16 Aug 08
2 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne=================================
"What I do not see from you is a point by point refutation of my sentences - most of them.
Perhaps this gives a clue to your approach. It appears that you take each sentence as if it stands on its own. In doing so, you lose the context and the therefore the larger meaning. In other words, you can't see the forest for the trees.
For exam that mean, "A good tennis player has a good serve" as your "proof".[/b]
For example, here you've pulled out select verses from 1 John 5 and assigned meaning to each one while ignoring the rest.
"Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been begotten of God ... " ( 1 John 5:1)
"He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son does not have the life." (1 John 5:12)
"I have written these things to you that you may know that you have eternal life, to you who believe into the name of the Son of God." (1 John 5:13)
=============================================
It appears that you do not have the enthusiasm or the skill to address my questions.
You know I have made extensive comments on your concepts and answered many problems to reconcile paradoxical passages. I have spoken of process, growth, destination, the pledge, the seal, the forestaste, the reward, the gift, the judicial side of salvation and the organic side of salvation.
I have written quite a lot to deal with difficulties in our two understandings.
Though it was not meant to be offensive I exposed the net effect of accusation that your approach to these verses intails.
I would have been happy to see you deal with any four or five of those questions if not all 13 or so. Do you see the problems that your theology introduces? I think you introduce far more problems than you solve.
And because you reject the speaking of Christ in the book of Acts I am not terribly impressed with your overall commitment to the New Testament Scriptures. Your explanations of what "rings true" does NOT ring terribly true with me.
=============================
There are other verses in 1 John 5 such as:
"By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments." (1 John 5:2)
" For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome." (1 John 5:3)
"We know that no one who is born of God sins; but He who was born of God keeps him, and the evil one does not touch him." (1 John 5:18)
================================
I believe that these kinds of passages have been dealt with in my explanations of process, growth, development, and levels of maturity.
=====================================
It appears that what you are doing is focusing on only one concept, such as "a strong serve", and then insist that to be a strong tennis play all you need do is develop a strong serve. You then point to all the sentences that mean, "A good tennis player has a good serve" as your "proof".
======================================
That is not true that I have focused on only one aspect.
For example, I spoke extensively on GIFT and REWARD, of JUDICIAL REDEMPTION and ORGANIC SALVATION.
I looked at these admitedly puzzling passages from two angles and not from one only.
You have held rather close to the vest exactly how much of the 27 books of the New Testament you DO NOT regard as the word of God. I see you reject much of the book of Acts. I think you reject more but are secretive about it.
You appeal to the Apostle John but you reject the Apostle Paul and the ascended Christ speaking from the heavens in the book of Acts.
You call this "freedom?" I don't call this "freedom". It is not freedom from considerable doubt and unbelief of the Bible.
16 Aug 08
6 edits
Originally posted by jaywill[/b]"It appears that you do not have the enthusiasm or the skill to address my questions."
[b]=================================
For example, here you've pulled out select verses from 1 John 5 and assigned meaning to each one while ignoring the rest.
"Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been begotten of God ... " ( 1 John 5:1)
"He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son does not have the life." (1 John 5:1 It is not freedom from considerable doubt and unbelief of the Bible.
If you look at 1 John 5 in its entirety and come to understand the "larger picture", you'll also come to understand that your "questions" have, for the most part, been answered. You'll come to understand that insisting on pulling single verses out of context, can only result on false conclusions.
"That is not true that I have focused on only one aspect.
For example, I spoke extensively on GIFT and REWARD, of JUDICIAL REDEMPTION and ORGANIC SALVATION."
Yes you've spoken extensively on these topics. However they are merely a means of trying to reconcile the contradictions that are introduced by insisting on believing that one can continue to sin and have "eternal life"/"heaven"/"salvation". So it still is one aspect. An aspect upon which you have built a house of cards. A house built on sand rather than a sound foundation.
Have you ever asked yourself why Jesus never spoke of "JUDICIAL REDEMPTION and ORGANIC SALVATION" or positional or dispositional righteousness?
Instead Jesus says the following:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever;"
Righteousness is righteousness. You cannot both sin and be righteous.
"A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit."
"That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."
If you don't believe Jesus, then believe John the Baptist:
John 3:36
"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."
Perhaps the above will drill home the concept that "believing in the Son" has the requirement of "obeying the Son".
16 Aug 08
4 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne===============================
"It appears that you do not have the enthusiasm or the skill to address my questions."
