Apparent Contradiction in 1 John:

[Atwood]

More on this subject. I realize that the habitual or continuous interp has been popularized over many years now; but I don't buy it.

Now the fact is that the Bible teaches that fact Christians do sin in many ways. And it is a fact of experience for all honest Christians that they indeed can sin habitually. Do you deny that you habitually sin? Christians indeed have besetting sins. Thus, such an interpretation of 1 John is impossible. Neither do I believe that you can prove that because the present tense is used here, the meaning has to be habitual.

What do you think of the Church of Ephesus? It left its first love. Was that a sin? Was it just on rare occasions that it was deficient in love? Do you suppose that a state of carnality cannot be long term? "Are you not carnal?" In the state of carnality, which Christians definitely can have, do you suppose they don't sin habitually? Are there not those who sin so habitually that they sin a sin to death? Was there not long term unrepentant sin at Corinth? Are there no brothers who sin 7 X 70 times vs the same person?

Can you not admit that the idea that Christians do not sin habitually is really preposterous?

Consider the reasoning in the text itself.

To this end was the Son of God manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. 9 Whosoever is begotten of God does no sin, because his seed abides in him: and he cannot sin, because he is begotten of God.

"because his seed abides in him" "because he is begotten of God." It makes sense that the one who is recreated by God gets along with his re-creation a disability, namely the disability to sin. What percent of the time is he disabled to sin? If the begotten status & the seed abiding does not come & go, how does the disability to sin come & go? To me this only makes sense as referring to the new man, new nature the Christian gets (while his flesh, Old Man remains also).

We know that whosoever is begotten of God sins not; but he that was begotten of God keeps himself, and the evil one touches him not.

A negation is put to the sin process based on being begotten of God. The begetting does not come & go.

The only reasonable explanation I know of this passage is that it refers to the New Nature, which is the nature begotten by God. The "Christians cannot habitually sin" interpretation seems impossible to me.


1)"If we confess [present tense] our sins, He is faithful & just to forgive us our sins."

If one supposes that the present tense means continual or habitual action, then there would be continual and habitual action in "confess." Now if a man is habitually confessing sin, would that not imply that he habitually sinned?

Surely the need to confess sin is more frequent than daily in the life of a Christian. Men who have wives might ask their wives, if those men have any bad or sinful habits.

2) "For in many things we all stumble." - James 3:2

Do not we Christians habitually stumble? And is not stumbling a figure of speech here for sinning? Do we really believe that we only goof up on rare occasions? Do we have no need to cry out "God be merciful to me a sinner?"

3) < 1 Cor 3:
3:1 "And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, as unto babes in Christ. 2 I fed you with milk, not with meat; for ye were not yet able to bear it: nay, not even now are ye able; 3 for ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you jealousy and strife, are ye not carnal, and do ye not walk after the manner of men?"

Were not these carnal Christians habitual sinners? Is it not possible and all too frequent for Christians to walk after the flesh?
"do . . . walk after the manner of men" (present tense on walk. If the present tense is used for habitual action here, how could these Christians not be habitually sinning? περιπατεῖτε = present tense.) And the Word calls them "brethren."

4) < 1 Cor 4-5: " I write not these things to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children. . . .
5:1
"It is actually reported [present tense] that there is [present tense] fornication among you, and such fornication as is not even among the Gentiles, that one of you has [present tense] his father’s wife. 2 And ye are [present tense] puffed up, and did not rather mourn, that he that had done this deed might be taken away from among you. 3 For I verily, being absent in body but present in spirit, have already as though I were present judged him that hath so wrought this thing, 4 in the name of our Lord Jesus, ye being gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, 5 to deliver such a one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved"

That passage says in present tense "is reported, and is [present tense], has, and "are puffed up" [present tense]. Do you not see a cotinual habit here?

IMHO, if you sin every day, you have a sin habit. And in fact your Old Man flesh does have a sin habit. It lusts vs the Spirit. And IMHO, Christians in general have a habit of letting the flesh take over, like every day. They are like Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde.

So my brethren, it seems clear both from scripture & from our honest experience that we Christians do sin habitually & are quite capable of having besetting sins. And that is why I cannot buy the "habitual sin theory" of 1 John.


