sin/sins is not the issue today!

[turbosixx]

Do you believe that the word "worketh" in this verses is strictly referring to the ordinances, the religious life of Israel?:

"Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt" (Ro.4:4).​

I cannot see how that could be possible since these words are found in the context of Abraham and that was before there was such a thing as the ordinances which governed the religious life of Israel.:

"What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt" (Ro.4:1-4).​

Yes, I understand the works he is talking about to be the works of the law of Moses. If you look at the end of the previous chapter, he is talking about works "of the law". That is Paul's point, we are saved by faith and not works of the law of Moses.

3:28 For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law.

He uses Abraham to prove, to those who want to rely on the law, that righteousness can come apart from circumcision and the law.

4:10 Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before!

He then goes on to say since the promise came by faith (before circumcision and the law), it is for everyone not just Jews.

4:16 Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who have the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all.


Same thing in Galatians, he shows that we are justified by faith and people who rely on the law are cursed.

3:10 For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse, as it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” 11 Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.”


He makes it even clearer that inheritance is through the promise and not "the law."

Gal. 3:17 What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 18 For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on the promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise.

 

[Jamie Gigliotti]

This is absurd! Christ did not die for us to indulge ourselves! Even the Atheists see the ridiculousness of this. How many so called 'Christians' have injured innocent people because sin doesn't matter. This is straight from the pit of Hell. Sin injures. How is the conversation gonna go? "Jesus didn't you die so I could harm that child of yours?" Hypocrisy, apostasy, lunacy; without a doubt!

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

This is absurd! Christ did not die for us to indulge ourselves! Even the Atheists see the ridiculousness of this. How many so called 'Christians' have injured innocent people because sin doesn't matter. This is straight from the pit of Hell. Sin injures. How is the conversation gonna go? "Jesus didn't you die so I could harm that child of yours?" Hypocrisy, apostasy, lunacy; without a doubt!

Irony

1 Cor 2:14 (KJV)

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Irony

1 Cor 2:14 (KJV)

Fitting post.

 

[Shasta]

Grosnick Marowbe's behavior is curious to me. He seems to be an intelligent man but when confronted with John 5:24 where the Lord Jesus says that those who "believe" are saved it seems as if Grosnick just cannot believe Him. Could it be that he is so brain-washed by the false teaching within the Neo-Mad camp that it is just impossible for him to believe what the Lord said?

I have seen this exact same thing with those who have been brain-washed into the Marian cult. You can show them passages from the Scriptures which directly contradict the teaching of Rome concerning Mary and those Scriptures mean nothing to them

What is your opinion about why what the Lord Jesus says at John 5:24 seems to mean nothing to Grosnick?

Thanks!

I don't know why people do what they do. I know that I am inclined to be defensive of what I believe as perhaps we all are. I try not to keep my initial explorations of a topic close to the text in hopes that it will anchor me and keep me from flights of imagination. Whatever we believe has to be established through hermeneutics and not eisegesis. There are a lot of things I still do not understand in scripture

 

[Jamie Gigliotti]

Irony

1 Cor 2:14 (KJV)

Agreed!
"But God's firm foundation stands, bearing this seal:'The Lord knows who are his,' and 'Let everyone who names the name of the Lord depart from inequity.'" 2 Timothy 2:19

"If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the teaching that accords with godliness, he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing." 1 Timothy 6:3-4

 

[Shasta]

[heir;4417361]2 Timothy 2:11 It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him:

We are dead and our life is hid with Christ in God and when Christ appears, then shall we also appear with Him in glory (no doubt about it)!

Colossians 3:1 If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God.
Colossians 3:2 Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth.
Colossians 3:3 For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God.
Colossians 3:4 When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory.

I cannot comment on portions of your post because I do not know exactly what you think being "dead in Christ means." However as far as I can tell these scriptures are not speaking of believers who are in danger of denying Christ which is the subject addressed in 2 Timothy 2:12. Paul speaks to the Colossians as believers who have had a genuine salvation experience and are abiding in Him.

From these few verses we can deduce a few things : (1) that we need to KEEP ON seeking after the things of God, (2) that we should FIX our affections (desires) on Him and (3) that we should NOT fix our desires on the world and the flesh. So the life hidden in Christ requires some participation on our part to maintain. It is not a static unalterable state but an ongoing and dynamic relationship, a walk.

2 Timothy 2:12 If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:

This is about suffering, “If we suffer, we shall also reign with Him” as in:

Philippians 1:27 Only let your conversation be as it becometh the gospel of Christ: that whether I come and see you, or else be absent, I may hear of your affairs, that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel;
Philippians 1:28 And in nothing terrified by your adversaries: which is to them an evident token of perdition, but to you of salvation, and that of God.
Philippians 1:29 For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;
Philippians 1:30 Having the same conflict which ye saw in me, and now hear to be in me.

