Is it better to have no awareness of sin?

[Deuteronomy]

...do children have the law written on their hearts?* And did Jesus say, become like little children?

Hello again Runningman, as I said above, I believe that God will judge the unbeliever on the basis of what he/she both knows and understands of the law, even if the only law that they possess is the one that was written on their hearts from birth by God. On the other hand, those who possess the law (even if it is just the law that is written on all of our hearts), but do not know/cannot understand it (e.g. unborn babies/infants/toddlers/the mentally infirmed) will not be judged and condemned like the rest who do. (so yes*, babies already have a moral code from God written on their hearts, but their minds are not developed enough to make heads or tails of it, so making either a negative or a positive moral choice because of it is impossible for them)

Since it appears that God will judge/condemn unbelievers on the basis of what they know AND understand of sin, NOT on the basis of what they do not know and/or do not understand, this means that the unborn, infants & toddlers, and the severally mentally infirmed, will not be judged or condemned by Him, since their minds are not developed enough to know/understand/act upon such things.

Also (just to be clear), while we are all born in the tarnished/fallen image of our sinful progenitors (with a sinful "nature"), the Bible tells us that God will judge/condemn unbelievers on the basis of their ~own~ sins, not because of our first parents' sin, and not on the basis of our sinful "nature".

God bless you!!

~Deut

 

[Pilgrimshope]

That’s interesting and I agree with some of that, but Jesus said He came to make the blind see and those who see blind. Blind is equal to not being aware of sin and seeing is equal to being aware of sin.

I think Jesus told people to repent because they could see their sin, but if they repented then they wouldn’t have a reason to see their sin.

I’m not saying we shouldn’t at any point ever know about our sins, but at some point we’re forgiven and it’s time to move on from them and, if possible, become blind to their existence.

So what’s your take on what Jesus meant when He said this in John 9?

John 9:41 NASB
41Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now that you maintain, ‘We see,’ your sin remains.

“That’s interesting and I agree with some of that, but Jesus said He came to make the blind see and those who see blind. Blind is equal to not being aware of sin and seeing is equal to being aware of sin.”

Blindness is based biblically on the ot prophecies of God saying he would blind israel to the messiah. See when we hear what Jesus is saying it’s always rooted in the ot prophets Jesus was fulfilling all those things they foretold

Blindness is to see Jesus and not understand who he is a blind man recognized and accepted him. The blind man saw and perceived Jesus

“Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him? And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that taketh with thee. And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him. ( this man was blind but now saw )


And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see;

and that they which see might be made blind. And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also? Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.”
‭‭John‬ ‭9:35-41‬ ‭KJV‬‬

you see they were blind to this

“I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.”
‭‭John‬ ‭8:24‬ ‭KJV‬‬

To believe in Jesus as he presents himself is to see and perceive , to hear Jesus and reject what he’s claiming of himself is to be blind.

Israel was purposely made blind because of thier rebellion and rejection of Gods word they were made that the authority of Israel established by the law , would reject Jesus and. BRing the ot prophets words into fruition

“and not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: but their minds were blinded:

for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.”
‭‭2 Corinthians‬ ‭3:13-14, 16‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭11:7‬ ‭KJV‬‬

in order for Jesus to be rejected and crucified they had to reject and crucify him. It was the plan for the stone the builders rejected to become the head stone of the corner in order to reach all nations because the ot had isolated Israel alone and left out all nations

Jesus is where Jew and gentile become one people from all nations because of the rejection and crucifixion of Christ Gods ot prophecies always are sure to come to pass if israel
Had accepted Jesus the gentiles would have not been included into him

the blindness of man is to not hear and believe the gospel of our lord , and the sight of man is to hear and believe the lord and his word

imagine brother what the works would be like if there was no discernment between good and evil imagine how much evil would be done if man knew no difference we would just be driven 100 percent by the lusts of our flesh whatever we wanted and felt like doing would be irrelevant evil would always endure if man didn’t know the difference

 

[pottersclay]

John 9:41 NASB
41Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now that you maintain, ‘We see,’ your sin remains.

Jesus of Nazareth, as far as I can tell, basically said if you aren’t aware of your sin then you don’t have any sin.

Consider the following passage:

Matthew 18:5-7 NASB
5And whoever receives one such child in My name, receives Me;
6but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it is better for him that a heavy millstone be hung around his neck, and that he be drowned in the depths of the sea.