James 3 "πολλὰ γὰρ πταίομεν ἅπαντες." For in many things we all stumble."
ptaiomen = present active indicative 1 Plural. If the present had to mean continuous, this would mean "For in many things we all continuously stumble"!!!

"but as it is, I wrote unto you not to keep company, if any man that is named a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such a one no, not to eat."
μηδὲ συνεσθίειν. Sunesthiein = present active infinitive.
Paul is not telling them yes, you may eat on occasion with the fornicator, but don't you continually eat with him. In the same way, IMHO, 1 John is not telling them that yes Chrs sin, but they don't sin continually.

To express continually in Greek one may use διὰ παντὸς (dia pantos). < Heb 13
"Through him then let us offer up a sacrifice of praise to God continually"
The verb is ἀναφέρωμεν anapherōmen = present active.

Thus we see that while the present can be used when an action is continuous, the verb by itself does not specify continuous.

It is a theory, because the word "habitual" or "continual" does not appear in the text. I think the habitual interp arose from


1) a desire to avoid a sinless perfection interp and to harmonize the text with other scripture that indicates that Chrs do sin. and
2) a superficial but popular understanding of Greek.

 

[Atwood]

More on this subject. I realize that the habitual or continuous interp has been popularized over many years now; but I don't buy it.

Now the fact is that the Bible teaches that fact Christians do sin in many ways. And it is a fact of experience for all honest Christians that they indeed can sin habitually. Do you deny that you habitually sin? Christians indeed have besetting sins. Thus, such an interpretation of 1 John is impossible. Neither do I believe that you can prove that because the present tense is used here, the meaning has to be habitual.

What do you think of the Church of Ephesus? It left its first love. Was that a sin? Was it just on rare occasions that it was deficient in love? Do you suppose that a state of carnality cannot be long term? "Are you not carnal?" In the state of carnality, which Christians definitely can have, do you suppose they don't sin habitually? Are there not those who sin so habitually that they sin a sin to death? Was there not long term unrepentant sin at Corinth? Are there no brothers who sin 7 X 70 times vs the same person?

Can you not admit that the idea that Christians do not sin habitually is really preposterous?

Consider the reasoning in the text itself.

To this end was the Son of God manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. 9 Whosoever is begotten of God does no sin, because his seed abides in him: and he cannot sin, because he is begotten of God.

"because his seed abides in him" "because he is begotten of God." It makes sense that the one who is recreated by God gets along with his re-creation a disability, namely the disability to sin. What percent of the time is he disabled to sin? If the begotten status & the seed abiding does not come & go, how does the disability to sin come & go? To me this only makes sense as referring to the new man, new nature the Christian gets (while his flesh, Old Man remains also).

We know that whosoever is begotten of God sins not; but he that was begotten of God keeps himself, and the evil one touches him not.

A negation is put to the sin process based on being begotten of God. The begetting does not come & go.

The only reasonable explanation I know of this passage is that it refers to the New Nature, which is the nature begotten by God. The "Christians cannot habitually sin" interpretation seems impossible to me.


1)"If we confess [present tense] our sins, He is faithful & just to forgive us our sins."

If one supposes that the present tense means continual or habitual action, then there would be continual and habitual action in "confess." Now if a man is habitually confessing sin, would that not imply that he habitually sinned?

Surely the need to confess sin is more frequent than daily in the life of a Christian. Men who have wives might ask their wives, if those men have any bad or sinful habits.

2) "For in many things we all stumble." - James 3:2

Do not we Christians habitually stumble? And is not stumbling a figure of speech here for sinning? Do we really believe that we only goof up on rare occasions? Do we have no need to cry out "God be merciful to me a sinner?"

3) < 1 Cor 3:
3:1 "And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, as unto babes in Christ. 2 I fed you with milk, not with meat; for ye were not yet able to bear it: nay, not even now are ye able; 3 for ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you jealousy and strife, are ye not carnal, and do ye not walk after the manner of men?"

Were not these carnal Christians habitual sinners? Is it not possible and all too frequent for Christians to walk after the flesh?
"do . . . walk after the manner of men" (present tense on walk. If the present tense is used for habitual action here, how could these Christians not be habitually sinning? περιπατεῖτε = present tense.) And the Word calls them "brethren."

