ARCHIVE: Free From Sin - 1 John
- Thread starter Sozo
- Start date
4: You do know the truth and you deliberately refuse it and foster a false gospel. Oh yes, you will sincerely and deliberately go to hell because you you willfully remain in the flesh. You are quite the sinner alright. You have no excuse.
RULZ: Oh no. Another case of sozoitis. I have a cure. It is called the Word of God, not ad hominem logical fallacies that you are guilty of. I am very disappointed in you. I expected better from you, since I have appreciated many of your thoughts and thought you had more integrity than you-know-who.
4:According to you those in Christ remain in sin also and you count the blood atonement as a worthless thing.
RULZ: Those in Christ do not remain in sin. Because we are in Him, we should not sin. We are children of God. This does not preclude the possibility of a sinful thought, motive, or act. I John 'if' conditions about believers. The atonement is not worthless. It is provision for all past, present, and future sins. Are you lying or merely ignorant of my true views?
4: Now I know there is no excuse for your remaining in the flesh (sin) We are called Holy because we are Holy,We are called into the light and to walk in it because we are in Christ . Christ is the light. There is no darkness in Him. We are in the Spirit and not of the flesh if so be that Christ is in you and if you are not of the spirit you are none of his. Yes you are because only sinners sin. Are you saying that Christ is unable to deliver you from all sin? That Satan still has authority over you and Jesus was not victorious? That one sentence repudiates every word of theology that you have previously made. So don't try to tell me you don't know. That is why your punishment will be worse than if you had never heard. Your unbelief makes you a sinner. All Adam did was eat a bite of fruit. That didn't make him a sinner? because of that all flesh becomes guilty before God. So are you of the flesh and mind the things of the flesh or are you of the Spirit and mind the things of the Spirit? Is it you who sins or is it the sin (flesh) that sins. What does Paul mean when he says, "it is no longer I that do it?
RULZ: Romans 6-8 shows that we can have victory over sin (sanctification). Romans 4; 5 shows us that we are freed from the power and penalty of sin. When we are glorified, we will be free from the very presence of sin. You are emphasizing a positional aspect while ignoring the progressive, practical aspect. The issues about spirit, light, and be holy are couched in terms of exhortations or commands. You wrongly assume they are automatic just because we are converted. These authors command us to do these things because we are in Christ, but they also warn us about not doing the opposite since some believers were in fact not living up to the exhortations. You display an ignorance of basic Greek and English grammar and have not read the verses in context if you counter all of the phrases with your sentences that are not fully true. We are to be like Christ, but that does not mean that we are the God-Man. Things that apply to Him are not identically applied to us. We are to grow in the grace and knowledge of Christ and put off the old self. You assume it is automatic and that we no longer have will, intellect, or any responsibility. An imperative is a command that can be obeyed or disobeyed. An exhortation to do or not do is just that. Do you just cut these out of the text? I Peter 1:13-15; Rom. 6; 2 Cor. 7:2 should be enough to get you beyond your simplistic views that do not match Scripture nor the experience of godly believers.
If I did not believe in Christ and His finished work, you could call me a sinner and hell-bound. Since I am not guilty of unbelief, but affirm the essential truths of Christianity that hundreds of millions of other believers do, it seems to me that you should retract your nonsense.
Paul's expressions of struggle (difficult to exegete as to when he was a believer and when he was not...Rom. 7) cannot be used as a wooden literalism to make 'flesh' metaphor a real biological entity inherited from Adam. As long as you see sin as substance or two wills in man, you will continue to have a confusing harmartiology/soteriology.
RULZ: Oh no. Another case of sozoitis. I have a cure. It is called the Word of God, not ad hominem logical fallacies that you are guilty of. I am very disappointed in you. I expected better from you, since I have appreciated many of your thoughts and thought you had more integrity than you-know-who.
4:According to you those in Christ remain in sin also and you count the blood atonement as a worthless thing.
RULZ: Those in Christ do not remain in sin. Because we are in Him, we should not sin. We are children of God. This does not preclude the possibility of a sinful thought, motive, or act. I John 'if' conditions about believers. The atonement is not worthless. It is provision for all past, present, and future sins. Are you lying or merely ignorant of my true views?