If we deny Him the suffering, He also will deny us the reign!

2 Timothy 2:12 If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:

It's about reward 1 Corinthians 3:10-15 KJV, 2 Corinthians 4:17 KJV, Colossians 3:24 KJV)

The first part of 2 Timothy 2:12

If we suffer, we shall also reign with him:

Is about reward in that it holds out the promise of reigning with Him

The second half

if we deny him, he also will deny us


is not about rewards. It is a warning of what will happen to us if we deny Christ and reject the truth of the Gospel.

But what does it mean to "deny" Jesus?

According to Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance the Greek word for deny (arneomai) means to “deny, disown, repudiate.” Other sources add the synonym “reject.” The Bible uses the same word (arneomai) when it says Peter “denied” Jesus three times. When Peter denied Jesus he was not denying that he knew about Jesus. He was repudiating his personal relationship with Him.

According to Paul himself he was not the author of verses 11-12. He said it was a "trustworthy saying" although evidently part of it came from the words of Jesus.

32 So everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven, 33 but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven (Matthew 10:32-33)

Without in any way altering the definition of the word “deny” this means that a Christian who denies disowns repudiates, rejects Jesus in THIS life He will deny, disown repudiate, reject them when they appear before the Father in the NEXT. As with Peter, this means that God will sever all relational connection with them

This refers to a sin the Bible calls "apostasy" which is rejecting the faith. Paul brings it up here because it happens most frequently in times of persecution and suffering. Throughout the days of the Roman persecutions the Early Church Fathers commonly used the word “denying Jesus” to describe the act of repudiating the faith for whatever reason.

For 2 Timothy 2:12 to mean what you say it does words would have to be added so that it reads if we deny him, he also will deny us our reward but the verse does not say we will be denied a reward. It says HE will deny US which is a much more personal and dire consequence than merely not reigning with Him.

Thayer’s Greek Lexicon defines of arneomai this way

2. to deny, with an accusative of the person, in various senses:
a. ἀρνουσθαι Ἰησοῦν - to deny Jesus- is used of followers of Jesus who, for fear of death or persecution, deny that Jesus is their master, and desert his cause (to disown): Matthew 10:33; Luke 12:9; (John 13:38 L text T Tr WH); 2 Timothy 2:12 (ἀρνουσθαι τό ὄνομα αὐτοῦ, - to deny His name - Revelation 3:8, means the same); and on the other hand, of Jesus, denying that one is his follower: Matthew 10:33; 2 Timothy 2:12.

http://biblehub.com/greek/720.htm

So you see I am not making this up. Another point is that, according to Paul, what Jesus said about this in the Gospels still applies today. In fact when the Early Church Fathers use the term "denying Christ" they do not quote Paul's letter to Timothy but Jesus original saying in the Gospels.

if we are faithless, he remains faithful— meant that nothing we can do would ever sever our relationship to God.
Knowing our position in Christ found in passages throughout Romans through Philemon including our being dead with Him and that we shall live with Him when He Who is our life appears: we believers read 2 Timothy 2:13 KJV as an “even if”! Even if we believe not, we are identified in and with Him. To deny us, would be to deny Himself and He cannot deny Himself as He abideth faithful!

This dialogue began originally because of what you said here in the highlighted statement. The problem with this is that if we take “faithless” to include even denying the faith (which it necessarily would) the passage is reduced to nonsense.

It would read this way:

12 If we deny reject, repudiate disown) Him he will deny reject, repudiate disown us

13 if we are faithless (and deny Him), he remains faithful (and He will NOT deny us)

Both of these statements cannot be true. However, if Being “faithless” means that under pressure our faith falters but not that we renounce it altogether then the verses remain consistent and coherent.

I expect you might bring in Romans 3:38 here but if you look at the list of things people might consider to be barriers separating them from God all they consist of is circumstances and demonic powers, not the willful rejection of Christ by the person himself. Also the phrase "any other created thing" cannot be used as a catch-all either because apostasy is not a "created thing."

 

[Shasta]

Jerry, Abraham was not saved by faith alone. Abraham had to obey everything that God commanded.

Genesis 26:4-5 I will make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and will give them all these lands, and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because Abraham obeyed me and kept my requirements, my commands, my decrees and my laws."


God was going to kill Moses because Moses was not going to obey the ceremonial law and circumcise his son.

