Sanctification - what is it?

Theology
107

Sanctification would be the process of God leading us to repent of our sin.

108

sinless perfection this side of glorification is a lie cloaked in light. You say “remain” means sin dies completely?

Did I?

John uses ΌέΜω (menƍ) in 1 John 2:6, yes, to “abide,” to “stay,” to “continue”-but abiding isn’t .

I don’t understand what you mean by: sinless existing, and Spirit led resisting. Sound like you are creating your own arguments

All have sinned and come short of the glory of God right? Or does it say all will continue to sin after they have been born with life from above? If so please share the scripture.

You argue, “Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil.” True. And He did, on the cross (1 John 3:8, Î»Ï…Ì„ÌÏƒáżƒ, “to unbind, loose, break”). But newsflash: the same .

Capacity to sin
The capacity to sin is not in question. Didn’t Jesus have the capacity? Point is why would He, it’s not his nature.

Now let’s get surgical with this line: “If you sin you have an Advocate, not when you sin.” That’s theological gymnastics. 1 John 2:1 says, “If anyone sins (áŒÎŒÎŹÏÏ„áżƒ, aorist subjunctive), we have an Advocate.” Not had, not used to, not until your next perfect streak breaks, but have (áŒ”Ï‡ÎżÎŒÎ”Îœ, present active). You have Christ in the courtroom, not only for past charges, but for any future stumblings. That’s not license, that’s lifeline.

But who are you making this point to?

Who said we did not need Him for a life time- We must remain in Him. Let me throw up my preschool greek: Telio I thought means complete- that could mean: what was intended met it’s goal, or intended purpose.

And what of “remaining cleansed”? You cite 1 John 1:7, “the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin.” But again, ÎșÎ±ÎžÎ±ÏÎŻÎ¶Î”Îč is present active, ongoing action. The blood keeps cleansing, not a one-time cosmic shower that makes you unsinable. You don’t become fireproof, you cling to Christ in the fire.

True, and when we remain in Him if it keeps cleansing you never get dirty

Finally, “Has God given us the power to remain in Him by faith?” Absolutely. But that power is not the removal of the struggle, it’s the resistance in the struggle (Ephesians 6:13, “having done all, stand”).

Who said anything about the removal of struggle, and what has that have to do with being made complete in Christ?

Faith doesn’t make you flawless, it makes you faithful. And faithful saints stumble.

Maybe it does so much more! :thinking: How do you know faithful saints who have stumbled will not stumble anymore when they remain in Christ?

Peter did is correct, Paul did is correct
but did they continue


But what makes you a conqueror isn’t a spotless track record, it’s clinging to Christ, crucified and risen, when you fall.

I did not say that we weren’t conquerors through Christ.

The cross is not your stepping stone to sinless self-glory. It is your daily altar. Your only hope. Your Advocate’s blood cries louder than your best deeds ever could.

Who said the cross was my stepping stone to sinless self :face_with_steam_from_nose: glory? Not I.

There is nothing no one will be able to say they did without God and there is definitely nothing that will be done without Him. And no one is claiming Sinless Perfection means you did something on your own.

Have not blessings and cursings been set before us that we must choose life so that we may live.

Now tell me, are you trusting your spotless behavior, or the slaughtered Lamb?

That’s out of bounds. Why would I shoot a basket ball out of bounds. That wouldn’t score any points


The person to Trust is Jesus. The person to remain in is Jesus
have I said any different. Why are you creating things I’ve never said?

The term “sinned” is SINGULAR and refers to sin in general. The Greek term means “to miss the mark.” This means that sin is both the commission and the omission of the things revealed in God’s Word. The false teachers claimed salvation was related only to knowledge, not to life. They theologically separated justification and sanctification.

So let me get this strait. You are saying as you are in Christ you are sinning? Explain that one,sense there is no sin in Him.

“we make Him a liar” The gospel is based on the sinfulness of all mankind (cf. Rom. 3:9-18,23; 5:1; 11:32). Either God (cf. Rom. 3:4) or those who claim sinlessness, is lying.

I dont think it’s talking about those who remain in Christ. If that is true how can you remain in Him sinning? There’s no sin in Him. Right?

