One on One: Door and Jerry Shugart on 1 John 1:1-10

[Jerry Shugart]

Door, let us look first at 1 John 1:6:

"If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth" (1 Jn.1:6).​

First of all, the word "we" must refer to John and others. And John is a Christian. You yourself admitted that it had to include John when he used the same word earlier:

When John uses the word "we", he is speaking of himself and those who were witnesses of the earthly ministry of Jesus and His resurrection.

You also said that Christians cannot walk in darkness:

Paul says that they are light, and they are to walk as they are. They cannot walk in darkness.

But John certainly raises the possibility that he can walk in darkness--"If we say...and walk in darkness."

So you affirm that the word "we" must refer to Christians and then you say that Christians cannot walk in darkness. And now you say:

If John was to claim that he has fellowship with the Father, and is yet walking in darkness (like the Gnostics are), then John would be a liar, and not doing (Poieo) the truth.

If John could not possibly walk in darkness then why would he raise the possibility that he could?

We Declare Unto You

You are missing the whole point of what John was telling these Christians so that they "may have fellowship':

"This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: 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" (1 Jn.1:5-7).​

The Christians John was addressing were not in fellowship. The reason that they were not is because they had been walking in darkness. In order to get into fellowship they could not continmue to walk in darkness but instead they must walk in light. And once they did that they would be cleansed from their sin.

"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" (1 Jn.1:7).​

Let us look at what you said about this verse:

Once again, John is affirming and confirming that is in Christ, he is in the light, and they have fellowship with one another. The blood of Jesus has cleansed everyone in His Body from all sin

If John's words here are in regard to a cleansing of sins that happened when these people were saved then John would have said that the blood "has" cleansed, meaning it happened in the past.

But the Greek word translated "cleanseth" at verse seven is in the "present" tense, which means that it cannot possibly be in reference to these people's salvation. It can only be in regard to a cleansing that takes place after the sinner is saved. And you have no place for such a cleansing by the blood in your theology. Now let us look at the verse which is the heart and soul of this debate:

"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness"(1 Jn.1:9).​

You said that at verse nine "John is reaffirming verse 7":

No other verse in the bible has been completely pulled out of context like 1 John 1:9 and used, in my view, to keep people focused on self, rather than on Jesus. Having just examined carefully the context of this letter, it should be quite obvious that John is reaffirming verse 7.

Yes, the words of John at verse nine are speaking of the same thing of which he spoke at verse seven. And I have already explained that at verse seven the Greek word translated "cleanseth" is in the "present" tense and if that word was in regard to these people's salvation it would be in the "past" tense and not the "present" tense.

The cleansing of the blood of the Lord and Savior is a cleansing for those who are already saved. Unless you can somehow wave a magic wand and change the tense of the Greek word translated "cleansing" from the "present" tense to the "past" tense then you must admit that you are wrong and I am right when I say that John's words at verse 9 apply to Christians and they apply to the sins committed after they are saved.

In His grace,
Jerry

 

[Door]

Door, let us look first at 1 John 1:6:

"If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth" (1 Jn.1:6).​

First of all, the word "we" must refer to John and others. And John is a Christian. You yourself admitted that it had to include John when he used the same word earlier:

You also said that Christians cannot walk in darkness:

But John certainly raises the possibility that he can walk in darkness--"If we say...and walk in darkness."

So you affirm that the word "we" must refer to Christians and then you say that Christians cannot walk in darkness. And now you say:

If John could not possibly walk in darkness then why would he raise the possibility that he could?

Jerry.. Because those whom he is addressing need to know not to listen to anyone who is walking in darkness, even if it was John (which he is not, but they don't know that).

In other words, it is similar to Paul saying to the Galatians that if he or an angel from hevean preached another Gospel, let them be accursed. Paul is just saying to them not to listen to anyone who is lying to them, he doesn't care who it is.

It is so very simple, but you get stuck on the preconceived idea that Christians can walk in darkness, when there is no place in the Bible that says they can. This is why you may never understand the text, or that you cannot bear the thought that your religious house of cards will tumble.

 

[Door]

We Declare Unto You

You are missing the whole point of what John was telling these Christians so that they "may have fellowship':

"This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: 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" (1 Jn.1:5-7).​

The Christians John was addressing were not in fellowship. The reason that they were not is because they had been walking in darkness. In order to get into fellowship they could not continmue to walk in darkness but instead they must walk in light. And once they did that they would be cleansed from their sin.

"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" (1 Jn.1:7).​

Let us look at what you said about this verse:

If John's words here are in regard to a cleansing of sins that happened when these people were saved then John would have said that the blood "has" cleansed, meaning it happened in the past.

But the Greek word translated "cleanseth" at verse seven is in the "present" tense, which means that it cannot possibly be in reference to these people's salvation. It can only be in regard to a cleansing that takes place after the sinner is saved. And you have no place for such a cleansing by the blood in your theology. Now let us look at the verse which is the heart and soul of this debate:

"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness"(1 Jn.1:9).​

You said that at verse nine "John is reaffirming verse 7":

Yes, the words of John at verse nine are speaking of the same thing of which he spoke at verse seven. And I have already explained that at verse seven the Greek word translated "cleanseth" is in the "present" tense and if that word was in regard to these people's salvation it would be in the "past" tense and not the "present" tense.

The cleansing of the blood of the Lord and Savior is a cleansing for those who are already saved. Unless you can somehow wave a magic wand and change the tense of the Greek word translated "cleansing" from the "present" tense to the "past" tense then you must admit that you are wrong and I am right when I say that John's words at verse 9 apply to Christians and they apply to the sins committed after they are saved.

In His grace,
Jerry

It is a statement about who cleanses from sin, not the event. Those who are in the light are those who Jesus cleanses from all sin.

Again, your mind is stuck on a false understanding of the text.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Jerry.. Because those whom he is addressing need to know not to listen to anyone who is walking in darkness, even if it was John (which he is not, but they don't know that).

In other words, it is similar to Paul saying to the Galatians that if he or an angel from hevean preached another Gospel, let them be accursed. Paul is just saying to them not to listen to anyone who is lying to them, he doesn't care who it is.

You are wrong. If it was impossible for John and other Chrtistians to walk in darkness then John certainly would not speak of the possibility that they can:

"If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth" (1 Jn.1:6).​

Of course he or any Christian can walk in darkness, or else John would have never spoken of the possibility that a Christian could walk in darknes.

In the following two verses from the next chapter John expresses the same principle, but this time he uses the word "abide" instead of "fellowship," but the principle is the same:

"He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked" (1 Jn.2:6).​

"He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him" (1 Jn.2:10).​

If the Christian is abiding or in fellowship with the Lord then he will walk as the Lord Jesus walked and will not sin.

Buit if the Christian sins then he does not continue to abide or remain in fellowship with the Lord. He is walking in darkness but not according to the light. And if the Christian says that he is abiding in the Lord but at the same time he sins then the truth is not in him. His sins prove that he is not in fellowship or abiding in the Lord.

But even though John's own words prove that a Christian can walk in darkness you must deny his words so that you can cling to your mistaken ideas.

It is a statement about who cleanses from sin, not the event. Those who are in the light are those who Jesus cleanses from all sin.

Let us look at the verse:

"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" (1 Jn.1:7).​

From the "context" we can understand that the cleansing by the blood is in regard to "fellowship" and not "salvation." After all, John's words here are in regard to how these Christians "may have" fellowship.

Secondly, John is telling these Christians something in regard to this fellowship that they "may have," and he says "the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin."

The Greek word translated "cleanseth" is in the present tense and not in the past tense. If John was speaking about "salvation" in this verse he would have said that the blood of Christ "has cleansed" us from all sin. But that is not what he said.

But you know that if John's words are taken at face value then your whole argument is without merit and cannot be defended. John is telling the Christians that the blood "cleanseth" (present tense) and not that the bood "has cleansed," as would be the case if John's subject was salvation.

In His grace,
Jerry

 

[Door]

You are wrong. If it was impossible for John and other Chrtistians to walk in darkness then John certainly would not speak of the possibility that they can:

"If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth" (1 Jn.1:6).​

Of course he or any Christian can walk in darkness, or else John would have never spoken of the possibility that a Christian could walk in darknes.

He never did speak of the possibility. You are still pouring your false preconceived mindset into the text.

There is nothing in that verse that says that a believer can walk in darkness. Nothing. In fact, it says the opposite. It says that anyone who is walking in darkness is not in fellowship with him. He is speaking of the Gnostics.

The Gnostics were walking in darkness, yet they lied and said they had fellowship.

IF John was like the Gnostics, and teaching what they teach, and walking in darkness like they are, he too would be a liar if he said he was in fellowship.

It is one of the easiest verses in the Bible, but because you are walking in the darkness, you cannot see the truth.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

He never did speak of the possibility. You are still pouring your false preconceived mindset into the text. There is nothing in that verse that says that a believer can walk in darkness

In order for you to say this you must first deny John's plain words and then you must divorce John's words from the "context."

First, let us examine the context.

The words of John's which I will now quote are instructions to the people telling them how they "may have fellowship" (v.3):

"This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another" (1 Jn.1:4-7).​

This is all about how these people can have fellowship. And in verses six and seven John indeed speaks about fellowdship. But according to you John is not speaking of the fellowship of the Christians. In order to have any answer you trot over to your bag of tricks and just pull something out of a hat--the idea that verse six is in regard to the Gnostics! You give no evidence to support your assertion and in order to assert such a thing you must ignore the context.

There is nothing in that verse that says that a believer can walk in darkness. Nothing. In fact, it says the opposite.

Let us look at John's words again:

If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth" (1 Jn.1:4-7).​

Certainly John is raising the possibility that a Christian can walk in darkness.

He says that if a Christian says he has fellowship with the Lord but "walks in darkness" then he is lying.

Why would John even bring up the possibility that a Christian could claim to be in fellowship with the Lord but at the same time be "walking in darkness" if it was not even possible for a Christian to walk in darkness?

That would make no sense whatsoever.

It is one of the easiest verses in the Bible, but because you are walking in the darkness, you cannot see the truth.

Since you do not believe that a Christian can walk in darkness then I can only conclude from your remarks that you do not think that I am a Christian. That certainly fits your modus operandi on this forum. When you can't answer the messsage attack the messenger!

In His grace,
Jerry

 

[Door]

Jerry... Telling me the same cr@p over and over again, does not change the truth. You don't understand the text. I can't help you with that, because you don't want to know the truth. I can only tell you the truth, I cannot make you smart.

I KNOW what you think, but I have already explained to you why you are in error, but you don't care. All you care about is walking in darkness. I have given you the light, but you do not want to be exposed, so you choose to remain in the darkness. Can't help you with that either.

John NEVER says that believers can walk in darkness. It is not in the Bible anywhere! It does not say what you think it says in the verse you keep being confused about.

"If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth"

This verse does not say/imply/suggest/ in any way that it is possible for a believer to walk in darkness. It is NOT there. YOU cannot even comprehend a simple sentence. How can you even think that you can understand a whole paragraph, let alone a whole letter?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

"If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth"

This verse does not say/imply/suggest/ in any way that it is possible for a believer to walk in darkness. It is NOT there. YOU cannot even comprehend a simple sentence. How can you even think that you can understand a whole paragraph, let alone a whole letter?

Then why do John's words there suggest the possibility that a Christian can walk in darkness?

He says that if a Christian says he has fellowship with the Lord but "walks in darkness" then he is lying.

Why would John even bring up the possibility that a Christian could claim to be in fellowship with the Lord but at the same time be "walking in darkness" if it was not even possible for a Christian to walk in darkness?

That would make no sense whatsoever.

Door, we should follow Paul's example and "reason out of the Scriptures":

"And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures" (Acts 17:2).​

When it comes to verses that do not fit your ideas you just throw your reason to the wind.

In His grace,
Jerry

 

[Door]

Then why do John's words there suggest the possibility that a Christian can walk in darkness?

They don't. John NEVER says what you claim he is saying.

He says that if a Christian says he has fellowship with the Lord but "walks in darkness" then he is lying.

No, he does not.

This is where you make a false assumption, and put words in John's mouth.

John is simply saying that if he is walking in darkness, then you will know that he is not in fellowship, and therefore he is not a Christian.

John wants to make sure that those whom he is writing to will not make the same mistake again and that it is important that they "test the spirits" to see if they are from God. Those who are in darkness deny that Jesus has come in the flesh.

YOU are not listening Jerry or you are just plain stubborn. It is blatantly obvious.

 

[Door]

Jerry, you don't have to agree with my last post, but you are behaving like you don't even understand what I said. That does not speak well of your ability to reason, and it makes me think that I should have debated this with someone who can think.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

This is where you make a false assumption, and put words in John's mouth.

John is simply saying that if he is walking in darkness, then you will know that he is not in fellowship, and therefore he is not a Christian.

It is you who is making a false assumption by saying that having "fellowship" with Christ is the same thing as being in the Body of Christ.

But if we look at John's words we can see that when John speaks of being in "fellowship" with the Lord and "walking in the light" he is speaking of "abiding" in Him and "abiding in the light." Notice the similarity:

In Him

"If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth" (1 Jn.1:4-7).​

"He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked" (1 Jn.2:6).​

The Light

"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another" (1 Jn.1:7).​

"He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him" (1 Jn.2:10).​

From the evidence contained in the first epistle of John it seems certain that the word "fellowship" is related to the word "abiding."

You have provided no evidence at all that would lead anyone to think that the words "fellowship" and "abiding" are not related.

What do you think John is referring to when he speaks about "abiding" in the light and "abiding" in Him?

1 John 1:9

“If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

Despite the plain wording of 1 John 1:9 you say that John is not telling Christians to confess their sins for the purpose of having their sins cleansed. Here is one of the reasons you give:

You have been made righteous by the blood of Christ! How then do you suppose after having been made righteous, that you could make yourself unrighteous? You could never make yourself unrighteous or righteous to begin with. The fact is you can only be cleansed of sin once! You can only be cleansed of unrighteousness once!

According to your reasoning a Christian cannot become unrighteous after he is saved. But what about these verses?:

"Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby" (Heb.12:11).​

How could this chastening yield righteousness to someone who is already righteous?

According to your reasoning a Christian is cleansed from his sin only once, and that upon conversion.

But what do you say about this verse where Christians are in view, and we can see that at one point during their Christian lives they are not partakers of the Lord's holiness:

"For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness" (Heb.12:10).​

There is only one way whereby that a Christian can become "holy" once he is defiled and that is by confession of sins, a confession that brings about the cleansing of sins.

But you say that no cleansing for these people's condition is possible because upon conversion the Christian is cleansed then and never again.

Again, we see that your arguments are based on nothing but assertions, assertions that are easily shown to be in error once they are examined under the light of the Scriptures.

In His grace,
Jerry

 

[Door]

Jerry, thanks to tetelestai's video, we now know that you are in a non-Christian cult, and can understand why you ignore what 1 John clearly says.

You believe that the sacrifice of Jesus and that of a goat are the same thing.

You believe that all the Jews who sacrificed a goat were saved and filled with the Holy Spirit.

You believe that God will punish you the same way he punished Israel if you do not confess your sins.

You believe that the Holy Spirit will leak out of you and that the seal that God made is faulty.

There is no need to believe anything you say.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Jerry, thanks to tetelestai's video, we now know that you are in a non-Christian cult, and can understand why you ignore what 1 John clearly says.

You believe that the sacrifice of Jesus and that of a goat are the same thing.

You believe that all the Jews who sacrificed a goat were saved and filled with the Holy Spirit.

You believe that God will punish you the same way he punished Israel if you do not confess your sins.

You believe that the Holy Spirit will leak out of you and that the seal that God made is faulty.

There is no need to believe anything you say.

Door, this is just what I expected from you. Instead of discussing the points that I raised in my last post like a mature Christian you ignored them. Then you make some statements in regard to my beliefs that have no basis in fact.

I challenge you to quote me where I ever expressed the ideas that you are now attributing to me.

In His grace,
Jerry

 

[Door]

Do you denounce the things expressed in the video posted by tetelestai? Do you claim that they are false, even though you have been defending them?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Do you denounce the things expressed in the video posted by tetelestai? Do you claim that they are false, even though you have been defending them?

I haven't even watched it. Why have you not answered the points that I made?

Why are you attempting to derail this debate?

Changing the subject is not going to help you in anyway.

 

[Door]

Jerry, all your questions have been answered. All your points addressed. You don't agree. I can't make you. What else can I say to change your mind?

I have shared with you the meanings of verses 1-10. They say, what John and I have said they say.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Jerry, all your questions have been answered. All your points addressed.

No they haven't. But I can see why you refuse to even attempt to defend your following statement:

You have been made righteous by the blood of Christ! How then do you suppose after having been made righteous, that you could make yourself unrighteous? You could never make yourself unrighteous or righteous to begin with. The fact is you can only be cleansed of sin once! You can only be cleansed of unrighteousness once!

According to your reasoning a Christian cannot become unrighteous after he is saved. But what about these verses?:

"Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby" (Heb.12:11).​

How could this chastening yield righteousness to someone who is already righteous?

According to your reasoning a Christian is cleansed from his sin only once, and that upon conversion.

But what do you say about this verse where Christians are in view, and we can see that at one point during their Christian lives they are not partakers of the Lord's holiness:

"For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness" (Heb.12:10).​

There is only one way whereby that a Christian can become "holy" once he is defiled and that is by confession of sins, a confession that brings about the cleansing of sins.

But you say that no cleansing for these people's condition is possible because upon conversion the Christian is cleansed then and never again.

Again, we see that your arguments are based on nothing but assertions, assertions that are easily shown to be in error once they are examined under the light of the Scriptures.

In His grace,
Jerry

 

[Door]

No they haven't. But I can see why you refuse to even attempt to defend your following statement:

According to your reasoning a Christian cannot become unrighteous after he is saved. But what about these verses?:

"Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby" (Heb.12:11).​

How could this chastening yield righteousness to someone who is already righteous?

Jerry, righteousness is a gift. God does not revoke His gift. The gift of righteousness is by faith. It is impossible to be righteous and unrighteous at the same time, just as it is impossible to be in the light and in darkness at the same time, or cleansed and uncleansed at the same time.

Discipline (renewing the mind with the truth), will yield the FRUIT of righteousness.

We are already righteous Jerry. The fruit of righteousness is that we know that we will not be judged as the world is judged, because we are legitimate children of God. God does not have unrighteous children.

For you to claim that God's children are unrighteous, is to claim that Jesus is unrighteous. We have died and our life is hidden in Christ, in God. We are the righteousness of God in Christ.

But what do you say about this verse where Christians are in view, and we can see that at one point during their Christian lives they are not partakers of the Lord's holiness:

"For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness" (Heb.12:10).

There is only one way whereby that a Christian can become "holy" once he is defiled and that is by confession of sins, a confession that brings about the cleansing of sins.

No Jerry, that is a doctrine of demons. The Bible does not teach anywhere that a believer is to confess their sins for forgiveness. Sins require a death, and Jesus died for our sins ONCE for ALL. You want to crucify Him over and over again. If God continues to see you as a sinner, then you are continuing to sin willfully, and there is no more sacrifice for your sin. (Hebrews 10 ).

God is renewing our minds (disciplining) with the truth, in order that we can get in our minds what God has done in us through Christ. We are holy as He is holy, and God wants us to stop putting our confidence in our flesh and to fix our eyes on Jesus (which is why he mentions it first thing in the context of discipline). YOU are obsessed with YOU, and think that you please God by what You do, and not by faith. You are preaching a false gospel of self-righteousness and self-holiness.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Jerry, righteousness is a gift. God does not revoke His gift. The gift of righteousness is by faith. It is impossible to be righteous and unrighteous at the same time, just as it is impossible to be in the light and in darkness at the same time, or cleansed and uncleansed at the same time.

Door, you are having a difficult time grasping the difference between a Christian's "standing" and his actual "state" or "walk.". Yes, the believer is imputed with the righteousness of God, and "in Christ" he is forever righteous. That is in regard to the Christian's "standing," being raised up with Christ and sitting together with Him in the heavenlies (Eph.2:6-7).

But we are also at the same time "pilgrims" away from our place of citizenship. And as pilgrims away from home we are not always righteous and when we sin we become defiled. But you cannot seem to see the distinction between the Christian's "standing" and actual "state."

For instance, the believer is created in true holiness in the New Man, the Body of Christ. He is sanctified through the blood of Jesus Christ once for all, and he is perfected forever (Heb.10:10,14).

On the other hand, the following verses in regard to sanctification are not in regard to the same sanctification that is in regard to the Christian's "standing" but instead is in regard to his actual "state" or "walk":

"Furthermore then we beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please God, so ye would abound more and more. For ye know what commandments we gave you by the Lord Jesus. For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication: That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour; Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God" (1 Cor.4:1-5).​

Surely you can see that the "sanctification" spoken of here is not the same sanctification spoken of at Hebrews 10:10 & 14. A person would have to be walking around with his eyes closed or else he would be able to see the difference. Perhaps now you can see the difference and will refrain from making the same old uninformed arguments concerning a Christian's holiness.

Now let us look at the following verse:

"For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness" (Heb.12:10).​

It is obvious that the Christian spoken of here is not a "partaker" of the Lord's holiness until he is chastened by the Lord. That means that until he is chastened he is "unholy." But you say that a Christian is never unholy. In fact, your whole argument is based on your mistaken idea that a Christian cannot be either unrighteous or iunholy.

You do not even understand the relationship between the father and son in regard to this chastening.You say:

Discipline (renewing the mind with the truth), will yield the FRUIT of righteousness.... God is renewing our minds (disciplining) with the truth, in order that we can get in our minds what God has done in us through Christ.

The "chastening" spoken of in the book of Hebrews (Heb.12:5) is compared to a father's discipline of his son. Verse 5 is quoted from Proverbs 3:11-12:

" My son, despise not the chastening of the LORD; neither be weary of his correction: For whom the LORD loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth" (Proverbs 3:11-12).​

The word "chastening" is translated from the Hebrew word muwcar, and here is how that word is used in regard to the chastening in the father and son relationship:

"Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction (muwcar) shall drive it far from him" (Pro.22:15).​

"Withhold not correction (muwcar) from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die" (Pro.23:13).​

Now that you have a better understanding of the meaning of the word "chasten" at Hebrews 12:5 let us go to the following verses which speak of the same chastening:

"Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body"(1 Cor.11:27-29).​

There were some in the church at Corinth who were sinning by eating the Lord's Supper in a manner described as being "unworthy" and by doing so they were bringing damnation upon themselves.

Here we can see that they were chastened by the Lord because they would not "judge themselves":

"For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world' (1 Cor.11:30-32).​

There were some who did not judge themselves in regard to the way that they partook of the Last Supper so therefore they were "chastened of the Lord'-- many were weak and sickly and many slept.

The word "confession" means nothing more or less than the words "judge yourself." "Confession" means "acknowledgement of sins," and that is exactly what happens when a person judges himself in regard to his sinful deeds.

If these people would have confessed their sins they would have received the forgiveness of those sins and they would not have been chastened of the Lord:

"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (1 Jn.1:9).​

One of the reasons that you are having a diffiocult time understanding these things is your misunderstanding of the meaning of the discipline or chastening of the Lord. You said:

God is renewing our minds (disciplining) with the truth, in order that we can get in our minds what God has done in us through Christ.

In His grace,
Jerry

 

[Door]

Door, you are having a difficult time grasping the difference between a Christian's "standing" and his actual "state" or "walk.".

No, Jerry, I understand it perfectly. You are attempting to create something that does not exist.

"As you therefore have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him"

I received Him by grace through faith.

I walk by grace through faith.