Obsession with Confession (1 John 1:9, sin confession)

[Skinski7]

We MUST yield ourselves wholeheartedly to God. Those who refuse to do so simply have not repented
This I agree with, but it however does not mean that we will never sin while yielded.

You cannot yield to God and not yield at the same time.

How can one yield and not yield at the same time?

Sin while yielded? That is absurd. Can you descend whilst ascending? Can you run while walking?


Your false doctrinal position constantly trips you up into stating plain absurdities. You agree that you MUST yield wholeheartedly to God but that does not mean that you don't "not yield"? Come on, use your mind here please.

In your explanation above you have disagreed with yourself. Let me show you how.
You say.
"The sin in question is PAST SIN, not ongoing present rebellion to God. We all have PAST SIN and we have to come clean about it."

you say
God is willing to cleanse us of our past sins IF we come clean with God in repentance and faith. Hence we are to WALK in the light as He is in the light with no darkness at all. Jesus leads and we follow. We are to hear and do.
Yet the scripture says that if we walk in the light His blood cleanses us from all sins


You also say.
A WALK is how we conduct ourselves and is reflective of the true intent of our hearts.

Now look at the scripture again.
"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin."

It says, according to you, that if we conduct ourselves in the light, which according to you is to walk without sin [I SAID WALK WITHOUT REBELLION, there are sins unto death and sins not unto death], then the blood of Christ cleanses us from sin. How can his blood cleanse us from sin that you say we cannot have to walk in the light? [As I stated previously, John is speaking of the "once and for all cleansing of past sins" that occurs when we approach God INITIALLY in repentance and faith. John is not speaking of an ongoing cleansing. We are cleansed whereby we are CLEAN. To engage in rebellion to God again would be to become unclean and defiled.

This isn't speaking of past sins but our walk, which you say is how we conduct ourselves. John is clearly speaking of the correct manner to approach God.

1Jn 1:3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.

John wants those reading to have fellowship with him and thus real fellowship with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ. Thus John is clarifying the correct way in which one is to approach God in order to enter into such a fellowship. This could not be clearer.

You clearly want a sin in salvation teaching as apposed to a purity in salvation teaching, which is why you constantly defend sin.

My comments in blue.

 

[seed_time_harvest]

"If we claim to have fellowship with Him yet walk in darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth." (verse 6).
In other words, if someone says he has fellowship with Christ, but is walking in darkness (lost), he is lying and not practicing the truth. The Gnostics claimed to be in fellowship with Christ (saved), and yet were actually living a lie and therefore weren't practicing the truth.

..........

 

[Skinski7]

Its interesting Skinski7 that you advocate Salvation by Works.

I contend for salvation by grace through faith, grace being the leading of God and faith being our yielding to it. This dynamic of yielding to the divine influence of God produces a quickening of our spirit to the true life. If you want to call that "salvation by works" then go ahead.

When the Bible says, "not of works" it is referring to the notion that one can be saved apart from the dynamic of "grace through faith" and in its place the mere keeping of rules and regulations (which is outward only).

Salvation is INTERNAL and wrought via INTERNAL MEANS. Hence we have to YIELD TO GOD. If you think that contending that we have to yield wholeheartedly to God is "salvation by works" and false then you have just rejected the Gospel.

Paul wrote that we have to WORK TOGETHER with God lest grace be received in vain (2Cor 6:1).

If Salvation is received by doing what James 1:21,22 says then how do you explain the Thief on the Cross entering into Heaven?

The thief repented of his wickedness and submitted himself to Jesus. He confessed that he was guilty of crimes, he did not cover over it, he petitioned Jesus to remember him. He was no longer in rebellion.

Luke 23:39-43
[SUP]39 [/SUP] Then one of the criminals who were hanged blasphemed Him, saying, "If You are the Christ, save Yourself and us."
[SUP]40 [/SUP] But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, "Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation?
[SUP]41 [/SUP] And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong."
[SUP]42 [/SUP] Then he said to Jesus, "Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom."
[SUP]43 [/SUP] And Jesus said to him, "Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise."

The Thief did no Works, he was NOT Baptized, but yet he entered into Heaven.

