Jesus what is sin

Either way, we are going to suffer spiritual death unless we believe that He is God. In 1 Corinthians we are told that we must also believe that He died for our sin, His physical body came back to life, and that He returned to heaven.

Notice in Matthew that Jesus said He was to die so that our sins could be forgiven. Jesus makes only one significant comment about intentional sins. It is found in Matthew Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.

In this passage Jesus states that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven. This is called the unpardonable sin. The key is to walk in the Spirit. And walking in the Spirit means being obedient to the Spirit. If we do this then it is written quite clearly what will happen.

We will not fulfill the lust of the flesh. You can say that He meant it as an exhortation to just try our hardest until we inevitably fall. Imagine for a second that Jesus knew exactly how things were going to go down. Imagine He knew that His words would be recorded and shared and preached among believers for years after the fact. Not once. Not a single time. All of His believers. What does it say? For example, when a woman was taken in the act of adultery, she was brought to Jesus for judgment.

Note the following: First, Christians should judge one another 1 Corinthians ; John Third, Jesus revealed the hypocrisy of the accusers who were more interested in ensnaring the Lord than preserving holiness in their community cf. Mark Leviticus ? Fourth, Jesus respected the Mosaic law that prohibited adultery and the punishment that the law prescribed. He also regarded the laws of accusation and testimony, which may not have been satisfied in this case.

Fifth, the Son of God had the right to forgive sins cf. The response to this situation by Jesus, the Son of God, was not designed to insulate wicked and impenitent individuals from rebuke or discipline in the Christian Age. Some of the sayings on sin by Jesus are perplexing. Did Jesus mean that the Jews would not have been in sin had he not come?

It is a form of self-harm. Well put, Chas. I agree with you that not forgiving people is a form of self-harm—in both the ways you mention. Amen to this post! The Jesus I grew up on withheld forgiveness until we performed our religious duties. Luke 23 was a real aha! If Jesus could forgive his unrepentant murderers, then everything I thought I knew about God was wrong.

You and me both, Josh. But no more. Now that I know the Father loves me unconditionally I can love myself and others too! Tim, again I have been led to think more about these passages. This shows action by God forgiving our sins and action by ourselves turning back from our old ways, which caused suffering. When seen in this form, the message seems like the traditional one of a need for repentance in order to receive forgiveness. This presumes that God always acts to minimize suffering.

As you say, it is changing our perspective and our orientation. We will always be imperfect in our relationships with people—and we will hurt people, but if we really internalize the love of the Father, whose love is unconditional for everyone, we should grow in our behavior toward others and hurt people less and less as it becomes more natural for us to love as the Father loves. Tim, It seems reasonable to assume that Jesus was able to hear and obey the Father.

Perhaps, but I focus on hearing and obeying Jesus. I am fine with the ambiguity of not identifying his specific voice. On the other hand, I have often known people who were absolutely certain that the Father was speaking to them and through them, while I was equally certain that they were mistaken. Tim, what do you feel was happening when you interpreted tongues for other people. They would be receiving His specific words, although it would be for them to use them as they thought fit.

From experience, it is necessary to be willing to do what you believe you have been asked. Chas, in my 20 years or so as a Pentecostal I only interpreted twice. I felt I had a sense of the content, but it was in my words and I would not claim authority for what I said; it might have been from God or it might have been from my deeply energized thoughts at the time.

In fact, one of those occasions my interpretations was to counter the first interpretation which I thought was in error. Paul, himself, warns that we should be wary of prophecies and interpretations. The one clear prophecy in the NT was given to Paul by Agabus, and Paul ignored the advice included in it.

I think such messages can be thought provoking or inspirational, but they are not authoritative and not necessarily the voice of God. I know you feel differently, but I think we can agree to disagree on this issue.

Sin is the result of allowing our feelings to control our behavior. It breaks the relationship we have with God because we are following someone or some thing rather than Him. Repentance is choosing to reestablish the relationship with God. Well said, Lee! Of course, we will always need to be alert to negative feelings that come over us from time to time.

There are many ways of understanding sin, but for me the best description is that it is simply a failure to love as God loves. Remember they are all in on the joke so the parts of the joke do not need to be present to make it funny for all involved with the story.

The Pharisees, Scribes, and other Jewish people there knew what a sin was based on the law…What Jesus did was redefine how we deal with the reconciling or repentance for those sins…What Jesus did was reestablish a closer relationship with God and the people by breaking the barriers that were being placed between them and God via the Law and Mishna.

Carl, are you saying that Jesus rejected sin as the keeping of the law in favor of sin being how we treat each other? No I am saying he rejected the ways the Teachers of the Law reinterpreted the Law to keep people oppressed while allowing themselves to look righteous…. You know like liberation theologians do.

Its simple yet hard for our egos at the same time…. Instead of interpeting the law to justify our own cirmcumstances…We are called to look to the law as a way to stretch ourselves to improve our relationship with God. Carl, it seems to me that it is more effective to internalize the love of the Father for us all so that love penetrates our heart and our behavior flows out of that. And I agree that we should not interpret the law to justify our thoughts and behavior.

While that is nice warm and squishy idea… Too bad the reality is, what we think love is and what the Father thinks love is are not necessarily the same thing…. The Law was meant as a guideline or plumb bulb if you like into where our heart truly lays…. It was never meant as a means of salvation as there is no Grace in it. As Jesus said you cannot follow two masters..