Tom, I don't believe it is a sin to deliberately choose not to abide in Jesus, to consciously reject the wooing influence of the Holy Spirit. What I believe is sinning follows this choice so closely that it appears to be simultaneous, but in reality they are two separate steps. The sequential relationship between faith and works is similar. Neglecting to abide in Jesus in not a sin, but it certainly and instantly results in sinning.

People abide in Jesus by faith and through faith. Such faith results in "righteousness and true holiness."

Your idea:
1.Person deliberately rejects the Holy Spirit, to discontinue abiding in Jesus, but this OK (i.e., not sin).
2.Instantly the person sins.

You say believe abide in Jesus by faith and through faith. Therefore step one above is tantamount to unbelief. Therefore you don't think unbelief is a sin.

Yes, “sinful flesh” as a synonym of “sinful nature,” changes in some aspects – that is, the mind, the character, which can be transformed. As I said previously, some aspects don’t change until Christ’s coming – like the need for the enmity against Satan being supernaturally implanted.

So you understand "sinful flesh" to be referring to the mind? And the character? So how is it that Christ took our sinful flesh?

No one abiding in Jesus abides in unbelief. They must first unwittingly neglect or willfully reject abiding in Jesus and then immediately thereafter they sin.

I think you missed the point. Of course they don't abide in unbelief. Did you think this was the point?

The point is you said that they abide by faith. Therefore to "unabide," to disconnect, takes an act of unbelief.



Willfully rejecting the Holy Spirit is an act of unbelief.

I understand "sinful flesh," or "sinful nature," or "fallen nature" (IOW, what Christ took) as including both the mind - with the character and the will - and the body. What happened in Christ's case is that the sinful flesh or nature was united with the divine nature, and the result of this was that Christ had the divine mind, a mind in harmony with God - not the sinful mind we are born with.

In Christ's case, the sinful flesh which He took was united with the divine nature, so that Christ had a mind in harmony with God, not the sinful mind we are born with. This is what you're saying, right?

What about the sinful flesh itself?(i.e., the sinful flesh which Christ took). Was it different than our sinful flesh?

Do you mean His body?
No, His body was like ours.

Christ took our sinful nature upon His sinless nature. What does that mean? If I'm understanding you correctly, you understand this to mean that Christ took a sinful nature which was different than our sinful nature, and took that upon His sinless nature. This different sinful nature was the same thing as "sinful flesh." So Christ's sinful flesh was different than our sinful flesh as well.

Christ's taking sinful flesh meant that He had a body that could become tired like ours. Other than that, it had no impact on His ability to be tempted. Specifically, Christ could not be tempted internally. Except when Satan was tempting him (or some other being), Christ wasn't being tempted at all. So Christ was tempted far less than we are.

Another difference in Christ's temptations and ours is that Christ never felt a desire to do the things He was tempted to do, except physically. That is, Christ could be tempted to eat bread, and that was a temptation because He was hungry. But that's the extent to which His temptations were like ours.