The answer to your question is in the highlighted portion above.
-JGIG
Edit: Never mind I don't want to get back into this. Thank you and I love ALL my brothers and sisters in this thread.
The 1 John 1:9 Lie: More New.Modern.Hyper Grace blasphemy
- Thread starter HeRoseFromTheDead
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Edit: Never mind I don't want to get back into this. Thank you and I love ALL my brothers and sisters in this thread.
I believe that a Christian who doesn't do the will of GOD, won't be saved. This is exactly the opposite of what gnostics believed.
I believe that a Christian can be corrupted by sin and lost. This is exactly the opposite of what gnostics believed.
I believe the new birth can be undone. This is exactly the opposite of what gnostics believed.
No, it's not clear. It's clear from the text that John wrote to his little children, who would have been his spiritual children whom he begat in the faith. You have nothing to support that claim except your opinion.
Never thought about it, and I'm not aware of Scripture that tells us where Jesus' physical Blood is now - it was shed on earth at the Cross. It was spilled onto the ground. Christ entered the heavenly Temple because of His Sacrifice - I don't know that the physical blood was somehow gathered up and used to 'gain him entrance'. His Authority to enter was because of Who He is and What He accomplished.
Whatever the details, Scripture tells us that Christ's Work is done, and He forever lives to intercede for us from a position of rest, sitting at the Right Hand of the Father, His Work finished.
-JGIG
The new creation in Christ does not want to reject Christ. If we are not made new in Christ then we were never in Christ. The butterfly does not want the things he had when he was a caterpillar. The butterfly now drinks the sweet nectar of the flower and has no appetite for the bitter old leaves he desired when he was a caterpillar.
The will of man caused him to sin in the garden. The new man in Christ now has his will in subjection to Christ and righteousness. At the cross we surrender our sin but also our will to Christ. Not my will by Thy will be done. That which was mine is now His.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
If a person is a Christian, the will of God has been done in their lives. It is His will that we believe on the One He sent.
Those two things are exactly the opposite of what the Scriptures clearly teach us. And I don't put much stock in your understanding of what Gnostics do or do not believe.
-JGIG
Hebrews chapter nine is deep but it is clear that the blood of Christ is sprinkled in the holy places not made with hands.
Hebrews 9:23 ¶ It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
The blood of Christ was not left on the ground but carried into heaven and sprinkled on the altar, mercy seat, for our sins.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
Sacrifices never entered the temple. They were destroyed outside. Only a high priest with blood could enter the holy place.
Jesus was resurrected with his wounds. He told Thomas to touch his wrists, and put his finger in the wound in his side.
Jesus could not have entered heaven without his blood. And no high priest intercedes on behalf of the people without blood.
but only the high priest [enters] into the second [tent] once a year, not without blood, which he offers on behalf of himself and the [sins] of the people committed in ignorance. Hebrews 9:7
On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many miracles in your name?’ And then I will say to them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Depart from me, you who practice lawlessness!’ Matthew 7:22-23
It's there in black and white in post #1.
it looks like God used the blood of Jesus to raise Him from the dead...
Hebrews 13:20-21 (NASB)
[SUP]20 [/SUP] Now the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, even Jesus our Lord,
[SUP]21 [/SUP] equip you in every good thing to do His will, working in us that which is pleasing in His sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory forever and ever. Amen.
Hebrews 13:20-21 (NASB)
[SUP]20 [/SUP] Now the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, even Jesus our Lord,
[SUP]21 [/SUP] equip you in every good thing to do His will, working in us that which is pleasing in His sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory forever and ever. Amen.
Yeah, I read through Hebrews 9 again, and it is not clear on where Christ's physical Blood ended up - it says that HE entered into heaven itself, it does not detail that His Blood was 'placed' or 'sprinkled' anywhere in the heavenly Temple.
Some interesting discussion here:
Wherever His Blood physically ended up, Hebrews tells us that it was enough to provide cleansing for the whole world's sins, and that's good enough for me
.-JGIG
I actually agree with this mostly, and is a big reason I scrapped my response to JGIG's response to that comment, but my point is that for whatever crazy reason that may come along I do feel God still gives me the right and free will to reject Him if I chose to. I also feel that it would be blaspheming the Holy Spirit. Although I do agree with you for the most part, and could never imagine how or why anyone would ever do something like this, I do feel it is technically possible no matter how insane or seemingly impossible. I do not think God would be responsible, and all His word would remain true, and it would be all the persons choice to walk away, but I don't agree with the butterfly analogy in the sense that the metamorphosis could not ever be reversed. I do not feel God takes our free will, even to turn from Him, when we are regenerated. Now to be clear this is not something I really want to argue about nor really "defend" real bad, it's just my view that God would respect our choices even after salvation, even one as dumb and self destructive as this.
