Geez Dave you really are being reactive… and this isn’t even the ‘How To Live Under An Unqualified President by John Piper’ thread… 
This started with me admitting my ignorance and asking for clarity. No attitude at all. I would have written the whole MW thing off except that a certain davo seemed to give it creedence, and usually that is a good indication that there is some there, there. I asked a few questions, then it’s all ‘oh Dave it’s your mumbo-jumbo’ and ‘oh Dave it’s soooooo apparent you are confused’.
It’s another davo hot-button, and I’m so scared I’d better just let this thing go.
My mumbo-jumbo was simply complimenting your mish-mash… that’s all. And I was only agreeing with your “zillion times”… love ya bro!! 
qaz, I agree. It is preposterous to say that sin no longer exists.
MM, if one is doing things that go against God,(lying, cheating, stealing etc.etc.) he is sinning. Take a look at the world around you, and you will see that there is plenty of sin going on.
Paidion,I totally agree.
Dave, I don’t think MW is teaching anything new. There are many who try to do away with man as an individual being with a mind and a heart. It goes along with the teaching that we don’t have to lift a finger or do anything because God and Jesus do everything for us. I have to ask, “Do we even exist?”, and “What are we here for?”.
This is the mind-blowing ignorance that leaves me astounded at your ability, or inability, to listen dispassionately… WHERE does MW say “sin no longer exists” period, without explaining what he means? From the videos above you will be able to give time-stamps in these videos as to where he allegedly makes this unqualified claim… please supply them.
I suggest that MW’s focus is… it is the sin condition AGAINST humanity that “no longer exists” i.e., such was taken away in Christ, as per the likes of Jn 1:29. THAT is a long bow from “sin no longer exists” “THEREFORE we no longer sin” — which is what you guys are saying MW is saying.
Davo, We still sin. We still suffer from sin. What is the sin condition against humanity that no longer exists? He seems to come from the viewpoint that God gave the Israelites the Jewish law to show them that they couldn’t live by the law. Is this the “sin condition” you are talking about? If so, I totally disagree.
What is so NEW about MW’s teaching - and do YOU, Davo, believe he is the only man in history to understand this ‘new thing’?
It’s not a new teaching it’s WOF and i’ve heard Kenneth Hagin teach this and he probably wasn’t the first. They teach the Mark verse as “Have the faith of God.”
LLC said:
Yep you are right there is plenty of wrongdoing going on. Wrong doing. We still do wrong. we will do wrong until the day we die.
Sin, on the other hand, is an active contradiction (breaking) of God’s law. So, God so loved his people that he sent a messiah to take away their sin (the idea that wrongdoing would be held against them). Done, fulfilled, completed, concluded, effected, etc, and no longer can these acts be counted against them because of the son.
Evangelicals (which you may well be) will always rail against the likes of Michael Williams because that message takes YOU out of the equation and it puts Christ in the proper perspective and prominence deserving of a King.
We all realize that we should do what we deem morally right, but if the absence of that doing starts to erode Christ’s crucifixion, I won’t buy it. 
And you and everyone else here should ask how arrogant we are to think that our petty lives can compare to that sacrifice.
Be good , do good , help people, rally against wrongs but don’t disgrace Christ’s cross. And to me, that is what Michael is saying, even if you don’t like the dlivery. 
My brother, I think there is a big misunderstanding. First, do you think, really, that WE are out of the equation? Chad I gotta ask - what equation are you talking about? Just exactly what do you mean by that? I, for one, agree with just about everything YOU say above. It’s not that I don’t like the delivery, it is just pure and simple that I don’t think MW made a case. I understand the words he uses, but that’s all.
What you said above is basic Christianity, I would think. Of COURSE Christ is King. OF COURSE we don’t want to erode the amazing and universe-exploding fact of the crucifixion. Be good, do good - there’s nothing NEW in that. Thanks to God!! And what YOU said did not include the very ambiguous 'Faith OF God" phrase. Or the “We don’t need any faith” phrase.
Chad - he came right out and said that he thought he was the first every to understand ‘this truth’. I mean, what the hell - there is nothing new in what YOU said - but he is claiming something NEW and for the life of me, I don’t think he has or needs anything NEW.
