Sentences with phrase «nature without sin»

Well when you give your life to God you have his nature, a nature without sin, you can't sin anymore because he lives in you and there is no sin in him and if he be in you, there is no sin in you because he destroyed sin once and for all, and you are pure just like he is pure; thats having fellowship with him because you are now the same.

Not exact matches

I've often been told that the reason I have a problem with the idea of people suffering eternally without the chance to be saved is because my sense of justice has been perverted by my sin nature, that it only seems unfair to me because «God's ways are higher than our ways.»

The reason Christ was without sin, is because the broken nature of fallen humanity is passed from the father to the child.

Is original sin really, without any distinction a person's corrupt nature, substance, and essence?

this applied not only when he was originally created by God pure and holy and without sin, but it also applies to the way we have that nature now after the fall.

This passage contains the combination of Jesus» nature (as sinless) and role (as sacrifice) that is central to the traditional idea of Jesus as Savior: he was a person without sin, and by offering himself up in our place as a perfect sacrifice he has secured salvation for those who join themselves to him by faith.

I think that without a sin nature, Jesus is not less human than we are, but more.

Sin is not possible without freedom, but it does not necessarily follow from it.4 The issue in Niebuhr's doctrine of sin is not man's finiteness in nature, but his abortive attempts to escape that finiteneSin is not possible without freedom, but it does not necessarily follow from it.4 The issue in Niebuhr's doctrine of sin is not man's finiteness in nature, but his abortive attempts to escape that finitenesin is not man's finiteness in nature, but his abortive attempts to escape that finiteness.

Some theologians put it more strongly than this and say that we are born with a human nature such that, without the action of God's grace, we are bound to be dominated by the motivations that lead to sinning.

Well, as an Atheist, I feel compelled through my instinctual nature as a social primate to clarify this: according to Christians, Mary was supposedly born without sin (the «immaculate conception»), otherwise god wouldn't have «gotten it on» with her.

It is a life without the nature of death and of sin, hence without sorrow, pain, anxiety, care, misery.

Therein is based our faith on Jesus Christ, in that we CAN NOT (in our sinful nature) obey the whole law of God (or even the first law, imho) without Him, and with Him even when we stumble, he will set us back on the path, because he has defeated sin and death and has won for us a victory.

We are flawed in our nature, without a doubt, but sin has not completely destroyed us and, thanks to Jesus Christ and all He has done for us, the grace we have lost can be restored again through faith in Him and through Baptism.

So the offence of sin could be forgone by God's free will, but the damage done to our nature and the restoration of God's glory in the glorification of man could not be achieved without real healing and a commensurate price being paid.

It is Christ Jesus himself, the God - man who both perfected human nature and perfectly exemplified its perfection, «one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.»

Nevertheless, if Christ's humanity did not diminish his divine nature as being the Son of God and without sin, it follows that human authorship of the Bible need not diminish its divine nature as being the Word of God and without error.

[2] This condition has been characterized in many ways, ranging from something as insignificant as a slight deficiency, or a tendency toward sin yet without collective guilt, referred to as a «sin nature», to something as drastic as total depravity or automatic guilt of all humans through collective guilt.

If Jesus of Nazareth is truly / fully human as well as truly / fully Divine and WITHOUT SIN, then * sin * can not be intrinsic to our human nature; but must be an aberratiSIN, then * sin * can not be intrinsic to our human nature; but must be an aberratisin * can not be intrinsic to our human nature; but must be an aberration.

One is supposed to be cast into belief without reason, by a miracle, and from then on to swim in it as in the brightest and least ambiguous of elements: even a glance towards land, even the thought that one perhaps exists for something else as well as swimming, even the slightest impulse of our amphibious nature — is sin!

pat - «Similarly many environmental activists believe that man's influence is a form of sin and nature (Gaea) will soon strike back...» You can phrase the position of a fictitious group any way you want of course, without rebuttal, because they don't really exist, though there are people who fit the description — especially if by «many» you mean more than three — but the more accurate reality is most of the human beings you would lump under the rubric «environmentalist» would more accurately be described as believing that short - sighted and greedy human attempts at total control and domination and complete disregard for the healthof the environment have gotten us out of balance with what was an interlocking web of balanced and dynamic systems, and would appear to have unbalanced many of those systems as well, including the still poorly understood cycles of climate; or weather, as we laymen call it.