Rosangela, I agree. A sinful suggestion becomes a sinful thought when we own it or cherish it. And even though sinful suggestions enter our mind it doesn't mean we are guilty of cherishing sinful thoughts, right?

Jesus was tempted in all points, that is, sinful suggstions entered His mind in the same way they enter the minds of born again believers. Do you agree that all such sinful suggestions revealed His potential, as a human being, to sin? If so, do you also agree He never consented to own or cherish them, therefore, He was sinless and guiltless of them?

And, if you can agree to these things, can you also agree that the same things apply to Spirit-led, born again believers? In other words, do you believe that when sinful suggestions enter their mind that it reveals their potential to sin? and that just because they enter their minds they are not, if they resist them like Jesus did, guilty of them?

quote:

---

But you can only discover that you have a sinful trait of character when you verify that the unholy suggestion pleases you.

---

Are we guilty of sinning if the sinful suggestion is pleasing (like overindulging cake and ice cream) so long as we resist it, in spite of how we think and feel about it?

Old Tom:You see the differenct between my saying your statement is meaningless and your view is meaningless, correct?

Mike:No, Tom, I don’t.

Tom:Ok, I'll try to clarify this then. I didn't write, "Your view is meaningless" or "Your post is meaningless". I wrote that your sentence did not convey meaningful information. You wrote that no born again believe has unknown sinful traits of character. But you don't believe there is such a thing as an unknown sinful trait of character, so the sentence you wrote was confusing -- it did not convey meaningful information.

Mike:So, please refrain from using derogatory words like “meaningless” when referring to my posts. Thank you.

Tom:The sentence was meaningless, for the reason I explained. Not the theory. Not the post. Just the sentence. It was meaningless in the sense that it did not convey any userful information. That's all I meant in the criticism of your sentence. Nothing more than that.

Mike:Even if you think you understand what I mean there is no good that can come from you critiquing my way of expressing myself. You are not my English or grammar teacher, right? Therefore, keep all such comments to yourself. Okay?

Tom:The reason for my comment was not to critique your grammar. I let all that stuff slide by. It was only for the purpose of discussing the concept. What you wrote was confusing the issue. It's confusing for you to write that born-again believers cannot have unknown sinful traits of character because the normal inference from such a statement is that you believe there is such a thing as unknown sinful traits of character. But you don't. Hence the confusion.

Mike:Are you saying we agree on the differences between inherited and cultivated traits of character?

Tom:The language used is a bit different than I would use, but as far as I understand the concepts you are conveying I would say that yes, I agree with you on this point.

Mike:Are you saying we agree on the state and status of dormant defective traits of character?

Tom:I'm not sure. I've asked a couple of times if you agree that Christ had these things, but I haven't noticed that you responded to this question. If you will respond to this question, I can answer yours.

Mike:Do you agree that character is developed by habitually thinking, feeling, speaking, and behaving in ways contrary to our conscience and convictions?

Tom:Our character is developed by our habitual thinking, feeling, speaking and behaving. This is irrespective as to whether or not these things are contrary to our conscience or convictions. That is, regardles of what our conscience or convictions tell us, we are developing character.

Mike:Or, do you believe it is possible, as born again believers, to develop certain sinful character traits without realizing they are morally wrong? If so, please name a few (with inspired quotes, please).

Tom:It depends on how one defines "sinful character traits".

Mike:Which one of the following fruits of the flesh do you believe we can develop and/or possess, as Spirit-led born again believers, endowed with spiritual eye salve and discernment, without realizing it?

Tom:It's possible for us to think we are rich in our understanding of the Gospel and God's character when we are really poor. If we have a warped view of God's character, then we cannot help but represent Him incorrectly. For all of us, this is a work in progress.

Tom, yes, Jesus inherited dormant defective traits of character. But, unlike us, He eventually became aware of all of them. Remember, a dormant defect is an inherited trait of character we either do not know about or do not choose to cultivate.

Is the Laodicean condition an example of a Spirit-led, born again believer who unwittingly develops and possesses unknown sinful traits of character? Is being willingly ignorant and self-deceived and self-serving an example of a born again believer possessing unknown character flaws and defects and imperfections?

Which one of the fruits of the flesh, that Paul listed in Galatians, can a Spirit-led, born again believer, who is walking in the Spirit and mind of the new man, who is actively and aggressively partaking of the divine nature, which one of the fruits of the flesh can such a person develop and/or possess without realizing it is morally wrong?

What is a sinful trait of character? As I understand it, a sinful trait of character is an inherited trait that we ourselves cultivate or turn into character by habitually thinking, feeling, speaking, and behaving in ways that contradict our conscience and convictions.

If it isn't the result of violating our conscience and convictions, that is, violating what we believe is morally right and wrong, then such things fall under the category of sins of ignorance, which, of course, do not count against us in judgment or character.

Character is the result of choice, not chance. We cannot ignorantly develop character. Character is who we are. It's our thoughts and feelings combined, our normal way of being and behaving. It's the result of the conscious choices we make as we react and respond to the things that affect us on a daily basis.

So again, please name an example, with quotes, of an unknown character defect that a born again believer, who is walking in the Spirit and mind of the new man, who is actively and aggressively partaking of the divine nature, can develop and/or possess without realizing it is morally wrong.

Tom, please do not give up so quickly. Surely you can name a character defect that a Spirit-led, born again believer can cultivate and/or possess without realizing it is morally wrong, that is, one that isn't considered a sin of ignorance in the eyes of God, one that He winks at until He can reveal it to them.