Jesus is a physical being, fully God and fully man . . . it's an interesting thing to think about.
It does not change the status of Christ's Work, however:
Finished.
-JGIG
Yes...I agree...Jesus shed His blood to buy our redemption. Where it went and where it is now in all reality not relevant as the fact remains it did it's job...and we are forgiven for all eternity..
His blood speaks of better things then the blood of Abel..which cried out for vengeance from the ground.
Our Lord's blood cries out you are free and innocent ..I love you!....you have the forgiveness of sins! We have a great salvation in Jesus our Lord!
In Him...we have redemption..the forgiveness of sins!
His blood speaks of better things then the blood of Abel..which cried out for vengeance from the ground.
Our Lord's blood cries out you are free and innocent ..I love you!....you have the forgiveness of sins! We have a great salvation in Jesus our Lord!
In Him...we have redemption..the forgiveness of sins!
Yeah, I read through Hebrews 9 again, and it is not clear on where Christ's physical Blood ended up - it says that HE entered into heaven itself, it does not detail that His Blood was 'placed' or 'sprinkled' anywhere in the heavenly Temple.
Some interesting discussion here:
Wherever His Blood physically ended up, Hebrews tells us that it was enough to provide cleansing for the whole world's sins, and that's good enough for me
-JGIG
For those who try and make 1 john fit the exagerated hyper grace theology--here's parts of a helpful article.
1 John 2:19, if taken at face value, strongly suggests that the false teachers were originally members of the Christian community to which the author is writing. They appear to have “gone out” from among this community “into the world” (4:1). Thus the author is addressing a community which has undergone a schism or split in which a substantial part of the community – maybe even a numerical majority – has withdrawn from fellowship. This is a key point which affects the interpretation of almost every part of 1, 2, and 3 John.30
(6) A DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY
The root of this split or division appears to be a doctrinal controversy, although there are ethical issues involved too (i.e., attitude toward sin, love for the brethren). The prologue (1 John 1:1-4) reminds the readers of the apostolic testimony about who Jesus is, and lays down adherence to this testimony as a condition for “fellowship” (1:4). Presumably those who have departed from the apostolic teaching about Jesus (2:18-19) would not share this “fellowship.” (There will be more to say about the views of the opponents later.)
(7) AN ADVERSARIAL STANCE
In writing 1 John the author adopts a “we–they” stance (cf. the pronoun switches [“you – they – we”] in 4:4-6), which implies that the people to whom he is writing have not yet embraced the teaching of the schismatics (who have withdrawn from the community but are still seeking to influence it from outside, perhaps to win adherents for their own views). However, some of the recipients of 1 John may be under pressure to side with the opponents, and one major reason for the letter would be to convince them not to do so.
-------------------------------
CONCLUSIONS:
What we can discern about the setting of the Johannine Epistles from the letters themselves is limited and fragmentary, but it appears that 1 and 2 John, at least, are rooted in controversy.31 The author of 1 John appears to be writing to a community to which he himself is well-known (and to which he himself may belong). He attempts to reassure those to whom he writes, because their Christian community has undergone a serious split whereby a substantial part of the community has withdrawn from fellowship over doctrinal issues. The author of 1 John describes the group which has left as made up of ‘antichrists’ and ‘false prophets’ (strong language by any account).
This group (which has split off and withdrawn from fellowship with the community to which the author writes) is continuing to propagate its own beliefs. The secessionists are seeking to win converts for their own views, even from among the community to which they formerly belonged. In light of this threat, the author of 1 John is writing both to reassure and strengthen the faithful members of that community, and to warn them to continue to resist the proselytizing efforts of the false teachers who have gone out from among them. In 2 John the author is writing to a particular congregation to warn the believers there against giving aid or shelter to the false teachers in their ongoing missionary efforts.
https://bible.org/seriespage/2-background-and-setting-1-john
You see 1 John always was written to believers. ts the hyper grace guys with their NEW teaching that have to prove otherwise.. And yet even their scholarly advocates can't even do that with any credance and credibility.