What is there to be so fired up about?? Exactly what NEW never-before-understood until MW teaching am I not getting? As I said, you and I agree on almost all things.
I’m not speaking for evangelicals because first, I don’t think there is such a real thing, except by those who want to fence themselves in by means of some dubitable doctrinal fence and second, because whatever they are, I"m not one, according to Parry.
I’m not attacking!!! Someone just needs to explain, from the big picture down to what MW is going on about, what the dickens is different in this NEW revelation to him alone.
We have all the rest of true Christian teaching to glory in and try to live up to, knowing that our sins are forgiven and that we have a trustworthy Heavenly Father, that the King of the Earth is His son the Messiah, and that joy unspeakable awaits us. What can be added to that?
Thanks. I want to understand.
Love ya bro, and it’s harder but love to Davo also.
I guess I would say first of all I was speaking to LLC, though I see your interest LLC said:
And then, I went on with my *wrong doing *almost diatribe, to try to mend and understand. BUT It seems there is some explaining to do.
DaveB said:
Well, maybe what he had to say resonated with me on the particular day he said it. 
When I read his book, I did not agree with everything he said, but the foundation of his thinking was way cool. He approached the gospels in a way that I have never experienced before. I like and appreciate that. Yes, I don’t agree with every nuance, but I like the thrust.
To me that is the key… progress comes from new ideas being thrown out and bunches of people saying it is a bunch of crap. In a sense it is throwing spaghetti on the wall and seeing what sticks… But in this case it is people ‘THINKING’ and I guess I like that about Michael. Hey, whatever is. I think Zappa said ‘you are what you is’ and we are all complex and will not figure this out here… but by golly I enjoy the input from everyone.
Am I reading you right Chad? You seem to be saying ‘wrongdoing’ is not sin.
Sin is “the idea that wrongdoing would be held against…”?
DaveB said:
So now I will address that Yes, in a sense, we are out of the equation. The equation we are talking about was in multiple manuscripts that were written thousands of years ago. To a people in that time and place.
So we are the recipients of Christ’s cross, in the sense that we benefited from God’s love of a particular people (Israel) and that through those very manuscripts it is told that all of humanity would be served by what the Messiah did. Fulfilled grace is the ultimate understanding of where I am coming from, pure and simple.
I tend to roll with this. And MW in his own vernacular is saying much the same thing. We push against things we don’t like and embrace things that we tend to believe. Simple phycology.
I hope this helps.
Hi Pilgrim! Good to hear from you. I will go ahead and re iterate my position. I said
So you can slice it any way you want, but we are fallible people, and made that way because the creator gave us that gift of choice. At the end of the day, the gift of ‘choice’ will always leave us in a substandard state but because of what God has accomplished through Christ we are free to live.
That is as simple as I can say it.
In what manner does Jesus, the Anointed, take away sin through His sacrifice? Does He just forgive it (whether we continue in sin or not)? Does He magically take it away or cover it up with a cloak of righteousness so that God can no longer see it, but when God looks at us, He is blind to our sin and sees only Jesus’ righteousness?
The angel announced to Joseph that he should call the name of Mary’s son “Jesus” (saviour) because He would save His people from their SINS. He didn’t say "save His people from the punishment of their sins, or from the necessity of being corrected concerning their sins. To do that would be a great disservice. To do that would be to solidify them in their sinful ways, and would be no deliverance at all!
The whole teaching of Paul and the apostles is that Jesus died to deliver people from their sins.
I quote yet again the reasons Paul, Peter, and the writer to the Hebrews gave for the purpose of Jesus’ death on our behalf:
Our salvation is a life-long process. We cannot do it alone. God won’t do it alone. But we, together with God, coöperating with His enabling grace CAN ACCOMPLISH IT! The process will some day be completed!
Paul wrote to Titus about the enabling grace provided through Jesus’s sacrificial death, and how it benefits people by enabling them to overcome wrongdoing:
Don wrote:
Yepper. He did save those who at that time believed and listened and did what the Messiah said. He saved them from their sin. He saved them from destruction, he gave them life.