Look at it the other way. Many times Abraham really did not begin to have true faith UNTIL He acted upon what God had told Him. For instance, what would have happened if God had told him "leave your father's house and come to a land I will show you" and Abraham had refused to leave? His inaction would prove that he did not really have faith in God. Leaving for Canaan was an ACT of faith. Had he stayed in UR Canaan would have remained an unrealized dream. He never would have received it as his inheritance.

Or what if when God said "Bring your only son Isaac and sacrifice him" Abraham refused to do so? Then he would have failed the test and his covenant with God would not have been ratified. Abraham chose to raise the knife over his son only because he believed that God would resurrect him from the dead and fulfill His promise (Hebrews 11:19) but the ACT of sacrificing his son was an act of faith.

In both instances faith and obedience were inseparable. Many times, faith was not faith until he acted on it. When Abraham walked with God he was not trying to earn points with God. His "obedience" was in choosing to ACT in faith on the basis of God's spoken word. Some people might say "it was BECAUSE he had faith that he acted." It could also be said that his faith was not real UNTIL he acted or, as James put it, "faith without works (a response) is dead."

Paul puts faith and obedience together. He even said the purpose of his ministry was to

bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations, (Romans 1:5)

The "works" of the Pharisees were not responses of faith. They were their own attempts to make themselves righteous before God (and in the eyes of other people). Abraham's was not going by any playbook, nor was he TRYING to be righteous. Abraham's "works" were hischoices to actively respond to what God had told him. True faith is not just mental belief. It inspires the choices we make.

 

[heir]

Make it simply? I will make it shorter but I am certain that you will refuse to answer my questions.



So here those under the law were Gentiles?:

"Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all" (Ro.4:16).​

You are totally confused if you think that the words "which are of the law" are referring to Gentiles. And you accuse me of not being very astute. Are you not aware that the Gentiles were never under the law?

You better back up the truck, JS. Some Gentiles were under the law. According to Paul, who is he speaking to:

Romans 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:

The Romans were resting in the law!

Romans 1:13 Now I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes I purposed to come unto you, (but was let hitherto,) that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among other Gentiles.

...

Romans 2:17 Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,

The whole point of Paul writing to them was to impart unto them some spiritual gift that would establish them (Romans 1:1-15 KJV), which can easily be shown to be the gospel of Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV) where the righteousness of God is revealed (Romans 1:16-17 KJV). And that's the righteousness of God without the law which is by the faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe (Romans 3:21-24 KJV)!

 

[heir]

This is absurd! Christ did not die for us to indulge ourselves! Even the Atheists see the ridiculousness of this. How many so called 'Christians' have injured innocent people because sin doesn't matter. This is straight from the pit of Hell. Sin injures. How is the conversation gonna go? "Jesus didn't you die so I could harm that child of yours?" Hypocrisy, apostasy, lunacy; without a doubt!

"Clueless as to what happened 2000 years ago and why"~john w

What is the gospel of your salvation, Jamie?

 

[Shasta]

Jesus was speaking to JEWS who HAD to do the ceremonial works and were obeying the ceremonial works, but those works were going to be soon fulfilled by Jesus. Those works were no longer going to be required but having faith in Jesus' blood was going to be required.

We still have to obey Jesus' commands but we no longer have to do the ceremonial works because now we only have to believe his blood cleans us.

The ceremonial works cleaned them.

The ceremonies of the law, washing and sacrifice revealed their sin, convicted their consciences and invited them to repent; however the ceremonies never cleansed anyone. Some OT believers understood this:

6 Sacrifice and meal offering You have not desired;
My ears You have opened;
Burnt offering and sin offering You have not required.
7Then I said, “Behold, I come;
In the scroll of the book it is written of me.
8 I delight to do Your will, O my God;
Your Law is within my heart.”

Psalm 40:6-8

Only the sacrifice of Christ was able to cleanse the human soul. Hebrews says that the very fact they had to keep sacrificing year after year showed the inadequacy of that system.

1 The Law is only a shadow of the good things to come, NOT the realities themselves. It can never, by the same sacrifices offered year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. 2 If it could, would not the offerings have ceased? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all and would no longer feel the guilt of their sins. 3 Instead, those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, 4 because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and of goats to take away sins (Hebrews 10:1-4).


Some people think Jesus came preaching the law just in a better way. However Jesus Himself said He did not come to patch up the old Mosaic system. He said new patches cannot be sewn onto an old garment. He brought new wine which could not be put into the old skins(Matthew 9:16-17). What He said was radical enough to tear the fabric of the old system apart

Of major components of the law such as the temple and its ceremonies, thedietary law and Sabbath-keeping, Jesus said:

6 I tell you, something greater than the temple is here. 7 And if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. 8 For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath” (Matthew 12:6-8)

When the Pharisees rebuked him because he allowed his disciples to eat without ritually washing their hands, Jesus gave them a lesson in how they had violated deeper more essential principles (Mark 7:5-10).