1 John 2:19, if taken at face value, strongly suggests that the false teachers were originally members of the Christian community to which the author is writing. They appear to have “gone out” from among this community “into the world” (4:1). Thus the author is addressing a community which has undergone a schism or split in which a substantial part of the community – maybe even a numerical majority – has withdrawn from fellowship. This is a key point which affects the interpretation of almost every part of 1, 2, and 3 John.30
(6) A DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSY
The root of this split or division appears to be a doctrinal controversy, although there are ethical issues involved too (i.e., attitude toward sin, love for the brethren). The prologue (1 John 1:1-4) reminds the readers of the apostolic testimony about who Jesus is, and lays down adherence to this testimony as a condition for “fellowship” (1:4). Presumably those who have departed from the apostolic teaching about Jesus (2:18-19) would not share this “fellowship.” (There will be more to say about the views of the opponents later.)
(7) AN ADVERSARIAL STANCE
In writing 1 John the author adopts a “we–they” stance (cf. the pronoun switches [“you – they – we”] in 4:4-6), which implies that the people to whom he is writing have not yet embraced the teaching of the schismatics (who have withdrawn from the community but are still seeking to influence it from outside, perhaps to win adherents for their own views). However, some of the recipients of 1 John may be under pressure to side with the opponents, and one major reason for the letter would be to convince them not to do so.
-------------------------------
CONCLUSIONS:
What we can discern about the setting of the Johannine Epistles from the letters themselves is limited and fragmentary, but it appears that 1 and 2 John, at least, are rooted in controversy.31 The author of 1 John appears to be writing to a community to which he himself is well-known (and to which he himself may belong). He attempts to reassure those to whom he writes, because their Christian community has undergone a serious split whereby a substantial part of the community has withdrawn from fellowship over doctrinal issues. The author of 1 John describes the group which has left as made up of ‘antichrists’ and ‘false prophets’ (strong language by any account).
This group (which has split off and withdrawn from fellowship with the community to which the author writes) is continuing to propagate its own beliefs. The secessionists are seeking to win converts for their own views, even from among the community to which they formerly belonged. In light of this threat, the author of 1 John is writing both to reassure and strengthen the faithful members of that community, and to warn them to continue to resist the proselytizing efforts of the false teachers who have gone out from among them. In 2 John the author is writing to a particular congregation to warn the believers there against giving aid or shelter to the false teachers in their ongoing missionary efforts.
https://bible.org/seriespage/2-background-and-setting-1-john
You see 1 John always was written to believers. ts the hyper grace guys with their NEW teaching that have to prove otherwise.. And yet even their scholarly advocates can't even do that with any credance and credibility.
Yes. And on that note, I'm outta here. Life, laundry and a ton of other tasks now demand my time.
Grace and peace, all!
-JGIG
I didn't say that did I? When one can't refute scripture, they often try to prop up the straw man argument to save face.
Well, maybe this ole dog can't learn new tricks!
That which was from the beginning, which WE have heard, which WE have seen with our eyes, which WE looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life . . . Although John doesn't specifically say who the "we" is, we can see from the context that it is other apostles who had heard and seen Jesus, those that were with him. John wanted them to continue in the intimate joint sharing among the believers. John is writing to fellow Christians whom he has discipled and with whom he is in an intimate relationship with.
We see in 1 John that many antichrists are coming along (2:18) and that they went "out from" the believers meaning that they had once been fellowshipping with John and those with him but left because they started following "many false prophets" that were in the world (4:1). These disciples were being confused by these deceived Christians who had become false prophets and even teaching against Christ. That is the essence of - If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in "darkness", we lie and do not practice the truth. What is the truth that is not being practiced? That which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, etc. Practicing the truth is standing on true doctrine. But if we are walking in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another. That is why John is writing to them to re-establish like-mindedness with his beloved disicples so that he and they could have "fellowship".
I just can't see not acknowledging my sin - we all still sin and in order to have that full sharing, that intimate relationship, we need to acknowledge any wrong doing. Sin affects our relationship (fellowship) with God and the rewards we will or will not receive in the future.
I'll take a look at it tomorrow, but Jesus Christ kind of already made me "all new", so I understand first hand honestly, and He did so in a radical, overnight way I like to call my "road to Damascus experience". I understand and agree with that with all my heart, and it was so free and undeserved I am still in awe over His amazing grace, no doubt. All that said I still very much feel I still have free will, and it's painfully obvious every time I do something I shouldn't. One of my own personal problems is anger while I'm driving, but the Spirit lets me know even when I have angry thoughts, and although it's WORLDS better than it was before I was saved I still feel I fall short daily in that area, and I WANT to change. That shows me that I still very much have a choice and a journey ahead of me until the day I close my eyes for the last time. I had to lose my right arm to find truth and now that He's given it to me I would never let it go, but still feel I have a choice none the less. That's really my only point, but I will watch or read that tomorrow, and thank you for sharing it.
Last edited: