St_Worm2

I meant to reply to this as well, but I don't believe that I did (so I will do so now). What is in "direct contradiction" (to 1 John 1-2) is your exegesis or interpretation of the verses from 1 John 3 that you just mentioned. MANY verses SEEM to say one thing (at least at first blush), but upon careful consideration/further study, we realize that what we "thought" they said, isn't even close to what they actually mean Here are a couple of other "clear" verses for you to consider. Luke 14 26 If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple. 1 Timothy 2 15 Women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety. The obvious problem is that if we decide to take what these two verses appear to say at first blush, we end up with the Lord Jesus and the Apostle Paul contradicting what they taught elsewhere in the Bible. Surely you cannot believe that women are saved by their works and by giving birth, or that the Lord Jesus requires us to "hate" our mothers and fathers, wives and children if we want to be His disciples? Likewise, don't do this kind of thing with the verses that you mentioned from 1 John 3, figure out what the Apostle John really means there instead God bless you!! --David

Hello again Live2believe, I did my best to explain to you/show you, at length in this thread (here), that the "we", "us", "our", "ourselves" and "you" in 1 John 1-2 is specific to Christians, not a general reference to everybody/everywhere. Apparently however, my best wasn't good enough Look, I get it. I realize that your presupposition (that believers are perfectly sinless on this side of the grave) requires it, but the context of 1 John 1-2 simply and clearly does not teach it or allow for that interpretation. Lastly, ALL true believers, including babes in Christ, are "born again", or they are not/cannot be believers. The "dead" cannot respond in faith to the Lord's call because "dead" people cannot "do", well, anything! This is why the Lord Jesus told Nicodemus that a person MUST be born again to even see the Kingdom of God, much less enter into it .. e.g. John 3:3, 5. So, all (true) Christians are "born again", no matter what level of maturity in the faith they are at, be they newborn children (babes in Christ), young men or fathers. If anyone has not been "quickened"/"made alive" and "born again", that person is still dead (spiritually) in their trespasses and sins and unable to come to faith .. e.g. Ephesians 2:1-3. They still need to be "made alive" by God .. e.g. Ephesians 2:4-5. The Apostle Paul does a nice job of contrasting believers (who are all both born again and spiritually alive .. see v12-13, 15-16 below) with unbelievers (who are not, who are still "natural" men/women rather than "spiritual" men/women .. see v14 below). 1 Corinthians 2 12 We have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, 13 which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words. 14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. 15 But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one. 16 For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ. God bless you!! --David

Hello again Live2believe, the core beliefs/teachings of Gnosticism and Christianity are radically different from one another, so why do you refer to Gnostics as "believers", as if they were Christians Granted, we do have Gnostics today who claim to be Christians too, but the fact that they claim to be Christians doesn't mean that they are. Here's a short article on Christian Gnosticism (if anyone would care to read it). Finally, the Apostle addressed many of the problems that the Gnostics were creating for the early church in his Epistle, but his purpose was to warn the church about them and the dangers that Gnosticism posed (so he wasn't "talking to" the Gnostics, rather, he was warning his congregants, and us, about both them and what they taught). I'm certain that he shared the Gospel with some of the Gnostics of his day, hoping that some of them would leave the Gnostic faith, come to Christ and be saved). God bless you!! --David p.s. - I'll finish replying to the rest of your last post to me in my next reply to you, just FYI.