“His word is not in us”
This involves the dual aspect of the term “logos,” both as a message and a person (cf. 1 John 1:1,8; John 14:6).
Utley
All have sin..missed the mark and fallen short of His glory
J.
But Romans 8 tells us there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the flesh but the Spirit. If the law of the life giving spirit has set us free then why would we want to put ourselves in bondage of what we been freed from.

Are you saying we have no choice but to sin?

109

Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

110

Sinless perfectionism, the belief that a Christian can, in this life, reach a state where they no longer commit sin, is not just doctrinal error, it’s often cultic in practice, and deadly in effect. Below is a line-by-line exposĂ© showing how this teaching hijacks Scripture, undermines the cross, redefines grace, deceives the conscience, and feeds spiritual pride-all marks not merely of error, but of sectarian danger.

  1. Sinless perfection distorts sanctification into deification
    Biblically, sanctification is progressive (2 Cor 3:18; Phil 1:6), a work of the Spirit conforming us to Christ, not transforming us into Christ. To claim sinless perfection is to smuggle in a covert form of spiritual divinization, implicitly claiming what only glorification promises (Rom 8:30). That is a heretical trajectory, not a holy one.

  2. It denies the ongoing need for the cross
    Paul, writing late in his ministry, still identified himself as the chief of sinners (1 Tim 1:15, áŒÎłáœŒ ΔጰΌÎč, present tense), and continued to press toward the goal, not claiming he had “already attained” (Phil 3:12). A sinlessly perfect man does not need ongoing mercy, but Jesus said those who daily come and daily forgive are the ones who walk in God’s light (Luke 11:4; 1 John 1:8–10). This theology crucifies Christ once (Heb 10:10) and then discards Him for self-cleansing-which is a mark of apostasy, not maturity.

  3. It redefines sin to fit the claim, rather than letting Scripture define it
    1 John 3:6 says, “Whoever abides in Him does not sin,” but this is present continuous (áŒÎŒÎ±ÏÏ„ÎŹÎœÎ”Îč), indicating habitual rebellion, not sinlessness. The same letter says just one chapter earlier, “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves” (1 John 1:8). The cultic maneuver is to cherry-pick 3:6 while explaining away 1:8–10, proof-texting while ignoring context. That’s not exegesis, it’s manipulation.

  4. It exalts man’s willpower above Christ’s mercy
    Sinless perfectionists often claim they just “chose not to sin anymore,” implying those still struggling are simply lazy, carnal, or uncommitted. But this isn’t sanctification, it’s Stoicism in a Christian coat. The gospel isn’t try harder until you’re holy; it’s die daily and walk by the Spirit (Gal 5:16, Rom 8:13). A theology that deifies willpower will crucify the weak, trample the contrite, and make idols of those who posture victory through denial.

  5. It mimics cult behavior: isolation, elitism, and denial
    Groups that teach sinless perfection tend to separate, claim a secret holiness others lack, and demonize dissent. When people fall, they cover it, redefine it, or blame others. These are classic cultic behaviors: closed accountability, extreme idealism, harsh judgment of outsiders, and suppression of questions. This is not the brokenness of the body of Christ, this is the tyranny of false perfection.

  6. It nullifies grace and rebrands salvation as performance
    If perfection is attainable here, then grace is just a starting point, and after that it’s up to us. Paul blasts this in Galatians 3:3, “Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?” (ጐπÎčÏ„Î”Î»Î”áż–ÏƒÎžÎ” ጐΜ σαρÎșÎŻ). A return to law-based self-righteousness is not a step forward, it’s a fall from grace (Gal 5:4).

  7. It boasts in the flesh, not in Christ crucified
    Paul said, “Far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Gal 6:14). But sinless perfectionists boast in their ‘victory’ over sin. That’s not Calvary-grounded humility; that’s Pharisaic pride in a holy mask. When the cross is displaced, the self must be enthroned, and Satan is content to sit behind that veil of whitewashed righteousness.

Sinless perfection is not just bad doctrine, it is spiritually toxic. It silences repentance, mocks the blood of Christ, weaponizes Scripture, breeds self-deception, and crucifies the brokenhearted who know their need for mercy. It is not the gospel, it is another gospel (Gal 1:6–9), and it should be exposed as such. Any system that turns Christ into a starter and the flesh into a finisher is not Christian, it is cultic.