7“Woe to the world because of its stumbling blocks! For it is inevitable that stumbling blocks come; but woe to the person through whom the stumbling block comes!

Jesus said we shouldn’t cause someone to sin. One of the ways to cause someone to sin is by making them aware of sin.

So my question is does God actually want us to be aware of sin? If yes, why?

I believe here jesus is talking about decipleship and correction.
If a person had no ideal that it was sinful to hate your enemy lets say (common among most people) but the truth was told that the commandment to love ....was given.
Then if the correction was received but not followed you are guilty of that sin......follow me.
Hard to explain here.
If a person teaches sinful practices knowing they are sinful to someone unawares.....lets say it will not end well.

The Pharisees added to the word of GOD to control the masses. Especially when it came to the law.
Jesus was stirring the pot lets say ....using the teaching for conviction.

When we are called to deciple another or others its very important that we give full council for we are held accountable.

 

[Gideon300]

.



It's far more likely the letter to Hebrews conveys information intended for the
posterity of the people to whom the prophets were sent, viz: Jesus' countrymen.

• Heb 1:1-2 . . In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets
at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to
us, by His son.

The author-- unknown by either name or gender --was apparently a Jew
because the pronouns "us" and "our" associate him with the ancestors to whom
the prophets were sent.

NOTE: One of the hardest epistles for Gentiles to figure out in the New
Testament is the letter to Hebrews; primarily because it wasn't written to
them. The target audience is the author's fellow Jews; especially those
trained in Moses' law. Gentiles tend to have the rather bad habit of
Christianizing the letter to Hebrews and thus clouding its intent.
_

In Christ there is neither Jew not Gentile. Hebrews has been and is a great blessing to me.

 

[Gideon300]

.



The Levitical system may be obsolete, but it has a long ways to go yet
before it comes to a permanent end. During the millennium, the Levitical
system will once again be up and running and on duty in a brand new
Temple at Jerusalem. (Ex 40:12-13 & Jer 33:17-22)

The thing is; God says that the Levitical system will survive for as long as
the cosmos exists; so He cannot cancel the ritual sacrifices until today's
cosmos is destroyed beyond recovery.

FAQ: Will today's Christians be required to offer sacrifices in the new
Temple?

REPLY: No, they are under a new system whose sacrifice is human rather
than animals.

FAQ: For whom then will be the Levitical system?

REPLY: Quite a few Jews will survive the time of Jacob's trouble (a.k.a. the
tribulation). The Levitical system will be for their use-- how long a time I
don't know, but eventually those survivors will have to make the switch to
the new covenant described by Jer 31:31-34 & Ezek 36:24-27 or risk getting
themselves culled from the herd when the millennium comes to an end and the new
cosmos comes into being.
_

I don't know about these things. I don't know how "Jacob's trouble" could be worse than the destruction of the temple by Rome or the holocaust.

 

[NotmebutHim]

I hope I'm sticking to the topic of this thread, but here's my take on the awareness of sin:

I believe that when Adam and Eve were first created, they were already "sinners" in the technical sense. In other words, they already "fell short" of God's glory (Romans 3:23). I say this because ANYTHING that God creates is by nature and default NOT EQUAL to Him. And one of the definitions of sin is "missing the mark". Therefore, Adam and Eve already "missed the mark" of God's perfect standard, even prior to the fall.

The thing was, though, is that they were not aware of this shortcoming prior to eating from the tree of knowledge of good & evil. The Scripture says that when they ate, their "eyes were opened" and they realized they were naked. Whereas prior to this, according to Scripture, they were naked yet "were not ashamed". Adam and Eve were "innocent" prior to the fall. But that doesn't necessarily mean that they were "sinless". It's just that God didn't impute sin to them or hold them accountable for it before they ate from the tree. That's one reason why He said that "in the day you eat of it, you shall surely die".

Once their eyes had been opened to good and evil, they were subject to God's perfect standard. But they couldn't keep it, which is why He warned them to not eat from the tree or else they would die. And this is why Christ had to come, to redeem mankind and to deal with sin completely.

$0.02

 

[BillG]

I hope I'm sticking to the topic of this thread, but here's my take on the awareness of sin:

I believe that when Adam and Eve were first created, they were already "sinners" in the technical sense. In other words, they already "fell short" of God's glory (Romans 3:23). I say this because ANYTHING that God creates is by nature and default NOT EQUAL to Him. And one of the definitions of sin is "missing the mark". Therefore, Adam and Eve already "missed the mark" of God's perfect standard, even prior to the fall.