Hello again Live2believe, while I agree that "we" can be used generally (as all sin .. e.g. Romans 3:23), we know that this is NOT true in the excerpt that I posited above from 1 John 1-2 (which we know because of context). Context most often plays an incredibly important role in determining the actual meaning of a word, phrase, verse and/or passage in the Bible, whether in Hebrew or Greek, and this is certainly both true and helpful in 1 John 1-2. The first question to ask, then, when looking at the posited text is, who is the Apostle John referring to (whenever he writes, "we", "us", "our", "ourselves" and "you" in that passage)? Is the "we", "us", "our", "ourselves" and "you" referring to everyone, everywhere w/o exception, or did the Apostle actually have a more specific group in mind instead Let's take a look. 1 John 1 8 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us. When considered by itself, ~some~ of what is said in this short passage could be applied to either unbelievers or believers, I suppose, but not all of it because, 1. The "truth" and His "word" reside in true believers, alone. 2. More importantly, God does not forgive the sins of those who are not saved, even if they do choose to confess them every now and again (because God's forgiveness is only for the redeemed, our redemption being merited for us by our Redeemer/Savior and His blood, apart from which forgiveness will not be granted to anyone (e.g. Hebrews 9:22, 10:4). Moving on... 1 John 2 1 My ~little children~, I am writing these things ~to you~ so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; 2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world. 3 By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. So, here we see who the Apostle is referring to a bit more clearly. My "little children" refers to believers (in general, in this case), and it is to them/us (to believers both then and today, of course .. those of us who both "KNOW HIM" and for whom He is the Advocate with the Father) that the Apostle has written this Epistle (e.g. .. "I am writing these things to you"). Further, John goes on to clear up any questions about which Christians (which members of the invisible church, that is) fall under the guidelines that he outlined for us (e.g. 1 John 1:9) by pointing out that ALL true believers need to confess their sins whenever they commit them, whether they be babes in Christ ("little children/children"), or those in the church who have already been progressively sanctified by God and are now more mature in the faith ("young men"), and/or those who are considered to be elders/leaders in the faith ("fathers") .. which, as I mentioned earlier, includes the Apostle John himself, who included himself both here and as a part of the "we", "us", "our" and "ourselves" in 1 John 1. 1 John 2 12 I am writing to you, little children, because your sins have been forgiven you for His name’s sake. 13 I am writing to you, fathers, because you know Him who has been from the beginning. I am writing to you, young men, because you have overcome the evil one. I have written to you, children, because you know the Father. 14 I have written to you, fathers, because you know Him who has been from the beginning. I have written to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one. This means that the "we", "us", "our", "ourselves" and "you" are all referring to believers in 1 John 1-2, NOT to the lost (or even to some sort of combination of the two (the saints and the reprobate together). This also means that your interpretation of 1 John 3:9 cannot be correct (for the reasons just given and other reasons too). More on the rest later :) God bless you!! --David

Hello Michael (@MichaelSnow), if you are still inquiring, yes, I'm a fan of Spurgeon! Here are a few of my favorite quotes of his. God bless you!! --David

Hello Live2believe, the problem is, John's words are also clear in 1 John 1-2, yes, where he, the now elder Apostle John, includes not only Christians (at all levels of maturity in the faith) as those who need to continue to confess their sins to God whenever they commit them, but he includes himself, as well (please take note of the words in bold below). 1 John 1 8 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us. 1 John 2 1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; 2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world. 3 By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. 4 The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; 5 but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him: 6 the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked. 7 Beloved, I am not writing a new commandment to you, but an old commandment which you have had from the beginning; the old commandment is the word which you have heard. 8 On the other hand, I am writing a new commandment to you, which is true in Him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true Light is already shining. 9 The one who says he is in the Light and yet hates his brother is in the darkness until now. 10 The one who loves his brother abides in the Light and there is no cause for stumbling in him. 11 But the one who hates his brother is in the darkness and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going because the darkness has blinded his eyes. 12 I am writing to you, little children, because your sins have been forgiven you for His name’s sake. 13 I am writing to you, fathers, because you know Him who has been from the beginning. I am writing to you, young men, because you have overcome the evil one. I have written to you, children, because you know the Father. 14 I have written to you, fathers, because you know Him who has been from the beginning. I have written to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one. So, how do we reconcile the above from the 1 John 1-2 with 1 John 3:9? I think that 1 John 3:9 in the ESV can help. IOW, a true believer will not continue to make a ~practice~ of sinning (or living a sinful ~lifestyle~) like they used to do before coming to saving faith in Christ (nor will they continue to be impenitent when they sin). God bless you! --David!

Both Greetings! I've always thought of "spiritual warfare" as a mostly defensive operation on the part of the saints, but I'm wondering if I need to revise my thinking about that? For instance, So, what say you? Offensive, defensive or both, and if it is the latter, do you believe that we are (or at least should be) principally engaged in an offensive or defensive operation (please explain why you believe what you do w/a verse or two in support, if possible). Thanks!! BTW, I always thought of "gates" as being defensive in nature, but the wording of Matthew 16:18 makes the gates of hell sound like it could be an offensive weapon of some sort instead, especially in translations like the NASB, NIV, and paraphrases like the NLT ("will not overpower it/the church" NASB and/or "will not conquer it/the church" NLT), though the AV's/NKJV's" translation, "the gates of hell ~shall not prevail~ against it (the church)" could certainly be understood as the "gates" being offensive too. There is much more concerning this topic that I'd like to discuss, but this seems like a good place to start, so please let me/us know what you think about all of this God bless you!! --David