The sacrifice of the Son of God took away the sin of God’s people, the anointed came and through his sacrifice, first Israel and then through prophesy, all of man kind would enjoy the ability to commune with God. By gosh man… this is totally good news why do you need to continually banter against it?
We do, and always have. To sin is to err (to miss or fall short) and that to varying degrees can have consequences, i.e., your “suffer” etc.
The condition of alienation that sin wrought no longer exists. The death of relationship that had man exiled (death) from the presence of God has been turned around and reversed in Christ, aka, the reconciliation. The gospel was/is about making that reality (of reconciliation) known to those sitting in darkness, i.e., sitting in ignorance as to this reality secured in Christ… what the first Adam lost the last Adam restored.
The condition or offense of sin that stood over and against humanity in terms of alienation from God — it is this that no longer exists…
The condition or offense of “the sin” (a noun not a verb) was annulled. Yes we can and do in our actions “sin” (verb) to which James advocates we confess one to another (Jas 5:16). This horizontal confession reflects the healing established in the vertical confession “it is finished” whereby the horizontal (man) met the vertical (God) in the Cross of Jesus Christ.
Dave, No we are not out of the equation as many try to preach. Again, my questions to those who think so:
And this is what we still do today.
Do you think that when if lie , cheat, steal , murder etc. etc. are lives are not destroyed by such actions?
LLC said:
Actually, I totally believe we are destroyed by those things, but destroyed in the sense that we are cut off from the fruit of this life that is available by following Christ. If we lie cheat steal it will not go well for us here in this existence.
Everyone wants to equate good works with going to heaven. In my mind that is a bunch of BS If Christ did not reconcile us, than how will we ever do it our selves? How good do we have to be, or how not evil do we have to be, don’t you see the perplexity of that position? What Michael is saying is that it is because of one… The one called Christ. You do not have to agree with everything he says, but maybe give him a chance.
Just a thought
Thanx
I would hope that most XN’s would NOT equate that.
But I do remember a bit of a dust-up here a year or so ago, where Faith was considered ‘a good work’; the impression being given that faith is not necessary to ‘get to heaven’.
One side of the dust-up was saying that Christ has abolished the need for good works (including faith) as the way ‘to heaven’.
One side was saying that, obviously, we need to respond to the good news by trusting God, and that is not a ‘good work’ but what God wants - our Trust.
FWIW I think the two sides were/are talking past one another: both sides want to glorify God thru Christ Jesus; but the quibble comes in over the usage of the word ‘faith’; when side one says ‘faith’ the side two hears ‘works’; when side two says ‘faith’ side one hears 'not OUR faith, that would rob Christs’s work of it’s glory and you might as well try to follow the Law to ‘get into heaven’.
The disagreement is therefore mainly on the surface at this level of discussion. But the feelings and convictions tied to this seem to go deep, I"m not sure why, but it seems like there are two sub-cultures, two ways of seeing, perhaps two traditions, neither really understanding the other. Just a guess.
Amen to that. I think that is pure Christianity. If we can agree on this, I suggest we don’t argue too much over what I think was a misfortunate emphasis by Mike, on the phrase ‘faith of God’. If he agrees with what davo has written above, and just leave it there, I’d be a happier man.
Dave, not sure what XN is, but maybe I obviously should. If you will simply go back and look at all my posts in this thread you will see my position. I am totally on board with the idea that Christ has sufficiently taken care of the sins of the world. That can not happen without God’s faith. You seem to be entrenched with the Idea of our faith, and I am with you. I’ll do what I don’t often do and quote scripture:
Heb 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.
Heb 11:2 For by it the men of old gained approval.
Heb 11:3 By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.
We see that worlds were prepared by the word of God. This does not happen by accident or by chance, If I love my children and will do the physical things it takes to get them through tough times, by golly it shows I have FAITH IN THEM.
The idea that there is an assurance for things hoped for, from my view, can only be done from Gods side. We hope, have faith yada yada but at the end of the day it is the fathers love that truly shows where the faith truly is.