4) < 1 Cor 4-5: " I write not these things to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children. . . .
5:1
"It is actually reported [present tense] that there is [present tense] fornication among you, and such fornication as is not even among the Gentiles, that one of you has [present tense] his father’s wife. 2 And ye are [present tense] puffed up, and did not rather mourn, that he that had done this deed might be taken away from among you. 3 For I verily, being absent in body but present in spirit, have already as though I were present judged him that hath so wrought this thing, 4 in the name of our Lord Jesus, ye being gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, 5 to deliver such a one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved"

That passage says in present tense "is reported, and is [present tense], has, and "are puffed up" [present tense]. Do you not see a cotinual habit here?

IMHO, if you sin every day, you have a sin habit. And in fact your Old Man flesh does have a sin habit. It lusts vs the Spirit. And IMHO, Christians in general have a habit of letting the flesh take over, like every day. They are like Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde.

So my brethren, it seems clear both from scripture & from our honest experience that we Christians do sin habitually & are quite capable of having besetting sins. And that is why I cannot buy the "habitual sin theory" of 1 John.


James 3 "πολλὰ γὰρ πταίομεν ἅπαντες." For in many things we all stumble."
ptaiomen = present active indicative 1 Plural. If the present had to mean continuous, this would mean "For in many things we all continuously stumble"!!!

"but as it is, I wrote unto you not to keep company, if any man that is named a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such a one no, not to eat."
μηδὲ συνεσθίειν. Sunesthiein = present active infinitive.
Paul is not telling them yes, you may eat on occasion with the fornicator, but don't you continually eat with him. In the same way, IMHO, 1 John is not telling them that yes Chrs sin, but they don't sin continually.

To express continually in Greek one may use διὰ παντὸς (dia pantos). < Heb 13
"Through him then let us offer up a sacrifice of praise to God continually"
The verb is ἀναφέρωμεν anapherōmen = present active.

Thus we see that while the present can be used when an action is continuous, the verb by itself does not specify continuous.

It is a theory, because the word "habitual" or "continual" does not appear in the text. I think the habitual interp arose from


1) a desire to avoid a sinless perfection interp and to harmonize the text with other scripture that indicates that Chrs do sin. and
2) a superficial but popular understanding of Greek.

I know that was too long; pardon me for wearing you out.

 

[Timeline]

Greetings Haz.

You say, "As for that flawed physical part of us, it's already dead (by faith, Rom 6:6)"

Is there any chance at all that I could convince you that Romans 6 does not mean the physical when it says,"knowing this, that our Old Man was crucified with him, that the body of Sin might be done away, that so we should no longer be in bondage to sin;"

Having done a lot of research on this, I am well-convinced that the physical body is not the residence of sin, but the temple of the Holy Spirit for the Christian -- how could it be both?

But before I spill a lot of cyber-ink on this, I would like to know if you are open at all to a different understanding of Old Man, flesh, members, and "Body of Sin."

Take a look at Galatians 5, the works of the flesh -- are they all physical issues? As Peter says, there is stuff in Paul hard to understand. I hold that the sarx, the "flesh" as prophet Paul teaches it, refers to the Adamic human nature, as the NIV recognizes (not that the NIV is the best translation).

Romans 9:19-24
[SUP]19 [/SUP]You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” [SUP]20 [/SUP]On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? [SUP]21 [/SUP]Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?[SUP]22 [/SUP]What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? [SUP]23 [/SUP]And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory,[SUP]24 [/SUP]even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

Vessel, here, is used to symbolize our fleshly bodies (In my opinion).

Romans 7:24
[SUP]24 [/SUP]Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?

Romans 8:1-8
8 Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. [SUP]2 [/SUP]For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. [SUP]3 [/SUP]For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,[SUP]4 [/SUP]so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. [SUP]5 [/SUP]For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. [SUP]6 [/SUP]For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, [SUP]7 [/SUP]because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, [SUP]8 [/SUP]and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

We see here that Paul says that Jesus came in the likeness "of sinful flesh."