In your mind what is the difference between a known sin (moral defect) and a sin of ignorance (intellectual defect)in the case of born again believers who are actively and agressively partaking of the divine nature? Can you name some examples?

In your mind what is the difference between a known sinful character trait and what you call an "unknown" one in the case of Spirit-led, born again believers? Can you name some examples?

Who is responsible for a spiritually connected, born again believer not being aware of his or her "unknown" sinful traits of character? If they are walking in the Spirit and mind of the new man how or why is it that they can be ignorant of a moral (versus intellectual) imperfection?

I assume you agree that no born again believer, who is abiding in Christ, can develop and/or possess one of the fruits of the flesh that Paul listed in Galatians without realizing it. Am I correct?

Yes, a lukewarm Christian is not a converted, connected, born again believer in the eyes of God. They may have experienced the miracle of rebirth at one time but obviously they did not maintain it.

What do you believe? Are lukewarm Laodiceans considered born again in the eyes of God? I say "in the eyes of God" because we as humans cannot make such judgments about our fellow humans.

Tom, please be as thorough as you normally are when answering these questions. Thank you.

Mike:Tom, please do not give up so quickly. Surely you can name a character defect that a Spirit-led, born again believer can cultivate and/or possess without realizing it is morally wrong, that is, one that isn't considered a sin of ignorance in the eyes of God, one that He winks at until He can reveal it to them.

Tom:You're asking for an unknown character defect which is not a sin of ignorance. But all character defects are sins, and if they are unknown, they are sins of ignorance. So it seems like you're asking me to name a sin of ignorance which is not a sin of ignorance.

Mike:In your mind what is the difference between a known sin (moral defect) and a sin of ignorance (intellectual defect)in the case of born again believers who are actively and agressively partaking of the divine nature? Can you name some examples?

Tom:The difference would be one is known and one is unknown. Any sin of ignorance would be an example.

Mike:In your mind what is the difference between a known sinful character trait and what you call an "unknown" one in the case of Spirit-led, born again believers? Can you name some examples?

Tom:Any sin of ignorance would be an example of an unknown sin. An unknown character defect would be one where this sin of ignorance is a part of the character.

Mike:Who is responsible for a spiritually connected, born again believer not being aware of his or her "unknown" sinful traits of character? If they are walking in the Spirit and mind of the new man how or why is it that they can be ignorant of a moral (versus intellectual) imperfection?

Tom:I'm not sure quite what you're asking, especially the moral vs. intellectual part. Ellen White used to pray, "Lord, show me the worse of my case." David prayed that the Lord search his heart. I think the answer to your question as to who is responsible for not being aware is both God and man. God is responsible to show us things as we are ready, and we are responsible to be open to what He shows us.

Mike:I assume you agree that no born again believer, who is abiding in Christ, can develop and/or possess one of the fruits of the flesh that Paul listed in Galatians without realizing it. Am I correct?

Tom:Selfishness would cover everything, wouldn't it? So it seems to me your question is tantamount to asking if one can be selfish without realizing it. If so, I would say yes, one can be selfish without realizing it.

Mike:Yes, a lukewarm Christian is not a converted, connected, born again believer in the eyes of God. They may have experienced the miracle of rebirth at one time but obviously they did not maintain it.

Tom:I don't think this is obvious.

Mike:What do you believe? Are lukewarm Laodiceans considered born again in the eyes of God? I say "in the eyes of God" because we as humans cannot make such judgments about our fellow humans.

Tom, please be as thorough as you normally are when answering these questions. Thank you.

Tom: I was going to be briefer, in light of Mark's suggestion, but decided to go back into verbose mode. The Laodecian question would be a very interesting one to pursue as a topic. I think I'll post it.

Tom, sense you believe "selfishness" counts as an unknown character defect at what point is a born again believer "free from sin"? When is the old man dead? See Romans 6.

In your opinion, can a Spirit-led, born again believer, endowed with spiritual discernment, be guilty of verbally abusing their spouse or children without realizing it?

Also, do you see any difference between a born again believer who is abiding in Christ and one who isn't?

Finally, again, can a born again believer who is partaking of the divine nature be guilty of any of the fruits of the flesh Paul listed in Galatians without realizing it? If so, please name one of the ones Paul listed. I'm asking specifically about Paul's list here. Thank you.

Mike:Tom, sense you believe "selfishness" counts as an unknown character defect at what point is a born again believer "free from sin"? When is the old man dead? See Romans 6.

Tom:One if freed from sin when one believes in Christ. When one is reconciled to God through faith in Christ one is simultaneously reconciled to God's law, which is the transcript of God's character.

Mike:In your opinion, can a Spirit-led, born again believer, endowed with spiritual discernment, be guilty of verbally abusing their spouse or children without realizing it?

Tom:It depends on how loosely one defines "verbally abusing". It's certainly possible to hurt someone with one's words without realizing it. We've seen evidence of that on this very forum.

Mike:Also, do you see any difference between a born again believer who is abiding in Christ and one who isn't?

Tom:What does it mean to be a born again believer who is not abiding in Christ?

Mike:Finally, again, can a born again believer who is partaking of the divine nature be guilty of any of the fruits of the flesh Paul listed in Galatians without realizing it? If so, please name one of the ones Paul listed. I'm asking specifically about Paul's list here. Thank you.

Tom:As I stated, I think all of them would be covered by selfishness. Why is the particular list in Galatians important to you? The law of God is what defines sin. That law is covered by two main principles, love to God and love to one's neighbor. It is possible, IMO, to not love God with one's whole heart and not be aware of it.