If you truly understand the cross—that Jesus bore your sin, once for all, and yet still intercedes for you as Advocate (1 John 2:1)—then you’ll never parade your holiness, but fall on your face in wonder, and walk in Spirit-wrought repentance every step until glory.

Shalom.

J.

1 Like
111

Sinless perfectionists seize 1 John 3:9 as their banner verse, claiming it proves that a truly born-again Christian cannot and does not sin, ever. But this is not just a misreading, it’s an exegetical hijacking. The verse says, “Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.” But context is king, and Greek grammar is the sledgehammer that smashes this shallow gloss. The Greek verb for “commit sin” is áŒÎŒÎ±ÏÏ„ÎŹÎœÎ”Îč (hamartanei), present active indicative, denoting continuous or habitual action, not a single act or sin in general. John is not saying born-again believers never sin; he’s saying they do not live in sin, make peace with it, or walk in unbroken rebellion. This harmonizes perfectly with 1 John 1:8–10, where the same apostle says, “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves,” and again, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us.” That’s present tense, ongoing, communal confession—a lifestyle of Spirit-led repentance, not a state of sinless existence.

Even more, John is writing to a church under siege from Gnostic dualists, false teachers claiming mystical union with God while denying the ethical weight of sin in the flesh. These heretics boasted spiritual enlightenment but lived lawlessly. John dismantles them by teaching that true new birth results in a life transformed, not lawless. So when he says “cannot sin,” he means the new nature opposes sin, is incompatible with it, and is repulsed by it. “Cannot sin” is moral repulsion, not metaphysical impossibility. Like Joseph saying “How can I do this great wickedness and sin against God?” (Genesis 39:9)—the heart born of God is under holy constraint.

To say 1 John 3:9 teaches sinless perfection is to call John double-minded. Why would he write earlier, “My little children, these things I write to you so that you may not sin, but if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father” (1 John 2:1), if sin is no longer possible? Why would we need an Advocate if sinless perfection is the norm? Jesus is not an ornament for the righteous, He is the ongoing Intercessor for the weak. If perfection was attained at new birth, the intercessory office of Christ collapses. That’s not theology, that’s spiritual sabotage.

Moreover, Romans 7 demolishes sinless perfectionism with surgical precision. Paul, speaking in the present tense, says, “I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing” (Romans 7:19). This is not an unregenerate man, this is the regenerate apostle wrestling with indwelling sin. He does not walk in it, but he feels its war. He cries out not, “I am perfect,” but “Who will deliver me from this body of death?” and answers with the cross: “Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!” (Romans 7:25). Sinless perfection dismisses this war, nullifies this cry, and renders the cross irrelevant in daily sanctification.

Let us be clear. 1 John 3:9 does not declare the born-again believer sinless, it declares him incompatible with habitual, unrepentant sin. It is not a statement of perfection, but a declaration of regeneration. It exposes the counterfeit, not exalts the flawless. True Christians stumble, but they cannot settle in the pigsty. The Spirit convicts, disciplines, and restores. To be born of God is not to be flawless, but to be fathered by the Holy One whose Son’s blood continually cleanses us (1 John 1:7). That is gospel. That is freedom. And that is what sinless perfection cannot stomach, ongoing mercy from a crucified Savior who still intercedes for saints who still need grace.

“practices sin” This is a PRESENT ACTIVE INDICATIVE in contradistinction to 1 John 2:1, where the AORIST ACTIVE SUBJUNCTIVE is used twice. There are two theories about the significance of this statement.

it relates to the Gnostic false teachers, especially that faction that reduced salvation to intellectual concepts, thereby removing the necessity of a moral lifestyle (i.e., Antinomianism)
the PRESENT TENSE VERB emphasizes continual, habitual, sinful activity (cf. Rom. 6:1), not isolated acts of sins (cf. Rom. 6:15)
This theological distinction is illustrated in Romans 6 (potential sinlessness in Christ) and Romans 7 (the ongoing struggle of the believer sinning less).

The historical approach #1 seems best, but one is still left with the need to apply this truth to today, which #2 addresses. There is a good discussion of this difficult verse in Hard Sayings of the Bible by Walter Kaiser, Peter Davids, F. F. Bruce, and Manfred Brauch, pp. 736-739.
Utley.

J.

1 Like
112

I gave my definition of sinless perfection

Would have loved for you to answer the question.