Romans 7:22-23
[SUP]21 [/SUP]I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good. [SUP]22 [/SUP]For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, [SUP]23 [/SUP]but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members.
and
2 Corinthians 4:7-18
[SUP]7 [/SUP]But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, so that the surpassing greatness of the power will be of God and not from ourselves; [SUP]8 [/SUP]we are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not despairing; [SUP]9 [/SUP]persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; [SUP]10 [/SUP]always carrying about in the body the dying of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our body. [SUP]11 [/SUP]For we who live are constantly being delivered over to death for Jesus’ sake, so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our mortal flesh.[SUP]12 [/SUP]So death works in us, but life in you.[SUP]13 [/SUP]But having the same spirit of faith, according to what is written, “I believed, therefore I spoke,” we also believe, therefore we also speak, [SUP]14 [/SUP]knowing that He who raised the Lord Jesus will raise us also with Jesus and will present us with you. [SUP]15 [/SUP]For all things are for your sakes, so that the grace which is spreading to more and more people may cause the giving of thanks to abound to the glory of God.
[SUP]16[/SUP]Therefore we do not lose heart, but though our outer man is decaying, yet our inner man is being renewed day by day. [SUP]17 [/SUP]For momentary, light affliction is producing for us an eternal weight of glory far beyond all comparison, [SUP]18 [/SUP]while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.

I may do a poor job of getting this across, but I believe that Paul is saying that our physical bodies are of sin. But as Christians, we have accepted the responsibility of being vessels for honor (If we have Jesus in us; and not that the honor is ours, but Jesus'). This is why we cannot practice sin, although I don't understand how anyone could come to the conclusion that we are perfect. Why would there be so much discussion in the bible about grace if we have become perfect. But we should not take grace for granted either.

I believe that we cannot sin (not that we don't) is because being led by the Holy Spirit, there is no law - And where there is no law, there is no violation. But God judges this, and I feel there is great danger in abusing it.

 

[gotime]

If you follow Johns process there is no contradiction. He starts out by addressing the fact that we can not have forgiveness unless we first acknowledge we are sinners and then we will confess and be cleansed.

what follows this is then the life that those who walk in faith will have. We can not have that kind of victory in Christ until we first acknowledge our true condition and helplessness. Only then can Christ make us like himself.

 

[haz]

Take a look at Galatians 5, the works of the flesh -- are they all physical issues?

Hi Atwood,

Gal 5, works of the flesh is speaking in spiritual terms, not physical.

Haz, you say: "Every sin that a man does is outside the body (of Christ that we abide in), but he who commits sexual immorality (with Hagar, which is unbelief) sins against his own body."

Are you really sure that body means something different in the two parts of this verse? Isn't physical sin implied, fornication?

No, I don't see it as physical fornication.
BTW, scripture is spiritually discerned, 1Cor 2:13,14.

Christians are one spirit with the Lord/married to Christ. We have this under grace.

The alternative to grace is righteousness by works of the law. This is described symbolically as Hagar, Gal 4:24.
Hagar is the harlot referred to in 1Cor 6.

We see a similar fornication spoken of in 1Cor 5:1 where a man is having his father's wife.
The wife spoken of here is Hagar/righteousness by works of the law.
The father is the devil, as Jesus described of the Pharisees (John 8:44) who likewise sought righteousness by works of the law.

As confirmation of this we see in the same context of fornication 1Cor 5:6, 7 speaking of "leaven".
What is leaven?
Jesus tells us in Matt 16:12 that it is the doctrine of the Pharisees (righteousness by works of the law, which is symbolized by Hagar).

This is consistent with the many warnings in scripture that we must not turn back to works of the law for righteousness.

 

[haz]

According to Matt Slick an apologist..............one who is born again does not habitually abide in sin. He may fall into it, but he does not practice it as a lifestyle.

Consider the definition of sin as given in 1John 3:4.
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

We all know that keeping the Sabbath holy is part of the law.
And we all know that most, if not all, Christians are not keeping the Sabbath holy, as described in scripture.

According to Matt Slick's quote above, Christians are, allegedly, habitually abiding in sin regarding the Sabbath. They are practicing this sin as a lifestyle. Thus they are of the devil according to 1John 3:8, if we trust Matt Slicks understanding of 1John 3.

I suggest that Matt Slick has got it wrong.