The thief has FAITH. Faith is reckoned as righteousness. He was not full of guile covering or defending sin. He was not claiming he could sin and not surely die, in fact he confessed that he was getting his due for his wicked deeds.

It sounds to me you are teaching what the Corrupted Catholic Church loves to teach and that is Salvation by our own Works.

I am teaching what the Bible teaches.

What do you do with Jam 1:21-22? Call it a Catholic perversion?


Why is the forsaking of rebellion to God such an issue with people like you? Is their any sin you have to actually stop in order to be reconciled to God?

Can one keep molesting children? Surely you believe that one must stop something like that?

 

[BenFTW]

Why do people like you have such an issue with the notion of having to forsake rebellion to God? The Bible teaches that we have to forsake wickedness from cover to cover, yet people like you despise such a notion. Why is that?

I quoted this part because this is a misrepresentation of the grace that is being taught. I mean, settle down. "Yet people like you despise such a notion." What an attack on my character and an ignorance on your part. You are full of assumptions and read into every post what is not there. Where did I say a person is not to forsake rebellion against God? You yourself rebel against God daily in the sins of thought or deed (or the lack there of). Yet He doesn't hold them against you because of Jesus.

You want to paint me as being licentious towards sin. Go ahead. Where sin abounds, grace much more.

 

[Skinski7]

I quoted this part because this is a misrepresentation of the grace that is being taught. I mean, settle down. "Yet people like you despise such a notion." What an attack on my character and an ignorance on your part. You are full of assumptions and read into every post what is not there. Where did I say a person is not to forsake rebellion against God? You yourself rebel against God daily in the sins of thought or deed (or the lack there of). Yet He doesn't hold them against you because of Jesus.

You want to paint me as being licentious towards sin. Go ahead. Where sin abounds, grace much more.

You clearly advocate that engaging in sin does not remove one from "walking in the light" and thus salvation is eternally secure.

Is there any other way that such a contention not be read as a defence of being able to sin and not surely die?

Can you watch porn and remain saved?

Can you rape babies or murder people?

Can you defraud people and remain saved?

You see, the salvation you believe in is not salvation at all. It is an imaginary state of not being under condemnation because you think you are covered positionally by something that Jesus did. You have no conception of HEART PURITY in salvation which is why you argue in favour of a "secure salvation" in which you can engage in evil.



Also, grace abounding when sin abounds is a reference to the longsuffering of God that all come to repentance. It does not mean you can continue in wickedness and be forgiven at the same time.

 

[ladylynn]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpUrua961Nk


Here is a message that addresses the many questions and rebukes against 1 John 1:9 interpretation here in this thread. I also liked how J.Prince addressed the fact that the letters were read out loud. How the editorial "we" is used. I challenge you who are interested in this thread to listen to the end.

Even if you don't happen to like this particular preacher., he does give a good explanation that will help in the study.

 

[shotgunner]

I quoted this part because this is a misrepresentation of the grace that is being taught. I mean, settle down. "Yet people like you despise such a notion." What an attack on my character and an ignorance on your part. You are full of assumptions and read into every post what is not there. Where did I say a person is not to forsake rebellion against God? You yourself rebel against God daily in the sins of thought or deed (or the lack there of). Yet He doesn't hold them against you because of Jesus.

You want to paint me as being licentious towards sin. Go ahead. Where sin abounds, grace much more.

On no! He doesn't sin! All hail the only man except Jesus who never sins!

It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

 

[WoundedWarrior]

I'd like to point out that this forum's most dedicated Sinless Perfection advocate has now been banned after over a year of participation.

 

[Skinski7]

On no! He doesn't sin! All hail the only man except Jesus who never sins!

It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

1Jn 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

Joh 8:11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

1Co 15:34 Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame.

1Jn 5:18 We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.

 

[BenFTW]

You clearly advocate that engaging in sin does not remove one from "walking in the light" and thus salvation is eternally secure.

Is there any other way that such a contention not be read as a defence of being able to sin and not surely die?

Can you watch porn and remain saved?

Can you rape babies or murder people?

Can you defraud people and remain saved?

You see, the salvation you believe in is not salvation at all. It is an imaginary state of not being under condemnation because you think you are covered positionally by something that Jesus did. You have no conception of HEART PURITY in salvation which is why you argue in favour of a "secure salvation" in which you can engage in evil.



Also, grace abounding when sin abounds is a reference to the longsuffering of God that all come to repentance. It does not mean you can continue in wickedness and be forgiven at the same time.

It is nothing of the sort. The verse itself is clear.

Romans 5:20King James Version (KJV)

20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence(sin) might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:

You cannot take that to speak of God's longsuffering. Also, let me give you other verses that plainly show what is being said and not what you have wrongly concluded.

Romans 6King James Version (KJV)

6 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

It is clearly a reference to actually sinning so that grace may abound, not God's longsuffering towards man to repent.

 

[Skinski7]

I'd like to point out that this forum's most dedicated Sinless Perfection advocate has now been banned after over a year of participation.

"Sinless perfection" is a misnomer.

God does not require sinless perfection, rather He requires perfection of motive or purity of heart.

"Sinless perfection" is an oft drawn upon strawman which makes no distinction between the sin of rebellion (sin unto death) and a sin of ignorance (wrong doing which is not rooted in an evil heart) and thus a perceived bar is set so high that no-one can fulfill and thus one is easily left susceptible to "sin you will and sin you must" and the "cloak for sin" which the provisional substitution false gospel offers.


If God requires "sinless perfection" then faith would not be reckoned as righteousness. God is not looking for outward perfection, rather He is looking for inward purity.

 

[WoundedWarrior]

"Sinless perfection" is a misnomer.

God does not require sinless perfection, rather He requires perfection of motive or purity of heart.

"Sinless perfection" is an oft drawn upon strawman which makes no distinction between the sin of rebellion (sin unto death) and a sin of ignorance (wrong doing which is not rooted in an evil heart) and thus a perceived bar is set so high that no-one can fulfill and thus one is easily left susceptible to "sin you will and sin you must" and the "cloak for sin" which the provisional substitution false gospel offers.


If God requires "sinless perfection" then faith would not be reckoned as righteousness. God is not looking for outward perfection, rather He is looking for inward purity.

Hey cool -- you responded. Was beginning to think you had ignored my previous question, perhaps it was simply overlooked.

I'd like to challenge one of your definitions above: sin of rebellion = (sin unto death); I think more accurate definition needs to include "knowingly" (knowingly sin unto death), because the distinction is between awareness and ignorance.

 

[Skinski7]

It is nothing of the sort. The verse itself is clear.

Romans 5:20King James Version (KJV)

20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence(sin) might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:

You cannot take that to speak of God's longsuffering. Also, let me give you other verses that plainly show what is being said and not what you have wrongly concluded.

Romans 6King James Version (KJV)

6 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

It is clearly a reference to actually sinning so that grace may abound, not God's longsuffering towards man to repent.

The law entering so that sin might abound is a reference to a "standard being presented" which would contrast the wickedness of men. Thus sin would abound and be clearer to the observer. The grace abounding where sin abounded is simply an allusion that God's mercy was still available.

Grace is available but it only reigns though righteousness unto eternal life. Grace does not reign unto eternal life through sinning against God, the sin has to stop.

Rom 5:20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
Rom 5:21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

Hence...Obedience unto righteousness (Rom 6:16) ---------------> Righteousness unto holiness (Rom 6:19) ----------------Holiness unto everlasting life (Rom 6:22).

Thus eternal life is THROUGH (the Spirit of His life) Jesus Christ, ie. an abiding manifest walk according to the Spirit.



After saying...

Rom 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
Rom 5:20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
Rom 5:21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

Paul raises the question...

Rom 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?

In other words, should we keep on sinning that grace abound even more?

Paul says NO, ie. the SIN STOPS.

Rom 6:2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
Rom 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
Rom 6:4 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 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Rom 6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
Rom 6:7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.

If we have indeed truly "died to sin" then we no longer "serve sin."

In the rest of Romans 6 Paul speaks about YIELDING and how it is through YIELDING TO GOD that we enter into eternal life. This, I repeat...
Obedience unto righteousness (Rom 6:16) ---------------> Righteousness unto holiness (Rom 6:19) ----------------Holiness unto everlasting life (Rom 6:22).

Thus eternal life is THROUGH (the Spirit of His life) Jesus Christ, ie. an abiding manifest walk according to the Spirit.