If you look at 1 John 5 in its entirety and come to understand the "larger picture", you'll also come to understand that your "questions" have, for the most part, been answered. You'll come to understand that insisting on pulling single verses out of conte "believing in the Son" has the requirement of "obeying the Son".[/b]
If you look at 1 John 5 in its entirety and come to understand the "larger picture", you'll also come to understand that your "questions" have, for the most part, been answered. You'll come to understand that insisting on pulling single verses out of context, can only result on false conclusions.
======================================
I am hardly impressed by lectures from you to understanding "the larger picture" when you don't even believe the book of Acts and some 13 New Testament books you do not accept as the word of God.
And you talk about the "larger picture"? You don't even accept the whole New Testament.
=====================================
Yes you've spoken extensively on these topics. However they are merely a means of trying to reconcile the contradictions that are introduced by insisting on believing that one can continue to sin and have "eternal life"/"heaven"/"salvation".
=========================================
I told you before I am not interested in sins. My focus is not to measure out if a born again Christian can sin a lot or more or a little.
The fact of the matter is that renewing and transformation and sanctification are processes that take time. All of these biblical processes effect one's living and ones degree of victory over the old sinful life and the world.
Have you ever led anyone to become born again?
Are you yourself born again ?
========================================
So it still is one aspect. An aspect upon which you have built a house of cards. A house built on sand rather than a sound foundation.
============================================
If you are someone who prefesses to be a disciple of Jesus yet rejects the book of Acts and 13 books of the New Testament canon shouldn't you be concerned with the firmness of your foundation ?
===========================================
Have you ever asked yourself why Jesus never spoke of "JUDICIAL REDEMPTION and ORGANIC SALVATION" or positional or dispositional righteousness?
======================================
But He did speak of these two aspects of His full salvation. He just did not use the words judicial and organic.
=====================================
Instead Jesus says the following:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever;"
=======================================
What is "the house" to you?
====================================
Righteousness is righteousness. You cannot both sin and be righteous.
==================================
You have not answered my questions on First John. I don't think I will ask you any more questions. That is not until you respond to at least some of the ones in the list I provided.
16 Aug 08
2 edits
Originally posted by jaywill[/b]Evidently you are immune to reason.
[b]===============================
If you look at 1 John 5 in its entirety and come to understand the "larger picture", you'll also come to understand that your "questions" have, for the most part, been answered. You'll come to understand that insisting on pulling single verses out of context, can only result on false conclusions.
======================= til you respond to at least some of the ones in the list I provided.
Hopefully someday it'll dawn on you that for the most part your beliefs are supported by the teachings of Paul, while my beliefs are supported by the teachings of Jesus.
Hopefully someday it'll dawn on you that many of your beliefs are contrary to the teachings of Jesus and that you have to distort His words to get them to fit your theology.
Good luck.
John 3:36
"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."
The crux of our disagreement is contained in the above verse. It seems you chose to believe the first phrase while dispensing the warning that goes with it. More's the pity. It's a simple compound expression that you seem unable to get your mind around or choose to close your eyes to. You have eyes but cannot see. Don't let your pride keep you from opening your eyes to truth.
16 Aug 08
2 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Evidently you are immune to reason.
Hopefully someday it'll dawn on you that for the most part your beliefs are supported by the teachings of Paul, while my beliefs are supported by the teachings of Jesus.
Hopefully someday it'll dawn on you that many of your beliefs are contrary to the teachings of Jesus and that you have to distort His words have eyes but cannot see. Don't let your pride keep you from opening your eyes to truth.[/b]
17 Aug 08
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneNo. Not everyone who doesn't accept your opinion is proud because of that. I have 13 or so issues on 1 John which you won't explain.
Sorry to see the pride has fully kicked in.
Good luck.
And you seem too proud to accept the book of Acts and a good deal of the rest of the New Testament.
I don't need your "luck". I need your explanations to the questions I put to you from First John.
17 Aug 08
5 edits
Originally posted by jaywillDid you do the following?
No. Not everyone who doesn't accept your opinion is proud because of that. I have 13 or so issues on 1 John which you won't explain.
And you seem too proud to accept the book of Acts and a good deal of the rest of the New Testament.
I don't need your "luck". I need your explanations to the questions I put to you from First John.
"Try reading 1 John 5 as a whole. John seems to be trying to describe various indicators that can help one discern if one has 'overcome the world', been 'born of God' and therefore has eternal life."