  1. Are you saying we have no choice but to sin?

  2. Are you saying that as long as you live you will always fall?

I feel you did not read a word I wrote in my posts.

It sounds like you are parroting, but not looking into the subject.

Im not scared to search out why I believe what I’ve been taught. That’s why God gave us a :brain: brain.

No one can claim they reached a place where they don’t sin without remaining in Christ. Isn’t He the mark?

Why not answer the questions:
3.Are you saying that a person who remains in the teachings of Christ, continues to walk by the Spirit is sinning?

Please be so kind to answer all questions numbered with a scripture proving you are correct.

For me it’s like this you either walking north or walking south regardles of the resistance coming from the flesh. Another words you are either walking by the Spirit or walking by the flesh.

  1. Are you saying that you can walk by both at the same time?
  2. Explain if there is no sin in Him, how you can be in Christ and still sin.
  3. You explain how we are saved from three tenses
    the penalty, power, and presence of sin. Justification, Sanctification, and glorification

Sense we are living right now in this world you are telling me the goal is to strive but we can never take hold of Christ’s character now? That we can never be perfect in Love?

  1. Why were 2 taken up who walked with God, why did they never see death. We know that flesh and blood canot enter the kingdom. But what about flesh, blood and Spirit?
  2. We have nothing to boast about without boasting in what God has done through us. Etc

Sorry, but I have to argue this opposing side for there are a couple of ways that I can think.

I can either think, He saved us so that we can sometimes live soberly and righteously in this present world. Or He saved us so that we would live soberly and righteously in this present world looking for His glorious appearing.

  1. Who will be able to stand at his coming? Will our whole body, soul, and Spirit be kept blameless because we continually obey the Spirit ?.. Because Jesus died on the cross for our sins, resurrected, and his Spirit was given for us to obey that sin is destroyed in our lives, now. So we will be ready to meet our maker. If not why?

  2. Was Paul a castaway after He was discipled by God or did He bring His body under submission to God?

  3. Was Abraham told to walk blamesless before God because Abraham was the reward or because God was his great reward.

  4. If God told Abraham to walk blameless before Him then did that mean He couldn’t when God was behind Him?

I guess for me Johann it’s about the effects of what we hold true.

So if I hold true, “that we will always sin”, how will that affect my journey?

You say it doesn’t give a license to sin and I say to many it has. One will say God will forgive me. I heard that often.

If we say we will sin as long as we are in this world, are we really trusting God? That God can do more than we can ever asked or think?

My last question: Are we complete when we remain in Christ’t teaching, in Him

Peace and blessings

113

@Corlove13

You’re echoing exactly what I’ve been saying, without actually reading me. You skim, then misrepresent, claiming I said, “We have no choice but to sin?”

That is not what I said.

Slow down. Read carefully. Engage with what’s actually written, not what you assume.

Your questions HAVE been answered.

Thanks.

J.

1 Like
114

Is He is not saying they will never get there in this life?

Who said the possibilty wasn’t there, it was there for Jesus but He chose it not.

But here he seems to be speaking when He was under the law. But then you get to Romans 8 it says Now, there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit. Off my head don’t quote. It goes further to explain the law of the life given Spirit has set you Freee from the law of sin and death.

No one is saying born again means flawless, at least not now. But why can’t being born again eventually bring you in a place of remaining in His teaching Christ.

Jesus said He always did what was pleasing to His father and His father never left Him alone. Is He not the goal?

115

I would love for you to quote them and answer under them..But if you choose not so be it
peace and blessings.

116

Did I say otherwise?!

I already did, but you’re misrepresenting me here. And if you recall, I even shared a link to Bob Utley’s guide on proper hermeneutics, did I not?

J.

117

Really @Corlove13?

Claim: Romans 7 is Paul under the Law, before Christ, so it doesn’t apply to believers now.
I answer- That’s false, strained, and ignores Paul’s verbs, tone, and theology.

  1. Paul is speaking in the present tense, and he doubles down on it.
    Romans 7:14–25 is drenched in the first-person singular, present tense: “I do not understand my own actions
 I do the very thing I hate
 I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand
”

In Greek, verbs like ÎșÎ±Ï„ÎżÎčÎșÎżáżŠÏƒÎ± (dwelling) and Ï€ÎżÎčῶ (I do) are present active indicatives. Paul is not telling a nostalgic story of pre-Christian failure. He is bearing witness to the ongoing inner war of a regenerate man who delights in the law of God in his inner being (Romans 7:22). An unregenerate man doesn’t do that.

  1. This passage matches Christian experience, not pre-Christian life.
    Paul says, “I delight in the law of God in my inner being” (7:22) and “I myself serve the law of God with my mind” (7:25).

That’s not a Pharisee talking, that’s a Spirit-filled man groaning under the flesh’s resistance. Romans 7 doesn’t describe slavery to sin without a fight, it describes the Spirit-empowered resistance against sin’s lingering presence.

If this were pre-Christian Paul, it would contradict Philippians 3:6, where he says “as to righteousness under the law, [I was] blameless.” He had no such inner torment then.

  1. Romans 8 does not cancel Romans 7, it completes it.
    The transition from Romans 7 to 8 is not from “lost” to “saved”, but from agonized struggle to Spirit-empowered endurance. The flesh still exists, but the Spirit now leads and liberates.

Romans 8:13 says, “If by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.”
Why put them to death if they’re gone? Why fight if sinless perfection already arrived?

The point is this: the believer is no longer condemned, but he is not yet glorified, so the war continues.*** The Spirit is not a switch that eliminates all sin, it is the power to kill it. Not the absence of battle, but the presence of victory through crucifixion.***

4. The cross is central, not perfectionism.
Christ didn’t die to help you bypass sanctification. He died to crucify the old man (Romans 6:6), and yet the flesh still seeks to wage war (Galatians 5:17).

Perfectionism denies this duality. It preaches arrival before resurrection. But Scripture says the full adoption-the redemption of our bodies, is yet future (Romans 8:23). We are still groaning, still waiting, still hoping.

If Romans 7 is gone and sin is impossible now, why does Paul tell believers to “put off the old self”, “flee youthful passions”, “resist the devil”, “be killing sin”, “watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation”?

Because until the trumpet sounds, we war.

No, Romans 7 is not Paul under law, it’s Paul under Christ, crushed in spirit but alive to the war. The verbs are present, the anguish is real, and the struggle is holy. Romans 8 doesn’t erase the battle, it arms the soldier.

Sinless perfectionism isn’t spiritual maturity, it’s spiritual denial, dressed in a borrowed robe it hasn’t earned. The gospel doesn’t say you can’t sin anymore, it says Christ died for the sins you still grieve over, and gave you the Spirit to kill them daily.

So beware any theology that neuters your cross, silences your groaning, and pretends the war is over before the resurrection. The blood bought your freedom, but the battlefield remains.

There have been four major theories about how to interpret Romans 7 (see Contextual Insights for Rom. 7:7-25)
Paul is speaking of himself (autobiographical)
Paul is speaking as a representative of all mankind (representative)
Paul is speaking of Adam’s experience (Theodore of Mopsuetia)
Paul is speaking of Israel’s experience

In many ways Romans 7:1-6 functions like Genesis 3. It shows the downward pull of rebellion even to those who are acquainted with God. Knowledge cannot free fallen humanity; only God’s grace, only a new heart, a new mind, and a new spirit can do that (the New Covenant, cf. Jer. 31:31-34; Ezek. 36:26-27).

And even then, there is an ongoing spiritual struggle (cf. Rom. 6:12,19; 1 Cor. 6:10-19; Eph. 6:10-18)!
Utley.

ROMANS 7)!

J.

118

YEZZZZZZZZ! 100% REALLY @Johann
He is speaking about when He was under the law as a pharasee->> In Romans 7
and then in Romans 8 is the cure


..I’ll get to the rest later..I saw that and thought I should respond.

Anything else you are implying im saying..I have to look at..but not right now
peace and blessings

119

Grace and shalom to you and family @Corlove13.

J.

120

One question at a time, no carpet bombing @Corlove13!

Peace and grace to you.

Johann.

121

Ok this is one of the best explanations I’ve heard on Romans 7.

Let me know what you think. I was very pleased listening to the first part. Where He mentions

Rhetoricical
Impersonation
Adam- sense we were all in Adam

It make sense of the present tense and reminds me to reread the book before I respond


122

Shalom.

Johann.