The thing was, though, is that they were not aware of this shortcoming prior to eating from the tree of knowledge of good & evil. The Scripture says that when they ate, their "eyes were opened" and they realized they were naked. Whereas prior to this, according to Scripture, they were naked yet "were not ashamed". Adam and Eve were "innocent" prior to the fall. But that doesn't necessarily mean that they were "sinless". It's just that God didn't impute sin to them or hold them accountable for it before they ate from the tree. That's one reason why He said that "in the day you eat of it, you shall surely die".

Once their eyes had been opened to good and evil, they were subject to God's perfect standard. But they couldn't keep it, which is why He warned them to not eat from the tree or else they would die. And this is why Christ had to come, to redeem mankind and to deal with sin completely.

$0.02

Interesting take but I have to say that I don't agree with this.

Purley based on

Genesis 1:26-27
26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

With regards to Romans

Romans 3:23
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

This does not say or indicate that they had already fallen short.
They hadn't already fallen when God made them.

They fell short when they fell foul of the following.

Genesis 2:9
9 And out of the ground the Lord God made every tree grow that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Genesis 2:16-17
16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”

We have the tree of life, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

They had the choice to eat of every tree in the garden.
Does that include the tree of Life?

They used their free will God had gave them to eat from the tree of evil.
That is when they fell short.

Then we find

Genesis 3:22-23
22 Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”— 23 therefore the Lord God sent him out of the garden of Eden to till the ground from which he was taken.

As a result God drove them out of the garden before they could eat from the tree of life because if he did not then they would have remained in that sinful condition for ever.

I believe God knew they would sin, and as a result a plan was already in place to redeem mankind for those in Jesus.

His death, burial and resurrection.

As a result we eat from him who is the tree of life.

 

[posthuman]

John 9:41 NASB
41Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now that you maintain, ‘We see,’ your sin remains.

Jesus of Nazareth, as far as I can tell, basically said if you aren’t aware of your sin then you don’t have any sin.

Consider the following passage:

Matthew 18:5-7 NASB
5And whoever receives one such child in My name, receives Me;
6but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it is better for him that a heavy millstone be hung around his neck, and that he be drowned in the depths of the sea.

7“Woe to the world because of its stumbling blocks! For it is inevitable that stumbling blocks come; but woe to the person through whom the stumbling block comes!

Jesus said we shouldn’t cause someone to sin. One of the ways to cause someone to sin is by making them aware of sin.

So my question is does God actually want us to be aware of sin? If yes, why?

Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when He had found him, He said to him, “Do you believe in the Son of God?”​

He answered and said, “Who is He, Lord, that I may believe in Him?”​

And Jesus said to him, “You have both seen Him and it is He who is talking with you.”​

Then he said, “Lord, I believe!” And he worshiped Him.​

And Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may be made blind.”​

Then some of the Pharisees who were with Him heard these words, and said to Him, “Are we blind also?”​

Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now you say, ‘We see.’ Therefore your sin remains."
(John 9:35-41)

​

when Christ says this to them it is in a certain context - He is speaking of a certain guilt.
the context is the deity of Christ -- He has given them many proofs and sure signs that He is God.
it is their sin of willful unbelief that remains in them, because they know He is the Messiah but refuse to accept Him.

the healed man worshipped Him, calling Him Adonai.
the pharisees saw that.

 

[Runningman]

Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when He had found him, He said to him, “Do you believe in the Son of God?”​

He answered and said, “Who is He, Lord, that I may believe in Him?”​

And Jesus said to him, “You have both seen Him and it is He who is talking with you.”​

Then he said, “Lord, I believe!” And he worshiped Him.​

And Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may be made blind.”​

Then some of the Pharisees who were with Him heard these words, and said to Him, “Are we blind also?”​

Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now you say, ‘We see.’ Therefore your sin remains."​

(John 9:35-41)​

​

​

when Christ says this to them it is in a certain context - He is speaking of a certain guilt.
the context is the deity of Christ -- He has given them many proofs and sure signs that He is God.
it is their sin of willful unbelief that remains in them, because they know He is the Messiah but refuse to accept Him.

the healed man worshipped Him, calling Him Adonai.
the pharisees saw that.

The Pharisees, or anyone probably, wouldn’t have recognized lack of faith in Jesus as a valid sin. As far as I can tell, the comparison isn’t the same.

This person below is not blind, he sees that Jesus is the Son of God,:

“Then he said, “Lord, I believe!” And he worshiped Him.”

But then later Jesus said that seeing is equal to being aware of sins. Believing in Jesus as Son of God is not being aware of sin, so I am sure Jesus wasn’t referring to a specific sin.

I believe Jesus was referring to all sin in general when He said “If you were blind you would have no sin.”

 

[Gideon300]

I hope I'm sticking to the topic of this thread, but here's my take on the awareness of sin:

I believe that when Adam and Eve were first created, they were already "sinners" in the technical sense. In other words, they already "fell short" of God's glory (Romans 3:23). I say this because ANYTHING that God creates is by nature and default NOT EQUAL to Him. And one of the definitions of sin is "missing the mark". Therefore, Adam and Eve already "missed the mark" of God's perfect standard, even prior to the fall.

The thing was, though, is that they were not aware of this shortcoming prior to eating from the tree of knowledge of good & evil. The Scripture says that when they ate, their "eyes were opened" and they realized they were naked. Whereas prior to this, according to Scripture, they were naked yet "were not ashamed". Adam and Eve were "innocent" prior to the fall. But that doesn't necessarily mean that they were "sinless". It's just that God didn't impute sin to them or hold them accountable for it before they ate from the tree. That's one reason why He said that "in the day you eat of it, you shall surely die".

Once their eyes had been opened to good and evil, they were subject to God's perfect standard. But they couldn't keep it, which is why He warned them to not eat from the tree or else they would die. And this is why Christ had to come, to redeem mankind and to deal with sin completely.

$0.02

I'm not sure that I agree. We don't consider animals to be sinners and they sure are not like God. My understanding is that God imposed just one, very simple, rule on Adam and Eve. Don't eat from the knowledge tree. Disobedience is the root of sin. (Romans 5:19). Until Adam disobeyed, there was no problem.

Adam was not complete, that was the issue in Eden. He could have eaten from the tree of Life and be completed in that way. Instead, he rebelled and chose the way of death. Was Adam conscious of sin from then on? Yes. He tried to cover up and hide from God.

 

[Runningman]

I don't know about these things. I don't know how "Jacob's trouble" could be worse than the destruction of the temple by Rome or the holocaust.

Matthew 24:21
21For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

 

[Runningman]

I believe here jesus is talking about decipleship and correction.
If a person had no ideal that it was sinful to hate your enemy lets say (common among most people) but the truth was told that the commandment to love ....was given.
Then if the correction was received but not followed you are guilty of that sin......follow me.
Hard to explain here.
If a person teaches sinful practices knowing they are sinful to someone unawares.....lets say it will not end well.

The Pharisees added to the word of GOD to control the masses. Especially when it came to the law.
Jesus was stirring the pot lets say ....using the teaching for conviction.

When we are called to deciple another or others its very important that we give full council for we are held accountable.

Well there is different kinds of love. When we “love” our enemies we do so in a social or moral sense, but that doesn’t rule out they can’t be hated in other ways. There’s people I love in the sense I would help them if they needed food, clothing, shelter, medical treatment. However, as far as their opinions go, their motivations, their attitude, their personality, even their laugh or smile I utterly detest and I don’t see where that’s a sin.

That doesn’t mean I’ll be mean to them or anything, but it doesn’t mean I need to respect them, validate them, or give them any assistance outside of helping them if they are in genuine need.

The. Bible actually tells us how to treat our enemies: we don’t roll the red carpet out for them. That isn’t the kind of love the Bible teaches for enemies.

Like you said we need to give full council when teaching the word and it isn’t for the intellectually or spiritual lazy person. It definitely requires a lot of energy just trying to teach definitions of Biblical words like love for example.

 

[SomeDisciple]

41Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now that you maintain, ‘We see,’ your sin remains.

Jesus of Nazareth, as far as I can tell, basically said if you aren’t aware of your sin then you don’t have any sin.

That is a gross distortion of the scripture. I've heard this preached from a pulpit before too, but it's wrong.

Jesus said we shouldn’t cause someone to sin. One of the ways to cause someone to sin is by making them aware of sin.

Also a gross distortion of scripture and truth.

35Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when He had found him, He said to him, “Do you believe in the Son of [g]God?”
36He answered and said, “Who is He, Lord, that I may believe in Him?”
37And Jesus said to him, “You have both seen Him and it is He who is talking with you.”
38Then he said, “Lord, I believe!” And he worshiped Him.
39And Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may be made blind.”
The man that Jesus healed was literally blind, and Jesus gave him his literal sight. But the more important thing is, the man understood that Jesus was the Son of God because of the miracle. That is why he could "see".
40Then some of the Pharisees who were with Him heard these words, and said to Him, “Are we blind also?”
41Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now you say, ‘We see.’ Therefore your sin remains.
THIS SAYING IN V41 has the same meaning as the following saying in Luke 5.

Luke 5
30But their scribes and Pharisees murmured against his disciples, saying, Why do ye eat and drink with publicans and sinners? 31And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick. 32I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Is Jesus saying "Oh, you pharisees are fine! You don't need me, you guys are righteous on your own!" ?

That's obviously not the case. The pharisees refused to believe that they needed Jesus- so he left them to their own delusions that they were righteous without him. That's the same case with Israel as a nation, and everyone else that persists in unbelief when presented with the truth. Unless you believe on Jesus you will stay blind to a lot of other truths as well.

It's like the last time I went to the VA- the doctor called me out for "lying" to him about abdominal pain. They know many men make it a habit to suppress and ignore pain- sometimes you have to, in order to get through tough situations- but the doctor's office is not the place to do it. Not being transparent about your symptoms makes their job harder and they don't like it when their job is harder than it has to be- nobody does.

The pharisees needed to admit they were blind, (believe and repent) so that Jesus could heal them of their blindness ( forgive their sins).

This is all very simple, very basic Christian teachings being distorted into terrible, terrible doctrines.

 

[Runningman]

That is a gross distortion of the scripture. I've heard this preached from a pulpit before too, but it's wrong.

Also a gross distortion of scripture and truth.

I don't think so. I'll explain why be responding to your distortion of the truth below.

35Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when He had found him, He said to him, “Do you believe in the Son of [g]God?”
36He answered and said, “Who is He, Lord, that I may believe in Him?”
37And Jesus said to him, “You have both seen Him and it is He who is talking with you.”
38Then he said, “Lord, I believe!” And he worshiped Him.
39And Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may be made blind.”
The man that Jesus healed was literally blind, and Jesus gave him his literal sight. But the more important thing is, the man understood that Jesus was the Son of God because of the miracle. That is why he could "see".

40Then some of the Pharisees who were with Him heard these words, and said to Him, “Are we blind also?”
41Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now you say, ‘We see.’ Therefore your sin remains.
THIS SAYING IN V41 has the same meaning as the following saying in Luke 5.

That's your distortion of the truth.

Jesus used the literal healing of a blind person as a kind of segue into a narrative about spiritual sight and spiritual blindness. Jesus later pointblank defines what seeing and being blind are.

John 9:41
Seeing = remaining in sin
Blindness = no sin

So the "seeing" that Jesus is the Son of God is a kind of spiritual sight, but Jesus already said that seeing is to remain in sin. Saying that Jesus meant that you have to know He is the Son of God to "see" would be like saying you have to know He is the Son of God to remain in sin. Or you would have to be blind to the fact He is the Son of God to have no sin. Obviously that is not what Jesus meant so you got it all wrong.

The most simple and clear interpretation here that avoids contradictions is what Jesus plainly said regarding sin:

41Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now you say, ‘We see.’ Therefore your sin remains.

Luke 5

30But their scribes and Pharisees murmured against his disciples, saying, Why do ye eat and drink with publicans and sinners? 31And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick. 32I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Is Jesus saying "Oh, you pharisees are fine! You don't need me, you guys are righteous on your own!" ?

That's obviously not the case. The pharisees refused to believe that they needed Jesus- so he left them to their own delusions that they were righteous without him. That's the same case with Israel as a nation, and everyone else that persists in unbelief when presented with the truth. Unless you believe on Jesus you will stay blind to a lot of other truths as well.

It's like the last time I went to the VA- the doctor called me out for "lying" to him about abdominal pain. They know many men make it a habit to suppress and ignore pain- sometimes you have to, in order to get through tough situations- but the doctor's office is not the place to do it. Not being transparent about your symptoms makes their job harder and they don't like it when their job is harder than it has to be- nobody does.

