I hear this preacher soundbite—“it’s a precious and rare thing to find a sinner” It’s like preachers are saying that’s the end of the story, and thee is no more need to know about Christ and how Christ atoned or how Christ justifies

      though only ungodly sinners are justified
      or need to be justified
      this does not mean that God justifies all ungodly sinners

      you can be a sinner without being justified
      you can know you are a sinner without being justified
      God never will justify all sinners

      Jesus rejects many sinners as His guilty clients, because Jesus was never the mediator for many guilty sinners

      God’s election comes first before Christ’s atonement
      Atonement to satisfy justice is a result of God’s love for the elect
      God’s love for the elect is not a result of Atonement for the elect

      This means that election is not the same thing as the atonement
      This means that election is not the same thing as justification.

  8. markmcculley Says:

    now i repent
    but not of the indwelling desire to use my sword to kill people trying too take my stuff or hurt my family

    thank you god that don’t float but i repent

    now that i have repented, it’s on you to accept me and if you don’t, then you are dead and don’t have the reality like I do

    Jesus , “woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites. For you cleanse the outside of the cup and dish but inside are full of extortion and self-indulgence.” Hypocrisy is a real sin, something to be ashamed of, something to repent for. It is shameful ….

    But there is something to be said for it. One wise Frenchman said it this way: “Hypocrisy is the homage that vice pays to virtue.” The hypocrite, while he may be caught up in whatever sin he is caught up in, is able to recognize virtue and desires to be perceived as virtuous even while lacking virtue. We as hypocrites we cover our sins because we also recognize them as sins.
    We postmoderns hate hypocrisy, not because we have such an abiding commitment to the virtue of honesty, but for the same reason we judge so harshly those who judge. There are those who hide their vice by arguing that their vice is a virtue (greed, selfishness)

    For many, avoiding hypocrisy is the only means of atonement for sin. But do these people avoid hypocrisy?

    “Well, I may be selfish , but at least I’m honest about it.” This proud confession of sin is a diabolical perversion of true repentance. We “acknowledge our sin” in that we admit to doing what we did, but we dismiss sin because in admitting it we make it no longer a sin.
    Admitting is our way to make atonement for it. http://www.mbird.com/2014/03/fighting-a-long-lost-battle-in-romans-7/


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: