In this latest post from you it looks like you have largely abandoned trying to make your case from the text of Romans and are instead trying to justify why you read certain things into Romans from other texts. That is a recipe for misunderstanding, error, and ultimately interpretive chaos.
Using cult leaders as an extreme example, the first guy reads X into Scripture where it pleases him, the second guy reads Y into Scripture where it pleases him, the third reads Z into Scripture, and so on. However many false interpreters and interpretations that there are they will all say theirs is the right interpretation. And many if not all of them will claim Inspiration from God, or the Holy Spirit, or a dream, or reading tea leaves, etc.
When the risen Lord opened the minds of the disciples to understand the Scriptures it wasn't the marks on the page, words on the page, that changed. The right understanding is going to come from reading Scripture according to the God given perfect immediate context in which it was given rather than a game of Scripture passage bingo.
Yes. At first glance Paul appears to be avowing sin. What sin do you believe he was engaging in?
The adjective wicked or ungodly isn't limited to a single sin or a single type of sin. To look for or guess at either is to miss his point because he explicitly wrote that he was laying out the common faith to the believers at Rome whom he has never met. See Romans 1:1-15.
What he writes of being a tested man in Romans seven is a readily identifiable true experience of all Christians.
Right. Of course God grants justification to sinners who repent.
Obviously the truth of your statement depends on who "we" are. Paul was telling those who wish to be saved that they can no longer sin. If you continue to sin, you do so in disobedience to Paul and the God he spoke for.
Again, see Romans 1. Paul was writing to believers. Also, the verbs of Romans 6:1 exclude the interpretation you offer. For example, the verbs now in bold are present tense statements of fact, reality, or truth. “What shall we say
then? Shall we continue
in sin, that grace may abound?” (Rom 6:1, KJVA)
Note that nowhere in this passage does Paul specify any particular sin. He's speaking very generally of sin no doubt to cover any sins potential converts might be committing.
Again, Paul was writing to believers.
“7. To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be
[The words "called" and "saints" are adjectives, the words "to be" were added by the translators] saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ. 8. First, I thank
my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken
of throughout the whole world.” (Rom 1:7-8, KJVA)
If you think he's avowing his own sin that he was committing at that time, then please post what iniquity you think he was working. Surely you can come up with something seeing that you are so confident that Paul was a sinner when he wrote his epistles. At that time was Paul fornicating or engaging in homosexual acts? Was he a thief, a liar, an adulterer, a blasphemer, or an idolater?
You asked a similar question above and it remains that this latest question misses the point for the same reason.
Christ was said to be without sin.
Other people were said to be "righteous." (Mark 2:17
Since Jesus was answering the error of the scribes and Pharisees that interpretation isn't supported by the context.
“And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners?”
(Mar 2:16, KJVA)
The category of sinners is greater than that of publicans and manifest sinners. It includes those same scribes and Pharisees who were wondering how Jesus could eat with those
sinners. (More on the relative use of righteous below.)
The man who asked Jesus for eternal life is described as sinless. (Matthew 19:20)
That is an inference which the context doesn't allow since the guy balked at being complete or perfect and then went away sad.
Noah was an obvious exception.
There is nothing in Scripture which indicates Noah was sinless. Otherwise, Noah would not have found grace or favor with God.
True, but how does any of that lend approval to the sin you refuse to repent of?
It doesn't lend approval to sin. Through the law is the knowledge of sin. Sin is always sin.
Yes, we can trust God to forgive our sins when we repent. You keep forgetting that last part.
Christ was freely given for our sins. Christ wasn't given for our sins based on a condition which we must first meet.
There is no Christian repentance apart from faith in Christ, a gift from God. The risen Lord in Luke 24:44ff told the guys to preach repentance and the forgiveness of sins in His name
. The law is already written in men's hearts, and some also have the written law, so they already know sin is wrong. The repentance, the change of mind, which the disciples were speaking of is towards Christ in whom alone is the forgiveness of sins.
An iidol worshippers who sacrificed a hundred people to his idol at the last festival may repent and resolve to sacrifice ten people or a thousand people at the next festival, but in neither instance is it Christian repentance.
In the same way, the guy who believes that he'll have another beer but then repents, has a change of mind, and passes on another round or decides to have ten more beers, is not repenting in a Christian sense.
I never cease to be amazed! So now those who seek sinlessness are pagans and unbelievers. On the other hand the sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, men who engage in illicit sex, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, swindlers—all of them will inherit the kingdom of God according to your interpretation of Paul's epistles. Can you just picture Paul at a drunken sex orgy in a bed engraved with idols and him cuddling with male prostitutes planning to swindle his followers out of their meager savings?
It is only your imagination that is amazing you since seeking sinlessness in this life is the goal, but it is only reached in this life in Christ through faith. It isn't reached, and can't be reached, in this life apart from faith in Christ. That is Paul's point about baptism into Christ.
Continuing on in Romans six from verse three.
“3. Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? 4. Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life....” (Rom 6:3-4..., KJVA)
Read Romans seven and eight in light of Romans 6.