Not By Works

I said John was not talking about two natures in 1 John 3 and you replied that "I didn't know what I was talking about" See post 101,655. Direct answer to my assertion that John was not talking about two natures in 1 John 3 was "pal, you don't know what you're talking about"

If I say 1 John 3 is not talking about two natures, and you tell me I don't know what I'm talking about and then go on to argue about two natures, isn't that about the same thing as saying 1 John 3 is about two natures?

See, this is the problem. A lot of times your answers are out of context with what you are replying to. I'll say something, like 1 John 3 is not about two natures, and then you'll burst out with a "you don't know what your talking about". Then you'll say "I didn't say that."

did you miss where I said " activity "??

Sure, I will turn down the heat,but my challenge to DC stands. Same rules I offered Bud, which are standard. Two men discussing civilly, without dog piling from the gallery.

if you want to get technical about yes, but the actual definition of the word believe in the greek is to be persuaded of, to think to be true, to entrust.

so, the actual act of believing is a mental activity.
and, I borrowed nothing, my theology is very consistent .

saved by faith, then everything else is a separate conversation .

Macaroni...there is no challenge....every time I engage you you twist, deceive, embellish and take what I say and apply it in a manner I never implied....then, double down, triple down, use deception and go off on a 5 day tangent of how right you are......I am not the only one you have done this to and exactly why many have you on ignore.....until you can be honest we are done...do not address me, engage me or even talk to me......end of story! AND snide little accusations will not work with me to get me to engage.....

I said John was not talking about two natures in 1 John 3 and you replied that "I didn't know what I was talking about" See post 101,655. Direct answer to my assertion that John was not talking about two natures in 1 John 3 was "pal, you don't know what you're talking about" Then you said you never applied the two natures teaching to John. That is not an embellishment, that is the truth.

Just like the fact that Argueless never accused you of lying to the Holy Spirit, he merely referred to your STANCE on the Holy Spirit. I have given documented proof of this many times, but you fail to acknowledge. I am not the one who is dishonest, you are.

I was laughing at the fact that you went back to a verse that has been a source of disagreement....lighten up Mr. M. is just seemed a little ironic

1 John 3:6-7 is not talking about two natures in the believer, one sinning and the other righteous. It is talking about people who are born of God and people who are not born of God. Anyone who reads the whole chapter (and book) in it's context can see that, unless a person is reading their own ideas into the text.

Pal....you have no idea and exactly why MOST have you on ignore...your drivel and bather = deceit....PAUL was clear, so was JESUS.....the bible is replete of the conflict between the two natures, you are just too dense to grasp it.....

MY original quote above... (in reference to post 2 above) SHOW where I applied it to JOHN....

the only thing you properly document is how an adult throws a childish temper tantrum every time you get proved wrong.

I was not proven wrong. DC has now denied applying the two natures teaching to John. (see post 101,624)

So I have not been proven wrong.

Works and faith, as Jesus pointed out.

the only thing you properly document is how an adult throws a childish temper tantrum every time you get proved wrong.

I would like to see someone offer a rebuttal to the statement below, without ad hominems or misrepresentations or personal attacks. Just attack the argument below, if you are able. I am sure that you will not be able to, because the interpretation below is based on rules of interpretation.

1 John 3:10 sums up what John is talking about in 1 John 3:6-9

1 John 3:10- 10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

No two natures in the believer. That is in Romans and Galatians, but not here. 1 John 3:6-10 is talking about two different sorts of people. Those who are born of God and those who aren't. Those who are children of God and because of the new nature practice righteousness, and those who are not born of God, and because they don't have a new nature practice sin. Nothing about two natures. Except only one nature of a Christian and one nature of a non-Christian. So simple, a child can understand, if one only reads the passage in context, without goggles of their own presupposition and tradition.

Not even Paul taught such a duality. He taught two natures, but not that one nature goes one way and we go another. He taught that we have two natures and we choose which nature to follow. If you live after the flesh, you will die, but if you put to death the deeds of the flesh, you shall live. And in another place, they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with it's affections and lusts. And in another place, walk after the Spirit and you will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh.

So if Paul were to exegete 1 John 3, I am confident that he would not transpose the two natures teaching, taking them from one context and moving them to another (to 1 John 3) where there is no mention whatsoever of two natures. He would agree with 1 John 3:10 that says that verses 6-9 are speaking of a distinction between those who are of God and those who are not, ie- those who have been born of God and those who have not. This is the only interpretation the CONTEXT allows for.

Verse 10 shows that clearly and plainly

Wrong.....faith alone for salvation....anything beyond that the results of the faith and salvation one already possesses eternally......nice try, but wrong on your part

sure you have. undergrace proved you wrong, you could not refute her, so you jumped on some random thing doc said as a cover/distraction.

your games are not as clever as you think they are, just like your theology is legalism , if you say so or not.

SO is an activity something you do? And are YOU SURE that faith is merely an activity? Or is it a product of and response to divine revelation, illumination, and drawing?

IN other words, is faith produced by the Grace of God?

Well, I would argue that LIFECHANGE is produced by the grace of God. And love is produced by the Grace of God. And perserverance is only by the Grace of God. And sanctification is by the Grace of God, and glorification is by the grace of God, and anything good we do is by the Grace of God, and fruit bearing is by the grace of God. EVERYTHING good is by the Grace of God.

Nothing I said is anti grace. I just believe we should gladly receive the whole package, whereas some think that grace is a buffet where everything except faith is optional. OK, perhaps that is true. But what they are missing out on

Both, as seen in Jesus' two greatest commandments.

sure you have. undergrace proved you wrong, you could not refute her, so you jumped on some random thing doc said as a cover/distraction.

your games are not as clever as you think they are, just like your theology is legalism , if you say so or not.

but there is a division- you and your church teach that one does not receive salvation UNTIL they walked just as He walked.

sure you have. undergrace proved you wrong, you could not refute her, so you jumped on some random thing doc said as a cover/distraction.

your games are not as clever as you think they are, just like your theology is legalism , if you say so or not.

Macaroni...there is no challenge....every time I engage you you twist, deceive, embellish and take what I say and apply it in a manner I never implied....then, double down, triple down, use deception and go off on a 5 day tangent of how right you are......I am not the only one you have done this to and exactly why many have you on ignore.....until you can be honest we are done...do not address me, engage me or even talk to me......end of story! AND snide little accusations will not work with me to get me to engage.....