Often misunderstood part of the Bible (1 John 1:8-19)

[Jason0047]

Amen, maybe he thinks we made ourselves and decided to just jump in here for fun?....might just be me, but looks like God is using every voice He can to wake this dude up before it's to late. After that he's gonna have Christ tell him to his face while trembling before Him.

Wake me up to what exactly?

A doctrine that says "all my future sin is forgiven" whereby it would make people think they have a "license to sin" because there is no real consequences that would matter?

A doctrine that says "only physical death is the result of sin committed by the believer"? Oh great, then why even serve God anymore and or think about Him? Does that sound like the lives of the apostles? Did they think they could sin and still be saved? I say thee nay.

For those who think they can sin and still be saved (and or those on the opposite extreme of the spectrum, i.e. Works Salvationists) will be the ones who will be in under Christ's Judgment as per Matthew 7 (And it will not be the faithful believer to Christ).

For Jesus said, you will know them by their fruits.

 

[dcontroversal]

Wake me up to what exactly?

A doctrine that says "all my future sin is forgiven" whereby it would make people think they have a "license to sin" because there is no real consequences that would matter?

A doctrine that says "only physical death is the result of sin committed by the believer"? Oh great, then why even serve God anymore and or think about Him? Does that sound like the lives of the apostles? Did they think they could sin and still be saved? I say thee nay.

For those who think they can sin and still be saved (and or those on the opposite extreme of the spectrum, i.e. Works Salvationists) will be the ones who will be in under Christ's Judgment as per Matthew 7 (And it will not be the faithful believer to Christ).

All three of these statements reek of pure ignorance of scripture and applies nothing more than your opinion based upon your salvation lite doctrine.....

a. Rejects God's use of Chastisement of a believer and makes a mockery of God's desire and will concerning chastisement
b. SEE A and open your eyes as people who teach eternal security do not teach this so quit lying and attributing things that we don't teach
c. More foolishness.....and pure blindness as YOU SIN, EVERYONE SINS and this view denies so many scriptures it about makes me puke......

Jason, you have no clue!

 

[Jason0047]

All three of these statements reek of pure ignorance of scripture and applies nothing more than your opinion based upon your salvation lite doctrine.....

a. Rejects God's use of Chastisement of a believer and makes a mockery of God's desire and will concerning chastisement

No, I believe in Scripture that talks about the Chastisement of the true believer. When OSAS proponents tell people that all future sin is forgiven, they may not read later what you had written about how a believer is supposed to live holy or they are not saved. But then again, you really don't believe that because you say in (c) below that no believer can stop sinning (Which means they can never be righteous or holy or a saint instead of a sinner).

b. SEE A and open your eyes as people who teach eternal security do not teach this so quit lying and attributing things that we don't teach

Again, I have talked with people who believe exactly as you do but they eliminate holiness and or moral living completely as being a requirement for salvation. It is strange that they believe exactly as you do but they differ on the topic of holiness. But then again, I am not entirely convinced you are for the doctrine of holiness because like you said below in (c), you do not believe a believer can stop in sinning. For Paul says, shall we continue to sin because we are not under the Law? Paul says, God forbid. Paul also lists sins for those who wil not inherit the Kingdom of God. Paul was writing to believers because he said be not deceived. For the type of sins that he lists will clearly lead to spiritual death.

c. More foolishness.....and pure blindness as YOU SIN, EVERYONE SINS and this view denies so many scriptures it about makes me puke......

Jason, you have no clue!

No, believers who are born of God do not commit sin habitually or as a way of life (1 John 3:9). For he that does not righteousness is not of God (1 John 3:10). In other words, one cannot do both righteousness and sin at the same time and be righteous. One is either doing righteousness and is righteous (1 John 3:7), or they are sinning which is of the devil (1 John 3:8). For no man can serve two masters. Believers are called saints. Scripture says, without holiness, no man shall see the Lord. Believers walk in the light as he is in the light whereby the blood of Jesus cleanses them of all sin (1 John 1:7). For if we say we have fellowship with him and walk in darkness (i.e. sin) we lie and do not the truth (1 John 1:6). For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved (John 3:20).

Peter identifies certain false believers as having eyes full of adultery who CANNOT CEASE (stop) from sin
(2 Peter 2:1, 14).

 

[Jason0047]

 

[dcontroversal]

No, I believe in Scripture that talks about the Chastisement of the true believer. When OSAS proponents tell people that all future sin is forgiven, they may not read later what you had written about how a believer is supposed to live holy or they are not saved. But then again, you really don't believe that because you say in (c) below that no believer can stop sinning (Which means they can never be righteous or holy or a saint instead of a sinner).



Again, I have talked with people who believe exactly as you do but they eliminate holiness and or moral living completely as being a requirement for salvation. It is strange that they believe exactly as you do but they differ on the topic of holiness. But then again, I am not entirely convinced you are for the doctrine of holiness because like you said below in (c), you do not believe a believer can stop in sinning. For Paul says, shall we continue to sin because we are not under the Law? Paul says, God forbid. Paul also lists sins for those who wil not inherit the Kingdom of God. Paul was writing to believers because he said be not deceived. For the type of sins that he lists will clearly lead to spiritual death.



No, believers who are born of God do not commit sin habitually or as a way of life (1 John 3:9). For he that does not righteousness is not of God (1 John 3:10). In other words, one cannot do both righteousness and sin at the same time and be righteous. One is either doing righteousness and is righteous (1 John 3:7), or they are sinning which is of the devil (1 John 3:8). For no man can serve two masters. Believers are called saints. Scripture says, without holiness, no man shall see the Lord. Believers walk in the light as he is in the light whereby the blood of Jesus cleanses them of all sin (1 John 1:7). For if we say we have fellowship with him and walk in darkness (i.e. sin) we lie and do not the truth (1 John 1:6). For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved (John 3:20).

Peter identifies certain false believers as having eyes full of adultery who CANNOT CEASE (stop) from sin
(2 Peter 2:1, 14).

Again you twist and add words just like you do to the bible....no where did I use the word habitually....you know to add words is lying and the bible states that all liars will have their part in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone.....

To say that you don't sin of have ceased from sin completely is exactly what the Pharisees got rebuked for.....the problem is you deny you sin because by our own doctrine you are lost.....

Quit adding the word habitually to what I have said...

And your particular use of PETER as applied to all believers who sin shows even more ignorance......Don't worry...You will find out one day soon that your salvation lite doctrine was false.....

 

[eternally-gratefull]

No.

2 Timothy 2:22, “Now flee from youthful lusts and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, with those who call on the Lord from a pure heart.”

Philippians 4:8, “Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and it anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things.”

“be ye holy in all manner of conversation; … ‘Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.’ ” (1 Peter 1:15-16) ?

Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: (1 Peter 1:22).

Psalm 119:9, “How can a young man (or young woman) keep his (her) way pure? By keeping it according to Your word.”

"flee from youthful lusts” and dwell on “whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely”. (2 Timothy 2:22).

1 John 3:2-3, “Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is. And everyone who has this hope fixed on Him purifies himself, just as He is pure.”

Matthew 5:8, “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.”

and this is your answer? What do you think being set apart means?

This does not answer anything, anyone who has truth faith in Christ would do these things. They do not support your works based theory.

Without Christ, you can do all those things, and you would still be condemned by the law. Because you have not been cleansed by the blood of Christ, why do you crucify Christ over and over?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

So the wife would be in the wrong for his unfaithfulness? The man is in the right? No. God's love does not allow people to get away with evil. That is just wrong. God cannot condone a person's sinful actions no matter who they are.

how is the wife wrong for showing agape love? it is obvious you have no idea what agape love is.

Dude you have real issues here. Your getting to the point your not even worth responding to anymore. Keep it up. and we will just leave yoiu in your fantasy world.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Uh, no. 1 John 1:9 is in context to 1 John 1:7 of them walking in the Light.

Uh no. If your sinning, your not walking in the light, you have fallen to darkness, you have grieved the spirit (however, notice, you did not lose the spirit, your still sealed till the day of Christ)

Yes, 1 John 1: 9 to excuse your sin is an easy way out of condemnation.

If I had a cookee I really liked, and my mom said I can not have any until she says, But I keep getting away with it by saying I am sorry, I am going to continue to steel those cookies.

A cheap way to excuse the sins you like. as long as yuo do not do the sins you deem evil.

You have made your own law. and reject the law of God.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Scripture has to be compared with Scripture. You can't take one text and focus a laser beam on it as if that is what the Bible says on the whole matter. The Bereans were more noble because they search the Scriptures on whether those things be so or not comparing spiritual things with spiritual things (i.e. Scripture with Scripture).

lol. So this is your excuse?

Again your heeding on the point of not being worth our time.

Peter asked him a question, He answered peter. Peter did not have any of the NT to twist what Jesus said, he had to take him at his word.

So again, where does it say the brother had to ask forgiveness?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Besides, here is the context.

O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee? And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him. So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.

aint that interesting.

Again no place is it required for the debtor to ask forgiveness. That person was supposed to forgive him anyway.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I would waste my time anymore...he is blind o the truth, teaches works by default and rejects simple truths which prove eternal security...

WHATSOEVER GOD DOES IT IS ETERNAL, NOTHING added nor NOTHING TAKEN AWAY FROM IT.......WHATSOEVER includes salvation......

SANCTIFIED FOREVER in Christ JESUS......
JUSTIFIED by the faith and BLOOD of CHRIST
SINS removed and placed upon the cross.......
Christ mediates NON STOP, GOD'S GRACE bounds ahead of our SIN

At the end of the day, people who teach you can lose it will also say...

1. Their sin is not bad enough to lose it
2. They have never lost it
3. Are self righteous and boast of their faithfulness
4. Attribute lies and falsehoods to those who believe eternal security
5. Ignore verb tense and context
6. Apply the word saved or save entirely to soul salvation even though sometimes applies to physical preservation
7. Use circular reasoning and worldly examples that have nothing at all to do with the spiritual aspect....

etc.........

I think it is about time to place the dude on ignore. Nothing he says makes sense. He continues to twist our words. He is stuck in his own fantasy world. Maybe if everyone ignores him, he will leave.

 

[Jason0047]

and this is your answer? What do you think being set apart means?

This does not answer anything, anyone who has truth faith in Christ would do these things. They do not support your works based theory.

Without Christ, you can do all those things, and you would still be condemned by the law. Because you have not been cleansed by the blood of Christ, why do you crucify Christ over and over?

Only those who apostasized for rejecting Jesus Christ when they have tasted of the heavenly gift and been partakers of the Holy Spirit, can they not crucify the Son of God afresh again (See Hebrews 6:4-6). However, James 5:19-21 does teach that a believer can backslide into siin and be renewed back to the faith to the saving of their soul, though.

Side Note:

Again, I don't believe in Works Salvationism.

 

[Jason0047]

how is the wife wrong for showing agape love? it is obvious you have no idea what agape love is.

Dude you have real issues here. Your getting to the point your not even worth responding to anymore. Keep it up. and we will just leave yoiu in your fantasy world.

The Scriptures say, He that does not love does not know God.
Take a step back a moment. Would another person (who is being objective) say you are being loving with your words towards me right now?

Anyways, God will not allow one of His own people to get away with evil. That would not be loving on the part of God if God is good, holy, just, and righteous (of which He definitely is).

 

[Jason0047]

Uh no. If your sinning, your not walking in the light, you have fallen to darkness, you have grieved the spirit (however, notice, you did not lose the spirit, your still sealed till the day of Christ)

Yes, 1 John 1: 9 to excuse your sin is an easy way out of condemnation.

If I had a cookee I really liked, and my mom said I can not have any until she says, But I keep getting away with it by saying I am sorry, I am going to continue to steel those cookies.

A cheap way to excuse the sins you like. as long as yuo do not do the sins you deem evil.

You have made your own law. and reject the law of God.

I said 1 John 1:7 is the context of 1 John 1:9. Now you are acting like 1 John 1:7 does not exist. Besides, lets say there is a person who struggles with their sin so as to stop it. Who was more justified in the parable of the Tax Collector and the Pharisee? The man who cried out to God to have mercy on him being a sinner or the man who thought he was God's untouchable child?

Obviously the man that didn't even bother to humble himself before God was a bad example in the Parable.

As for your analogy: Yes, true sorrow is in saying you are sorry to one's mother for stealing cookies and in not stealing them again. So according to 1 John 1:9 the child would stop stealing the cookies as per 1 John 1:7. If the child just stole and kept saying they are sorry, then they are not truly sorry or sorrowful over their sin. 1 John 1:9 is tied to 1 John 1:7.

 

[Jason0047]

aint that interesting.

Again no place is it required for the debtor to ask forgiveness. That person was supposed to forgive him anyway.

Why are you ignoring Matthew 6:15?

 

[Jason0047]

I said 1 John 1:7 is the context of 1 John 1:9. Now you are acting like 1 John 1:7 does not exist. Besides, lets say there is a person who struggles with their sin so as to stop it. Who was more justified in the parable of the Tax Collector and the Pharisee? The man who cried out to God to have mercy on him being a sinner or the man who thought he was God's untouchable child?

Obviously the man that didn't even bother to humble himself before God was a bad example in the Parable.

As for your analogy: Yes, true sorrow is in saying you are sorry to one's mother for stealing cookies and in not stealing them again. So according to 1 John 1:9 the child would stop stealing the cookies as per 1 John 1:7. If the child just stole and kept saying they are sorry, then they are not truly sorry or sorrowful over their sin. 1 John 1:9 is tied to 1 John 1:7.

But let's extend this real world example into an OSAS type belief.

Okay, in the OSAS world: The child would not need to say they were sorry or confess of their sin in stealing the cookies. Maybe the child would stop stealing the cookies for a while and maybe they would go back to stealing the cookies (Because the OSAS proponent believes they are not perfect or sinless or that they cannot stop from sin altogether). So in this example: the child is not truly sorry or sorrowful in any way shape or form if he doesn't say he is sorry and he later steals again down the road. If the child had at least said they were sorry, and they meant it, they would be more in favor with the parent then say the child who did not say they were sorry and just stopped and didn't say anything. I mean, have you ever been told your parents to say that you are sorry to someone and you didn't feel like doing it? That is kind of what you are doing when you mock my Biblical stand on 1 John 1:9. For it says, if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

I just don't understand why you don't want to accept that verse as it is plainly written, my friend.

 

[ChristInUs]

OSAS is a lie of Satan and that doctrine will lead many to hell. It is a works based doctrine and hides behind the ruse of Grace.

 

[Jason0047]

I think it is about time to place the dude on ignore. Nothing he says makes sense. He continues to twist our words. He is stuck in his own fantasy world. Maybe if everyone ignores him, he will leave.

This is so ironic. You do that which you claim me of doing. I say that I do not believe in Works Salvationism; Yet, you claim that is what I believe (When that is not what I believe). I have also used real life examples (and not fantasy world examples) to show you that the doctrine of OSAS itself will lead a person to have no major incentive to do what is good and right. Not that it applies to them, but Chastisement is not a deterrent for the person who wants to get away with sin instead of loving God. I say this because most here have expressed the belief that no believer can cease from sin (However, Peter identifies the false prophets as not having ceased from sin in 2 Peter 2:1, 14).

 

[ChristInUs]

You know Paul was left for dead and shipwrecked and slept in the ocean twice and went to Rome knowing it was His death. You think wow this man did a great work for God. Yet He wrote the works that I do are not my own. I place my faith in the cross least any man should boast.

 

[Jason0047]

OSAS is a lie of Satan and that doctrine will lead many to hell. It is a works based doctrine and hides behind the ruse of Grace.

One either is doing either good works and or evil works. A person cannot be doing both. For Jesus said you cannot serve two masters. He said we will know a tree by it's fruit.

Anyways, when a person says future sin is forgiven them to others (Whether they intend to or not), they are telling others they have a license to sin because there is no real lasting consequences of them sinning in regards to the afterlife. So they are placing the blood of others on their hands for leading people astray into sin (Whether they want that to happen or not). Also, some of them may even promote living right and or holiness (yet they backpeddal and say that a believer cannot stop in their sins, though, too).