About the dietary laws He said:

It's not what goes into your body that defiles you; you are defiled by what comes from your heart" (Mark 7:15)

Jesus did not come to tell the Jews to be better Jews and keep the law more perfectly. Such a message not have been Good News but yesterday's bad news, for the Law had never brought liberty and real cleansing of the heart and conscience. Only Jesus and not the priests had the "power on earth to forgive sins"

 

[Jamie Gigliotti]

"Clueless as to what happened 2000 years ago and why"~john w

What is the gospel of your salvation, Jamie?

Here it is clear as day.

"For the Grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self controlled, upright and godly lives in the present age, waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the Glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own posession who are zealous for good works." Titus 2:11-14

Amen!

 

[Shasta]

We are identified with Him and in Him and by His faith. That's how we can know and say:

2 Timothy 2:13 If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.

And just what part of complete in Him (Colossians 2:10 KJV) are you struggling with?

The first time we identified with His death was when we were first saved, however that was an initiation into a walk. Paul said,

Therefore consider the members of your earthly body as dead to immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and greed, which amounts to idolatry (Colossians 3:5NASB).

Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry (Colossians 3:5ESV).

Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry (Colossians 3:5NIV)..

He is talking about the need for believers to deal decisively with the desires of the body that lead us to sin. If this were a once for all action that occurred in the beginning of our walk only there would be no need to exhort believers to do continue to do it. Note that he is not saying they are doing these things only that when they are tempted (as they most certainly would be) they should take this course of action and continue to identify with His death. Just as temptations will never cease so we must continue to practice identification with His death. He never says the desires of the earthly nature cease only that we must put a stop to it.

That is my view and I am not struggling with that. Your view is what - that it happens once and you do not have to put to death the old nature ever again?

Historically your interpretation of 2 Timothy 2:13 was rejected by all the orthodox teachers, Apologists and theologians of Christianity until John Calvin. This is remarkable in itself since most people believe the belief has always been around. The first Anabaptists did not believe it, not even Augustine with his dogmatic belief in predestination believed in unconditional eternal security as it is now taught. Evidence of the universal agreement that apostasy was a real possibility for believers is abundant for anyone who cares to search it out in the writings of early Christianity. While you will no doubt claim that the Bible teaches it, histoically the hermeneutic was post hoc. It was formulated to support the Calvin's belief in God's absolute control over man's destiny.

 

[serpentdove]

1 Jn 3:9, Jas 1:22 :dizzy:

 

[God's Truth]

Look at it the other way. Many times Abraham really did not begin to have true faith UNTIL He acted upon what God had told Him. For instance, what would have happened if God had told him "leave your father's house and come to a land I will show you" and Abraham had refused to leave? His inaction would prove that he did not really have faith in God. Leaving for Canaan was an ACT of faith. Had he stayed in UR Canaan would have remained an unrealized dream. He never would have received it as his inheritance.

Or what if when God said "Bring your only son Isaac and sacrifice him" Abraham refused to do so? Then he would have failed the test and his covenant with God would not have been ratified. Abraham chose to raise the knife over his son only because he believed that God would resurrect him from the dead and fulfill His promise (Hebrews 11:19) but the ACT of sacrificing his son was an act of faith.

In both instances faith and obedience were inseparable. Many times, faith was not faith until he acted on it. When Abraham walked with God he was not trying to earn points with God. His "obedience" was in choosing to ACT in faith on the basis of God's spoken word. Some people might say "it was BECAUSE he had faith that he acted." It could also be said that his faith was not real UNTIL he acted or, as James put it, "faith without works (a response) is dead."

Paul puts faith and obedience together. He even said the purpose of his ministry was to

bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations, (Romans 1:5)

The "works" of the Pharisees were not responses of faith. They were their own attempts to make themselves righteous before God (and in the eyes of other people). Abraham's was not going by any playbook, nor was he TRYING to be righteous. Abraham's "works" were hischoices to actively respond to what God had told him. True faith is not just mental belief. It inspires the choices we make.

I am glad you agree with me, but you should humble yourself and say so, or else it sounds as if you are going against me and are trying to prove the truth that I said as being false.

Faith without works is dead, and there is no if and or but about it.

 

[God's Truth]

"Clueless as to what happened 2000 years ago and why"~john w

What is the gospel of your salvation, Jamie?

People misunderstand Paul about no works. No works is about the ceremonial works and not about not having to obey Jesus and abstain from evil.