The pharisees needed to admit they were blind, (believe and repent) so that Jesus could heal them of their blindness ( forgive their sins).

This section here isn't comparable to what Jesus said about seeing and being blind. Those who are blind have no sin, those who are sick have sin. Those who are healthy are righteous, those who see remain in their sin. Not the same things.

This is all very simple, very basic Christian teachings being distorted into terrible, terrible doctrines.

I almost guarantee you'll reject the clear words on John 9 in favor of your false doctrine, but I have the words of God on my side here and you're the one distorting Christ's words into something they don't say.

 

[SomeDisciple]

Jesus used the literal healing of a blind person as a kind of segue into a narrative about spiritual sight and spiritual blindness. Jesus later pointblank defines what seeing and being blind are.

On this we agree.

John 9:41
Seeing = remaining in sin
Blindness = no sin

No, because he said he came to make the blind see. He obviously didn't come to make the blind remain in sin.

He did not say "seeing is to remain in sin".

This section here isn't comparable to what Jesus said about seeing and being blind.

IT IS EXACTLY THE SAME TEACHING.

Those who are blind have no sin,

Those who are blind DO HAVE SIN- THEY JUST DON'T SEE IT! BECAUSE THEY ARE BLIND!

 

[SomeDisciple]

The whole way Jesus interacts with the Pharisees revolves around how they present themselves.

They're "sons of Abraham" and they "have the law", so they "don't need Jesus" to heal them. So, he lets them go on acting that way instead of accusing them of lying to him.

"if you were blind you would have no sin;
The Pharisees say they are not blind; that's why Jesus says "if you were blind". They ARE BLIND, they are just SAYING they're not.

If they simply admitted to their blindness, they would be healed and have no sin. That's why Jesus said-"if you were blind, you would have no sin" because he would FORGIVE THEIR SINS.

In no way is this a teaching about ignorance absolving sin.

 

[Runningman]

The whole way Jesus interacts with the Pharisees revolves around how they present themselves.

They're "sons of Abraham" and they "have the law", so they "don't need Jesus" to heal them. So, he lets them go on acting that way instead of accusing them of lying to him.

"if you were blind you would have no sin;
The Pharisees say they are not blind; that's why Jesus says "if you were blind". They ARE BLIND, they are just SAYING they're not.

If they simply admitted to their blindness, they would be healed and have no sin. That's why Jesus said-"if you were blind, you would have no sin" because he would FORGIVE THEIR SINS.

In no way is this a teaching about ignorance absolving sin.

Jesus apparently disagrees with you. Your whole false narrative doesn’t even make sense as i already explained. How about you just gracefully accept what Jesus plainly said instead of trying to change it?

John 9:41
41Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now you say, ‘We see.’ Therefore your sin remains.

 

[Runningman]

On this we agree.

Good to hear.

No, because he said he came to make the blind see. He obviously didn't come to make the blind remain in sin.

That isn’t what it says. The blind aren’t in sin and those who see are in sin. You got it backwards. Jesus came to make people aware of their sins so they can repent, but then blind to their past sins because they’ve been forgiven.

He did not say "seeing is to remain in sin".

This explains why you distort so much. You just can’t seem to understand the Bible on this point.

John 9:41
41Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now you say, ‘We see.’ Therefore your sin remains.

IT IS EXACTLY THE SAME TEACHING.

No it isn’t.

Those who are blind DO HAVE SIN- THEY JUST DON'T SEE IT! BECAUSE THEY ARE BLIND!

That’s not what the Bible says.

 

[SomeDisciple]

Jesus apparently disagrees with you. Your whole false narrative doesn’t even make sense as i already explained. How about you just gracefully accept what Jesus plainly said instead of trying to change it?

John 9:41
41Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now you say, ‘We see.’ Therefore your sin remains.

How about you read the whole chapter instead of cherry picking a single verse? You're missing the meaning out of context.

 

[SomeDisciple]

, but then blind to their past sins because they’ve been forgiven.

And Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may be made blind.”
It is not blinding you to your past sins. The Pharisees, who had better knowledge of God, because they had his law, understood better than the rest of the Israelites, but their rejection of Jesus made them blind.

Start at the beginning. The whole reason why he did this miracle was to show the work of God in him- he was demonstrating who he was. This whole passage is about faith in Jesus, not absolving ignorant people.