The grace of God abounding is indeed related to the longsuffering of God because if it wasn't then God's grace would be withdrawn. God wants all people to come to repentance.

 

[Skinski7]

Hey cool -- you responded. Was beginning to think you had ignored my previous question, perhaps it was simply overlooked.

I'd like to challenge one of your definitions above: sin of rebellion = (sin unto death); I think more accurate definition needs to include "knowingly" (knowingly sin unto death), because the distinction is between awareness and ignorance.

I have written a clear and concise article on the distinction.

The Pearl of Great Price: Two Types of Sin

Two Types of Sin


Sin can be both willful and non-willful.

It is willful sin which brings death, non-willful brings correction.

Rom 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

1. Sin unto death
2. Obedience unto righteousness

Sin unto death = disobedience unto unrighteousness.

Therefore...

Jas 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

Thus...

Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

1Jn 5:12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

1Jn 5:16 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
1Jn 5:17 All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.
1Jn 5:18 We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.

Two kinds of sin. One is rebellion, the other is falling short in ignorance. It is only rebellion which cuts one off from God (spiritual death).

Hence the context of the warning...

Heb 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
Heb 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
Heb 10:28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
Heb 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

Num 15:30 But the soul that doeth ought presumptuously, whether he be born in the land, or a stranger, the same reproacheth the LORD; and that soul shall be cut off from among his people.
Num 15:31 Because he hath despised the word of the LORD, and hath broken his commandment, that soul shall utterly be cut off; his iniquity shall be upon him.
Num 15:32 And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.
Num 15:33 And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.
Num 15:34 And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.
Num 15:35 And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.
Num 15:36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.

Now here is one of the most beautiful passages in the entire Bible.

Rom 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
Rom 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
Rom 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

It is the Spirit of life in Jesus Christ which sets us free from the law of sin and death. Why is that? It is because when we walk according to the Spirit by a faith that works by love we are no longer engaged in that which brings our ruin. What a wonderful salvation.

 

[Magenta]

I'd like to challenge one of your definitions above: sin of rebellion = (sin unto death); I think more accurate definition needs to include "knowingly" (knowingly sin unto death), because the distinction is between awareness and ignorance.

God's Word says people do know, and they hide the truth from themselves. Can't remember the exact Scripture; also that the heavens declare the glory of God... people run in rebellion and defiance, preferring the darkness to Light.

 

[WoundedWarrior]

I have written a clear and concise article on the distinction.

The Pearl of Great Price: Two Types of Sin

Hey cool - A simple: "yes, I agree" would have worked.

Are you planning to address my previous question?

 

[Skinski7]

Hey cool - A simple: "yes, I agree" would have worked.

Are you planning to address my previous question?

What is the question?

 

[WoundedWarrior]

What is the question?

Here it is...

Do you understand that we disagree with your interpretation of our understanding of sin and salvation?

I'm not asking if you understand that we disagree with you -- I am asking if you understand that we disagree with YOUR INTERPRETATION of our belief.

 

[Skinski7]

Here it is...

I'm not asking if you understand that we disagree with you -- I am asking if you understand that we disagree with YOUR INTERPRETATION of our belief.

It is cognitive dissonance in your mind. All I have done is strip the fluff from your theology, fluff which attempt to veil the notion of "you can sin and not surely die."

I can ask very simple questions which will demonstrate the truth.

Answer this...

Is there any sin or sins that MUST stop BEFORE God will grant forgiveness?




I did answer that question earlier I believe anyway. I fully understand that you disagree with what you perceive as my interpretation of your religion. The Pharisees disagreed with the contentions of Jesus about their religion also.

 

[Skinski7]

It is interesting that the error of the Pharisees was their focus on external rule keeping, rites and rituals and their lack of discernment as it pertains to the condition of the heart that matters.

Today's error is very similar, yet it has replaced the focus on "external rule keeping, rites and rituals" with TRUST IN A PROVISIONAL LEGAL EXCHANGE.

Both the religion of the Pharisees and the religion of the vast majority of that which claims to be Christianity totally disregard heart purity as being essential.

It is really the same error in different clothes. The Pharisees had faith in their rites, rituals and rules, the modern religionists have faith in dogmatic theological constructs.