 

[God's Truth]

The ceremonies of the law, washing and sacrifice revealed their sin, convicted their consciences and invited them to repent; however the ceremonies never cleansed anyone. Some OT believers understood this:

6 Sacrifice and meal offering You have not desired;
My ears You have opened;
Burnt offering and sin offering You have not required.
7Then I said, “Behold, I come;
In the scroll of the book it is written of me.
8 I delight to do Your will, O my God;
Your Law is within my heart.”

Psalm 40:6-8

This is where you start to lose sight of the truth. Sacrifices and burnt offerings might not have been what God desired---BUT GOD COMMANDED IT.
The Jews could not go to the tent and later the temple to worship God if they did not clean themselves. God's Spirit was among them. God's Spirit was in the tent, and in the temple.

Only the sacrifice of Christ was able to cleanse the human soul. Hebrews says that the very fact they had to keep sacrificing year after year showed the inadequacy of that system.

1 The Law is only a shadow of the good things to come, NOT the realities themselves. It can never, by the same sacrifices offered year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. 2 If it could, would not the offerings have ceased? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all and would no longer feel the guilt of their sins. 3 Instead, those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins, 4 because it is impossible for the blood of bulls and of goats to take away sins (Hebrews 10:1-4).


Some people think Jesus came preaching the law just in a better way. However Jesus Himself said He did not come to patch up the old Mosaic system. He said new patches cannot be sewn onto an old garment. He brought new wine which could not be put into the old skins(Matthew 9:16-17). What He said was radical enough to tear the fabric of the old system apart

Of major components of the law such as the temple and its ceremonies, thedietary law and Sabbath-keeping, Jesus said:

6 I tell you, something greater than the temple is here. 7 And if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, andnot sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. 8 For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath” (Matthew 12:6-8)

When the Pharisees rebuked him because he allowed his disciples to eat without ritually washing their hands, Jesus gave them a lesson in how they had violated deeper more essential principles (Mark 7:5-10).

About the dietary laws He said:

It's not what goes into your body that defiles you; you are defiled by what comes from your heart" (Mark 7:15)

Jesus did not come to tell the Jews to be better Jews and keep the law more perfectly. Such a message not have been Good News but yesterday's bad news, for the Law had never brought liberty and real cleansing of the heart and conscience. Only Jesus and not the priests had the "power on earth to forgive sins"

We do not have to do the ceremonial works of the law anymore because we are cleaned now by faith in Jesus’ blood.

 

[Shasta]

1 Jn 3:9, Jas 1:22 :dizzy:

1 John 3:9 uses the Greek linear present tense for the word "sins" meaning that the sin is habitual or continuous, a way of life.

Here is how it reads in other versions


ESV
No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God.

NASB
No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

NIV
No one who has been born from God practices sin, because God's seed abides in him. Indeed, he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born from God.

Berean Literal Bible
Anyone having been born of God does not practice sin, because His seed abides in him, and he is not able to continue sinning, because he has been born of God.

The purpose of John's letter is to combat the Docetists, a cult who believed that because divine knowledge had been planted in them nothing they did was sin. Because of this some lived immoral lives. In his letter John makes the point that God's nature of light (holiness and truth) is incompatible with the deeds of darkness (moral wickedness and deception). When the new life is planted in us it will motivate us to do the things that are in accordance with God's nature.

At the same time, he is not saying believers do not sin at all 1 John 2:1 says

My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But IF anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.

In this verse the highlighted words "does sin" is the same verb for sin only it is in the past not the present tense. Since the sentence begins with "IF" we know that it is a hypothetical and has not actually happened yet. In Greek, when the main verb of a hypothetical sentence is in the past (aorist) tense it means that the action "sin" is NOT repetitive. Therefore it is talking about committing A sin not living in sin.

John does not expect Christians to continue living in sin once they have converted. At the same time neither does he think it is impossible for them to sin.

Like John, James is calling believers to live out their faith and not just think about it (James 1:22)

NET
But be sure you live out the message and do not merely listen to it and so deceive yourselves.

NIV
Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says.

James is not talking about performing meritorious works for salvation. He encouraging them to have an active faith and avoid being hypocritical.

James and John are both talking about the effect of walking in the Spirit is supposed has on our lifestyle. Having the Spirit inside, guiding us, enabling us to walk in his ways is the promise of the New Covenant foretold by the prophets, realized by Jesus and celebrated at the Lord's Supper.

 

[OZOS]

We have to come to Jesus and repent of our sins.

AND?

:nono:

 

[God's Truth]

AND?

:nono:

Why do you say "AND" and shake your head?

Could you elaborate so we can discuss this better?