Did you check to see how this applies to your questions?
Did you check to see if any of your other questions were answered in the post? For instance, you asked:
11.) Why didn't John reaffirm that the one living a sinless life and keeping the commandments of Christ is the one who has been begotten of God?
I gave you the following:
"By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments." (1 John 5:2)
" For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome." (1 John 5:3)
"We know that no one who is born of God sins; but He who was born of God keeps him, and the evil one does not touch him." (1 John 5:18)
In case you still haven't put it together, the answer to #11 is that John did.
Do you really need to be spoon-fed here?
C'mon jaywill. You've exhibited that you have sufficient intelligence to put things together. You're just being difficult.
I noticed that you removed the following from your previous post:
"I'll take that as your feeble, dramatic and evasive last word in this debate."
I'll take that as evidence that you now recognize what I meant by "your pride fully kicking in".
17 Aug 08
8 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne===========================================
Did you do the following?
"Try reading 1 John 5 as a whole. John seems to be trying to describe various indicators that can help one discern if one has 'overcome the world', been 'born of God' and therefore has eternal life."
Did you check to see how this applies to your questions?
Did you check to see if any of your other questions were answered i nce that you now recognize what I meant by "your pride fully kicking in".
" For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome." (1 John 5:3)
"We know that no one who is born of God sins; but He who was born of God keeps him, and the evil one does not touch him." (1 John 5:18)
========================================
Does the Apostle John expect that no one who is born of God would possibly sin? Can verse 18 be proof that John expected no born again person to ever commit a sin?
The answer is no. And the proof of this is in the passages immediately preceeding verse 18:
"If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin not unto death, he shall ask and he will give life to him, to those sinning not unto death. There is a sin unto death; I do not say that he should make request concerning that." (1 John 5:16)
1.) This is a matter of Christian brother A observing Christian brother B sinning a sin "not unto death". For now I will not elabrate on "unto death". It is not necessary to the point.
The indisputable fact is that John is giving the brothers instructions on what to do if ONE brother in Christ observes ANOTHER brother in Christ sinning.
The usage of the term "brother" proves that both A and B are born again. If they were not then they could not both be in the brotherhood. It is the fact that they both have the divine life of the divine Father through Jesus Christ which constitutes them both members of the brotherhood.
2. Brother B who is born again has been observed to have commited a sin.
Of course John is not encouraging any brother to sin. Quite the contrary is true. But John is compelled to provide instructions IN CASE one of the brothers in the spiritual brotherhood has a moment of failure and does in fact commit a sin.
3. This is John's instruction - "he shall ask and he will give life to him"
This one who ASKS is Brother A the observer. And the one who gives life is also Brother A.
Brother A sees Brother B sin. Brother A is to make request to God and God answering will allow Brother A to give spiritual life to Brother B, the brother who has sinned.
Without going into exhaustive detail the essence of this point is this. It is not that Brother B does not have divine life at all. It is that Brother B has a shortage of divine life. The divine life that Brother A gives to sinning Brother B is not the initial giving of life that a man may be born again. It is the supplying of divine life to make up the shortage of life in Brother B's character and behavior.
In short this means the the praying brother is given wisdom to petition God for restoration of Brother B or perhaps after praying goes to talk to Brother B. In Brother A fellowship and talk Brother B is strengthened, restored, healed, uplifted, brought back to the right track.
Brother B has divine life already through the new birth. But in his behavior he displayed a lack of application of that life which makes him a member of the Christian brotherhood. Therefore, because of his shortage of divine life in his Christian walk, he needs the living petition of Brother A to give him life and heal and restore him.
Now since John has given this instruction it proves without a shadow of doubt that John had to address the situation of a born again Christian "brother" falling into sin.
Now in verse 18 John writes: We know that everyone who is begotten of God does not sin, but he who has been begotten of God keeps himself, and the evil one does not touch him.
According to the immediately preceeding instructions in verse 16, this verse 18 cannot mean that Brother B is incapable of sinning. Then what does it mean?
It must be an indication of the abnormality of Brother B sinning. This is deficient behavior. But it is not IMPOSSIBLE behavior. For Brother B to sin is abnormal for one who is begotten of God.
If the brother would abide in the divine life by obeying the teaching of the anointing as he should it would be impossible for to practice sin in a habitual way. The SEED within him cannot sin. But he must touch and abide in the enfluence of that seed. It is not automatic and it does not usurp his human will apart from his cooperation.