4: Now I know there is no excuse for your remaining in the flesh (sin) We are called Holy because we are Holy,We are called into the light and to walk in it because we are in Christ . Christ is the light. There is no darkness in Him. We are in the Spirit and not of the flesh if so be that Christ is in you and if you are not of the spirit you are none of his. Yes you are because only sinners sin. Are you saying that Christ is unable to deliver you from all sin? That Satan still has authority over you and Jesus was not victorious? That one sentence repudiates every word of theology that you have previously made. So don't try to tell me you don't know. That is why your punishment will be worse than if you had never heard. Your unbelief makes you a sinner. All Adam did was eat a bite of fruit. That didn't make him a sinner? because of that all flesh becomes guilty before God. So are you of the flesh and mind the things of the flesh or are you of the Spirit and mind the things of the Spirit? Is it you who sins or is it the sin (flesh) that sins. What does Paul mean when he says, "it is no longer I that do it?
RULZ: Romans 6-8 shows that we can have victory over sin (sanctification). Romans 4; 5 shows us that we are freed from the power and penalty of sin. When we are glorified, we will be free from the very presence of sin. You are emphasizing a positional aspect while ignoring the progressive, practical aspect. The issues about spirit, light, and be holy are couched in terms of exhortations or commands. You wrongly assume they are automatic just because we are converted. These authors command us to do these things because we are in Christ, but they also warn us about not doing the opposite since some believers were in fact not living up to the exhortations. You display an ignorance of basic Greek and English grammar and have not read the verses in context if you counter all of the phrases with your sentences that are not fully true. We are to be like Christ, but that does not mean that we are the God-Man. Things that apply to Him are not identically applied to us. We are to grow in the grace and knowledge of Christ and put off the old self. You assume it is automatic and that we no longer have will, intellect, or any responsibility. An imperative is a command that can be obeyed or disobeyed. An exhortation to do or not do is just that. Do you just cut these out of the text? I Peter 1:13-15; Rom. 6; 2 Cor. 7:2 should be enough to get you beyond your simplistic views that do not match Scripture nor the experience of godly believers.
If I did not believe in Christ and His finished work, you could call me a sinner and hell-bound. Since I am not guilty of unbelief, but affirm the essential truths of Christianity that hundreds of millions of other believers do, it seems to me that you should retract your nonsense.
Paul's expressions of struggle (difficult to exegete as to when he was a believer and when he was not...Rom. 7) cannot be used as a wooden literalism to make 'flesh' metaphor a real biological entity inherited from Adam. As long as you see sin as substance or two wills in man, you will continue to have a confusing harmartiology/soteriology.
Does the Bible apply to the body of Christ???
Does the Bible apply to the body of Christ???
1 Peter 4:17-18 "For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? AND IF IT IS WITH DIFFICULTY THAT THE RIGHTEOUS IS SAVED, WHAT WILL BECOME OF THE GODLESS MAN AND THE SINNER?" NASU
Does the Bible apply to the body of Christ???
1 Peter 4:17-18 "For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? AND IF IT IS WITH DIFFICULTY THAT THE RIGHTEOUS IS SAVED, WHAT WILL BECOME OF THE GODLESS MAN AND THE SINNER?" NASU
Sozo said:
Diimerwit: I agreed with the Petrine verse, but gave a few more that state a similar concept. Read my post again. The verses state the same principles (there is unity in Scripture, remember?).
Nit picker...what is your point?
What does your avatar say? We cannot read the yellow writing?
Sozo
New member
godrulz said:
Oh good, so then you agree that the righteous are not sinners! I'm glad you have come around. :thumb:
The avatar is an album cover from the band Aphrodite's Child (which is really Vangelis; the guy who did the soundtrack for Chariot's Of Fire). It is a concept album about the book of Revelations.
Ecumenicist
New member
godrulz said:
Sozo's worldview is being challenged, so he can't answer.
No Sozo, being Christian is not an excuse for bad behavior.
Sozo says I Jn. 1:9 is about unbelievers since Christians cannot sin.
I say it is about believers who should not, will not sin (but can sin).
Reading Olson's Beyond Calvinism/Arminianism: Mediate Theology, he had an interesting thought (Olson agrees with sozo on forgiveness of future sins, OSAS, etc. and disagrees with me about Open Theism).
He said some verses are about the forgiveness at conversion/justification. He says I Jn. 1:9 is fellowship forgiveness...it restores intimacy when believers breach fellowship (without destroying relationship/salvation) by sinning...if We (context = believers)....then....I think I concur and still disagree with any sinless perfectionism views...a believer will not, should not, need not sin, but cannot is an overstatement.
I say it is about believers who should not, will not sin (but can sin).
Reading Olson's Beyond Calvinism/Arminianism: Mediate Theology, he had an interesting thought (Olson agrees with sozo on forgiveness of future sins, OSAS, etc. and disagrees with me about Open Theism).
