The second list is of kinds of people.
The second list is of kinds of people.
This distinction may be observed in the following:
The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil . (Matthew 13:41)
I realize there may be overlap between the sins of the flesh and the sins of our personality, as in the case of "sexual immorality," for example. However, I think there is enough distinction between these two sources of sin that we should give some thought to the matter.
It indeed is true that if a believer yields continually to an alien spirit, such as sexual lust, that spirit will become part of their personality. Then, when they appear in the resurrection after death, they will be seen as "sexual lust." They have practiced "evil" while in their body and shall be judged accordingly. Their home is the Lake of Fire.
Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. (Daniel 12:2)
Do the sources of sin follow us after death. Also, does God deal with them differently?
These are important, practical issues, aren't they?
It may be a fact that the evil in our personality, unless God has granted us deliverance, shall follow us after death. We then will be sent into Hell or some other room in the Land of Darkness; or possibly our spirit will be returned to earth and wander about in dry places, seeking an unprotected body to invade in which we can satisfy our cravings.
We noted above the eight personalities who make their home in the Lake of Fire.
I do not understand how we can maintain that once a church-goer dies, sin no longer is a problem? What about the man who buried his talent? What about the people who are placed in the Lake of Fire?
I do not say there will not be an opportunity for a sinful personality to be instructed and transformed after death. But this would be true only for a person who, for one reason or another, never had been confronted with their sinful personality or shown what to do about it.
Paul goes into some detail concerning the second source of sin, the sins of the flesh:
I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. (Romans 7:15)
If my understanding is correct, there are two forces operating in the passage above. There is "I," whom I would judge to be Paul's mind and heart, his soul. Although Paul's mind and heart no doubt are of his old sinful nature, yet there is dwelling in Paul's flesh cravings he does not recognize or approve of. We can understand from this that some good remains in the midst of the adamic rebellion.
For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. (7:18)
(the following passages are adopted from: The Third Day Has Begun)
From my point of view, the New International Version does us a great disservice in its translation of Romans 7:18:
For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature . For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out.
"In my sinful nature" should be "in my flesh."
Since I am not a Greek scholar, there may be some linguistic reason why "in my flesh" can properly be translated "in my sinful nature." If so, I stand corrected.
However, since in this essay I am making an important distinction between the sins that proceed from cravings, "spirits" (perhaps), dwelling in our flesh, and then the sins that proceed from our personality, from what we are and not from alien spirits dwelling in our body, to change sarki (Greek: the flesh) into sinful nature is an unfortunate substitution.
Next Part Notice also:;