John seeks to bring the audience of brothers to realize that normally they should keep themselves and thereby remain untouched by the tempting enemy. That is their responsibility - to abide in the non-sinning divine seed and non-sinning divine life that has been implanted within them.
It is normal that one born of God keep himself in touch with that divine overcoming life that is within him. It is not normal that he should fail to do so. But if he becomes abnormal and does sin he is not UNBORN. Yet the other healthy brother has to petition God on behalf of the failing one. And he must give him the life which he needs to behave rightly.
17 Aug 08
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne=========================================
Did you do the following?
"Try reading 1 John 5 as a whole. John seems to be trying to describe various indicators that can help one discern if one has 'overcome the world', been 'born of God' and therefore has eternal life."
Did you check to see how this applies to your questions?
Did you check to see if any of your other questions were answered i nce that you now recognize what I meant by "your pride fully kicking in".
I noticed that you removed the following from your previous post:
"I'll take that as your feeble, dramatic and evasive last word in this debate."
I'll take that as evidence that you now recognize what I meant by "your pride fully kicking in".
=======================================
You may notice that I sometimes have a habit of going back and erasing something I wrote.
You may take it in any manner you wish. However, I decided to erase the comment before I read any response from you.
17 Aug 08
2 edits
Originally posted by jaywillLet me see if I understand you:
[b]===========================================
" For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome." (1 John 5:3)
"We know that no one who is born of God sins; but He who was born of God keeps him, and the evil one does not touch him." (1 John 5:18)
========================================
Do e failing one. And he must give him the life which he needs to behave rightly.[/b]
John makes a statement that explicitly states my position:
"We know that no one who is born of God sins."
You "prove" that this is not a true statement because John also speaks about what to do if a "brother" sins. You make an inference that "brother" can only be someone who is born of God. Never mind that John doesn't state what he means by "brother". "Brother" could easily be anyone who has taken an interest in following Jesus, anyone in the community or even a fellow human being. It seems ridiculous for it to mean someone born of God, because in his very next thought, John reminds them that no one who is born of God sins. John makes a point of reminding them of this fact.
Then you take that illogical inference, put it through a number of illogical contortions and draw the conclusion that John meant something entirely different from what he said.
You've done a similar thing with a number of verses by John and Jesus for that matter.
Rather than assume that John and Jesus are both EXTREMELY poor communicators, doesn't it make more sense that your premise is false?
17 Aug 08
Originally posted by jaywillWell, I think you know your pride got the better of you, so you decided to try to "hide" the evidence.
[b]=========================================
I noticed that you removed the following from your previous post:
"I'll take that as your feeble, dramatic and evasive last word in this debate."
I'll take that as evidence that you now recognize what I meant by "your pride fully kicking in".
=======================================
You may not ...[text shortened]... ner you wish. However, I decided to erase the comment before I read any response from you.[/b]
17 Aug 08
6 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne=====================================
Well, I think you know your pride got the better of you, so you decided to try to "hide" the evidence.
Well, I think you know your pride got the better of you, so you decided to try to "hide" the evidence.
==========================================
Many times I erase or modify things I wrote on Discusion Forums. Do not break your arm trying to pat yourself on the back in congradulations. Don't flatter yourself so much.
I often, without any notice of a reaction, will go back and erase something on my own cognizants.
You seem anxious to want to talk about pride. Whether I am the proudest person in the world or the most humble person in the world makes NO DIFFERENCE to the validity of your interpretation of spontaneous sinless perfection upon regeneration.
Is it because you cannot defend sinless perfection upon regeneration that you wish to switch the subject to my pride ?
But if you really want to have talk about pride, we can do that latter.
Right now I am going to look at your compaints and maybe I'll go another round with you on this. But I am not going to debate this indefinitely. You're welcomed to have another opinion about the matter.
I just give you the reasons why I don't share it, and what problems there exist with it.
17 Aug 08
Originally posted by jaywillWhat do you think was the source of these words?
[b]=====================================
Well, I think you know your pride got the better of you, so you decided to try to "hide" the evidence.
==========================================
Many times I erase or modify things I wrote on Discusion Forums. Do not break your arm trying to pat yourself on the back in congradulations. Don't flat ...[text shortened]...
I just give you the reasons why I don't share it, and what problems there exist with it.[/b]
""I'll take that as your feeble, dramatic and evasive last word in this debate."
Why keeps you from admitting it?