He said some verses are about the forgiveness at conversion/justification. He says I Jn. 1:9 is fellowship forgiveness...it restores intimacy when believers breach fellowship (without destroying relationship/salvation) by sinning...if We (context = believers)....then....I think I concur and still disagree with any sinless perfectionism views...a believer will not, should not, need not sin, but cannot is an overstatement.
elected4ever
New member
Wrong again. As usual you misrepresent what is being said. What is being said is that being a sinner is a prerequisite for salvation. All Christians were sinners. "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God". You just can't get anything straight can you. Sinners are what we were not what we presently are. Sinlessness is not the current state of the natural man (Flesh). As a matter of fact the natural man has nothing to do with God even after salvation. Our identity is not in the flesh. It is in the Spirit. But of course the spirit and the flesh are one and the same to you. According to you the flesh and the spirit cannot be separated and sense the flesh sins then so does the spirit. It is the spirit that has received the life of God and cannot sin. That is why I keep telling you that I have no sin. I am no longer identified in the flesh. My identity is in the spirit and that has been born of God and is righteous and Holy as God is righteous and Holy. It is His life that has been given to me.godrulz said:
elected4ever said:
Watchman Nee would be proud of you.
I have never said the spirit and flesh are one and the same.
Your view is wrongly metaphysical rather than moral (technical theological/philosophical concept, not 'morality'/self-righteousness).
You are personifying 'flesh' and artificially dividing the whole person. "Flesh" was a metaphor for sin, not a nebulous entity lodged in our physiology. Sin is not a substance. We do not have two wills. Read Romans 6-8 and do not ignore concepts involving obedience and will.
2 Cor. 7:2 "Since we have these promises, dear friends, LET US (exhortation/command) PURIFY OURSELVES from everything that contaminates BODY (flesh) and SPIRIT, PERFECTING (process) HOLINESS (why?) out of reverence for God."
I Peter 1:13-16 links self-control, obedience with being holy...BE holy is a command/imperative linked with volition, not just theoretical position. This is done in the strength of the Spirit.
You make a big doctrine about 'flesh' that goes beyond the analogy of Scripture.
Sozo
New member
Dave your post was so illogical, fragmented, incoherent, and ridiculous, it does not garner any response. You did not even address what was said! You simply took a word or phrase out of the text and made comments on those, in a completely unrelated manner.Dave Miller said:
If you want to discuss the OP, then do it point by point. You not only missed the point, but you never even saw it.
Last edited:
Sozo said:
Sounds like an unbeliever may claim to be without sin and thus think they would not need a Savior.
I John talks about those in and outside of Christ. There is no reason why both groups cannot be talked about in the same context. John may also be refuting 'sinless perfectionism' and reminding believers that they should not persist in sin and deny that they are sinning because of grace.
The primary context is believers 'we' (1:1-4). 1:6 could exhort those in their midst who were unbelievers (evangelize) and affirm those who believe ('one another') who do walk in the light. There is a contrast between believers and unbelievers. A distinction is even made between a believer who sins and an unbeliever who sins (2:2= redundant if there was not a point being made).
I stand firm that I Jn. 1:9 is about believers and their relationship with God. It does not support sinless perfectionism. Believers do not need to sin, but there is provision if they do (again, I am dogmatic that adultery is a sin and that it is self-evident that some believers have sinned thus...but there is provision....if...then...).
I hope these thoughts are not further proof to you that I 'hate Christ'. If they are, you should go to your local Christian bookstore and start boycotting the major publishing houses and their credible authors (this is off the top of my head, but many commentaries would concur with the gist of my opinion...this should not make these capable, godly scholars unbelievers just because they disagree with you based on their understanding of Greek and the context).
elected4ever
New member
Godrulzs said, "You are personifying 'flesh' and artificially dividing the whole person."
I said, "But of course the spirit and the flesh are one and the same to you."
Now lets see what the Apostle Paul said, "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.*Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
I guess Paul also 'artificially' divided the flesh and the spirit. Go figure. Paul just plane lied according to godrulzs.
I said, "But of course the spirit and the flesh are one and the same to you."
Now lets see what the Apostle Paul said, "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.*Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
I guess Paul also 'artificially' divided the flesh and the spirit. Go figure. Paul just plane lied according to godrulzs.
elected4ever said:
flesh=body
The Word of God can divide spirit, soul, and body (tripartite view). I am saying, with Paul in Rom. 6, it is what we do with our will and body that is the key. We can yield our members to righteousness or unrighteousness, according to Paul. This is why the 'flesh' metaphor is appropriate. It is not a nebulous nature passed on from Adam. It is a nature that is formed as we sin. We have the will to be immoral or pure in our sexuality. The flesh is not bad like some Greek philosophies taught. It is what we do with the flesh that is the issue.
2 Cor. 7:2 contradicts your view, but not Paul's true view that you distort.