 

[gotime]

Interesting that John gives that definition of sin when John is a preacher of righteousness by faith. and then goes on to say that those who abide in Him do not sin.

how exactly do you explain that? keep it in context, John is speaking let John explain himself before you try and bring other writers of the bible in. If what you say has validity then the context should display it.

 

[danschance]

Interesting that John gives that definition of sin when John is a preacher of righteousness by faith. and then goes on to say that those who abide in Him do not sin.

how exactly do you explain that? keep it in context, John is speaking let John explain himself before you try and bring other writers of the bible in. If what you say has validity then the context should display it.

I posted what I thought the answer was to this. Its an issue with Greek tenses. In a nut shell, it means we do not keep on sinning or have a life style of sinning.

An apologist explains it:

There is no contradiction. What is happening is that John is saying that the one who is born again does not habitually abide in sin. He may fall into it, but he does not practice it as a lifestyle. The nuances of the Greek language are not carried over to the English, but when we understand what is happening we then see there is no problem.

From: http:Can a true Christian sin or not? | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry

 

[gotime]

I posted what I thought the answer was to this. Its an issue with Greek tenses. In a nut shell, it means we do not keep on sinning or have a life style of sinning.

An apologist explains it:

I have heard that view before but when I checked the Greek it was not there. But even without and understanding of the greek it has problems. because John puts it in a different way in chapter 2.

1Jn 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
1Jn 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
1Jn 2:5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
1Jn 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

basically saying the same thing.

The key is abiding in Christ and dying to self through Christ. If we are dead and Christ lives in us then we will not sin because we are dead but we will keep the commandments because it is Christ living in us.

 

[Kerry]

What John is talking about is that there are sinners. Sinners enjoy sin, they roll in it and play in it. But the christian it is a totally separate thing, as a christian we hate sin and don't want to have anything to do with it. We avoid at all cost. However a christian cans still sin, in moments of anger or when a loss is experienced. The fact is that when our faith is cast on something other than the cross the sin nature revives in us. Take into consideration, I know of a certain man whose son was in Iraq and a sniper killed him and he came home in a body bag. He was 21 years old and had an unborn son. That man was so angry with God, that His son had been killed that he almost lost his salvation, for weeks he hated God. But gradually and finally He put his faith back in the cross and the peace of God surrounded Him. We all go through things and no matter how difficult things are, we must remain focused on the work of the cross.

 

[haz]

Interesting that John gives that definition of sin when John is a preacher of righteousness by faith. and then goes on to say that those who abide in Him do not sin.

Righteousness by faith means different things to different people.

Rom 4:5 says our faith is counted for righteousness.

For you, Gotime, it means we must have perfect obedience to the law as proof that one is abiding in Christ.

But for others, such as the thief on the cross who called Jesus "Lord", we believe on Jesus, as is God's will.
John 6:40
And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

how exactly do you explain that? keep it in context, John is speaking let John explain himself before you try and bring other writers of the bible in. If what you say has validity then the context should display it.

I have explained this to you already in previous discussions, as you know. And the context confirms it.

Perhaps you can answer my point from the previous post. Here it is again.

Consider the definition of sin as given in 1John 3:4.
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

We all know that keeping the Sabbath holy is part of the law.
And we all know that most, if not all, Christians are not keeping the Sabbath holy, as described in scripture.

According to Matt Slick's quote, Christians are, allegedly, habitually abiding in sin regarding the Sabbath. They are practicing this sin as a lifestyle. Thus they are of the devil according to 1John 3:8, if we trust Matt Slicks understanding of 1John 3.

And according to the doctrine you follow, Gotime, you go even further than Matt Slick and say that perfect obedience of the law is required.

 

[Kerry]

The only reason to post that you keep law is a self righteous boast that say's look at me, bless God I do this and I do that and you heathen don't. Never even realizing that the work of the cross is what set's you free.

 

[gotime]

Righteousness by faith means different things to different people.

Rom 4:5 says our faith is counted for righteousness.

For you, Gotime, it means we must have perfect obedience to the law as proof that one is abiding in Christ.

But for others, such as the thief on the cross who called Jesus "Lord", we believe on Jesus, as is God's will.
John 6:40
And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.



I have explained this to you already in previous discussions, as you know. And the context confirms it.

Perhaps you can answer my point from the previous post. Here it is again.

Consider the definition of sin as given in 1John 3:4.
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

We all know that keeping the Sabbath holy is part of the law.
And we all know that most, if not all, Christians are not keeping the Sabbath holy, as described in scripture.

According to Matt Slick's quote, Christians are, allegedly, habitually abiding in sin regarding the Sabbath. They are practicing this sin as a lifestyle. Thus they are of the devil according to 1John 3:8, if we trust Matt Slicks understanding of 1John 3.

And according to the doctrine you follow, Gotime, you go even further than Matt Slick and say that perfect obedience of the law is required.

You can't do it can you, you can't use the very context of John on this to prove your point. again you have gone to texts that are set in their own context.

This is why I can't be bothered answering your question, you never address the context surrounding the texts used. If what you say is true then show it from the book of 1 John that John does not mean what it seems to be saying.

 

[gotime]

The only reason to post that you keep law is a self righteous boast that say's look at me, bless God I do this and I do that and you heathen don't. Never even realizing that the work of the cross is what set's you free.

Its amazing how one can praise God for something and you claim they are being self righteous. The cross indeed sets us free but now I wonder if I should praise God for that because now if I claim to be free because of the Cross you will accuse me of self righteousness. Is it not the same thing? of course it is.

I boast not in my righteousness but Christs righteousness. It is Jesus who does the works. or do you also accuse Jesus of self righteousness.

Joh_14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

Jesus also gave the glory to His father for the works that he did.

are we not also to do the same works if Christ is in us?

Joh 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

the works do not refer to merely miracles but his life his words his actions everything He did testified of His Father.

 

[haz]

1Jn 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
1Jn 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
1Jn 2:5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
1Jn 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

And Christians keep his commandments.
1John 3:22,23
we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.

And love/grace forgives 7x70. Christians show the same love/grace to others, in this flawed physical world we live in, as God showed to us.

And those who do not keep his commandments are a liar, as 1John 2:4 says.
What defines a liar?
1John 2:22
Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son

How does one deny that Jesus is the Christ, thus proving that they are a liar?
Tit 1:16
They profess to know God, but in works they deny Him, being abominable, disobedient, and disqualified for every good work.

What works show that we know God?

For the thief on the cross who called Jesus "Lord", he believed on Jesus. And Jesus tells us that our works are to believe on him whom He hath sent, John 6:29. This is obedience to the gospel of grace. It's obeying God's will that we believe on Jesus, John 6:40

But according to you Gotime, its works of the law. Perfect obedience to the law is required. This is consistent with the leaven (doctrine, Matt 16:12) of the Pharisees. Righteousness by works of the law.

 

[haz]

You can't do it can you, you can't use the very context of John on this to prove your point. again you have gone to texts that are set in their own context.

This is why I can't be bothered answering your question, you never address the context surrounding the texts used. If what you say is true then show it from the book of 1 John that John does not mean what it seems to be saying.

Again you avoid answering my point and try to divert attention elsewhere.
You quote texts out of context to fit the doctrine you follow and also avoid looking at scripture overall which defines terms and provides a consistent message.

 

[Kerry]

Go is stuck on law, so focused on it that they can't see the light shining in the darkness. Why did Jesus come and die on the cross if all we needed was law?

 

[gotime]

And Christians keep his commandments.
1John 3:22,23
we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.

And love/grace forgives 7x70. Christians show the same love/grace to others, in this flawed physical world we live in, as God showed to us.

And those who do not keep his commandments are a liar, as 1John 2:4 says.
What defines a liar?
1John 2:22
Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son

How does one deny that Jesus is the Christ, thus proving that they are a liar?
Tit 1:16
They profess to know God, but in works they deny Him, being abominable, disobedient, and disqualified for every good work.

What works show that we know God?

For the thief on the cross who called Jesus "Lord", he believed on Jesus. And Jesus tells us that our works are to believe on him whom He hath sent, John 6:29. This is obedience to the gospel of grace. It's obeying God's will that we believe on Jesus, John 6:40

But according to you Gotime, its works of the law. Perfect obedience to the law is required. This is consistent with the leaven (doctrine, Matt 16:12) of the Pharisees. Righteousness by works of the law.

Thanx, that was more along the lines of what I meant.

now let me try to explain what I actually believe.

WE are saved by Jesus merits only. His righteousness imputed to us through faith in Him.

The pharisees believed that salvation was given because of law keeping. but this is against the gospel of Jesus, as you and I both know.

We are saved by grace through faith. and till that point we seem to agree.

As far as obeying the law perfectly that is impossible for any human to do in their own strength. but we are not asked to do this. we are simply asked to have faith in the promises of God through Jesus for us.

Let me put it this way.

I was a slave to sin and the devil. Jesus came and took my punishment which I rightly deserved. thus he offered my forgiveness for my sins and imputed his righteousness to me if I simply have faith/trust in his work on the cross.

but that is not all Jesus offers us. He also offers us his resurrected life. we can be one with him as he was one with the Father. and Just as the Father worked through Jesus, Jesus will work through and in us. Christ in you the hope of glory.
This can only be had by the same avenue that we gained freedom from sin in the first place. Faith/trust in his promise.

Its not about keeping the commandments perfectly, its about Faith in Christ to work in you bearing fruit that we could never do of ourselves.

If I do not keep the commandments then it simply means I have not received Christ fully by faith. It has nothing to do with what I can and can't do. Its all about what God can do in us through Jesus.

Its all about the promise and power of God in us and for us. it can only happen if we have faith in him.

let your faith see that Jesus did more than die for our sins. He came back to life for us.

hope this helps you understand that I do not believe in salvation by works or righteousness by works. I believe in salvation by faith and righteousness by faith. and the fruit that Christ brings in our life through Faith in Him and his ability to save us. he is not just the author but also the finisher of our faith.

 

[Kerry]

Thanx, that was more along the lines of what I meant.

now let me try to explain what I actually believe.

WE are saved by Jesus merits only. His righteousness imputed to us through faith in Him.

The pharisees believed that salvation was given because of law keeping. but this is against the gospel of Jesus, as you and I both know.

We are saved by grace through faith. and till that point we seem to agree.

As far as obeying the law perfectly that is impossible for any human to do in their own strength. but we are not asked to do this. we are simply asked to have faith in the promises of God through Jesus for us.

Let me put it this way.

I was a slave to sin and the devil. Jesus came and took my punishment which I rightly deserved. thus he offered my forgiveness for my sins and imputed his righteousness to me if I simply have faith/trust in his work on the cross.

but that is not all Jesus offers us. He also offers us his resurrected life. we can be one with him as he was one with the Father. and Just as the Father worked through Jesus, Jesus will work through and in us. Christ in you the hope of glory.
This can only be had by the same avenue that we gained freedom from sin in the first place. Faith/trust in his promise.

Its not about keeping the commandments perfectly, its about Faith in Christ to work in you bearing fruit that we could never do of ourselves.

If I do not keep the commandments then it simply means I have not received Christ fully by faith. It has nothing to do with what I can and can't do. Its all about what God can do in us through Jesus.

Its all about the promise and power of God in us and for us. it can only happen if we have faith in him.

let your faith see that Jesus did more than die for our sins. He came back to life for us.

hope this helps you understand that I do not believe in salvation by works or righteousness by works. I believe in salvation by faith and righteousness by faith. and the fruit that Christ brings in our life through Faith in Him and his ability to save us. he is not just the author but also the finisher of our faith.

Excellent post, the only way possible to keep the morals of God is to have our faith firmly planted in the work of the cross. You got it and hold fast to it.

 

[gotime]

Go is stuck on law, so focused on it that they can't see the light shining in the darkness. Why did Jesus come and die on the cross if all we needed was law?

Kerry, you have not understood me at all. I have never said nor do I believe that all we need is law. that is an assumption on your part.

let me ask you a question.

I am stuck on Jesus, now let me ask you did Jesus ever steal, kill, bear false witness, put other Gods before His Father etc?

If we are dead and Jesus lives in us will we treat God and others like He did?

If your answer is no to the first question and yes to the second then the inevitable result is we keep the law.

we can't be like him and not like him at the same time. we are one or the other. Faith is the key.