The Screwtape Letters Chapter 2 II MY DEAR WORMWOOD, I note with grave displeasure that your patient has become a Christian. Do not indulge the hope that you will escape the usual penalties; indeed, in your better moments, I trust you would hardly even wish to do so. In the meantime we must make the best of the situation. There is no need to despair; hundreds of these adult converts have been reclaimed after a brief sojourn in the Enemy’s camp and are now with us. All the habits of the patient, both mental and bodily, are still in our favour. One of our great allies at present is the Church itself. Do not misunderstand me. I do not mean the Church as we see her spread out through all time and space and rooted in eternity, terrible as an army with banners. That, I confess, is a spectacle which makes our boldest tempters uneasy. But fortunately it is quite invisible to these humans. All your patient sees is the half-finished, sham Gothic erection on the new building estate. When he goes inside, he sees the local grocer with rather an oily expression on his face bustling up to offer him one shiny little book containing a liturgy which neither of them understands, and one shabby little book containing corrupt texts of a number of religious lyrics, mostly bad, and in very small print. When he gets to his pew and looks round him he sees just that selection of his neighbours whom he has hitherto avoided. You want to lean pretty heavily on those neighbours. Make his mind flit to and fro between an expression like “the body of Christ” and the actual faces in the next pew. It matters very little, of course, what kind of people that next pew really contains. You may know one of them to be a great warrior on the Enemy’s side. No matter. Your patient, thanks to Our Father below, is a fool. Provided that any of those neighbours sing out of tune, or have boots that squeak, or double chins, or odd clothes, the patient will quite easily believe that their religion must therefore be somehow ridiculous. At his present stage, you see, he has an idea of “Christians” in his mind which he supposes to be spiritual but which, in fact, is largely pictorial. His mind is full of togas and sandals and armour and bare legs and the mere fact that the other people in church wear modern clothes is a real—though of course an unconscious—difficulty to him. Never let it come to the surface; never let him ask what he expected them to look like. Keep everything hazy in his mind now, and you will have all eternity wherein to amuse yourself by producing in him the peculiar kind of clarity which Hell affords. Work hard, then, on the disappointment or anticlimax which is certainly coming to the patient during his first few weeks as a churchman. The Enemy allows this disappointment to occur on the threshold of every human endeavour. It occurs when the boy who has been enchanted in the nursery by Stories from the Odyssey buckles down to really learning Greek. It occurs when lovers have got married and begin the real task of learning to live together. In every department of life it marks the transition from dreaming aspiration to laborious doing. The Enemy takes this risk because He has a curious fantasy of making all these disgusting little human vermin into what He calls His “free” lovers and servants—“sons” is the word He uses, with His inveterate love of degrading the whole spiritual world by unnatural liaisons with the two-legged animals. Desiring their freedom, He therefore refuses to carry them, by their mere affections and habits, to any of the goals which He sets before them: He leaves them to “do it on their own”. And there lies our opportunity. But also, remember, there lies our danger. If once they get through this initial dryness successfully, they become much less dependent on emotion and therefore much harder to tempt. I have been writing hitherto on the assumption that the people in the next pew afford no rational ground for disappointment. Of course, if they do—if the patient knows that the woman with the absurd hat is a fanatical bridge-player or the man with squeaky boots a miser and an extortioner—then your task is so much the easier. All you then have to do is to keep out of his mind the question “If I, being what I am, can consider that I am in some sense a Christian, why should the different vices of those people in the next pew prove that their religion is mere hypocrisy and convention?” You may ask whether it is possible to keep such an obvious thought from occurring even to a human mind. It is, Wormwood, it is! Handle him properly and it simply won’t come into his head. He has not been anything like long enough with the Enemy to have any real humility yet. What he says, even on his knees, about his own sinfulness is all parrot talk. At bottom, he still believes he has run up a very favourable credit-balance in the Enemy’s ledger by allowing himself to be converted, and thinks that he is showing great humility and condescension in going to church with these “smug”, commonplace neighbours at all. Keep him in that state of mind as long as you can. Your affectionate uncle, Screwtape

Hello Ghostdog, I was submerged three times when I was baptized as an adult (once for each Member of the Godhead .. e.g. Matthew 28:19). As far as how long I was underwater each time I was submerged, well, I never felt the need to come up early to breathe (nor did I ever wish that I'd been wearing a SCUBA tank ;)). Finally, what do you mean by, "long enough to make sure that it (your baptism) took hold? ("took hold" of what, exactly?). Thanks! God bless you!! --David

No Scar? "For to you it has been granted on behalf of Christ, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake." Philippians 1:29 Hast thou no scar? No hidden scar on foot, or side, or hand? I hear thee sung as mighty in the land; I hear them hail thy bright, ascendant star. Hast thou no scar? Hast thou no wound? Yet I was wounded by the archers; spent, Leaned Me against a tree to die; and rent By ravening beasts that compassed Me, I swooned. Hast thou no wound? No wound? No scar? Yet, as the Master shall the servant be, And piercèd are the feet that follow Me. But thine are whole; can he have followed far Who hast no wound or scar? BY Amy Carmichael Missionary to orphans in India. She suffered much -- and bore much eternal fruit. Back in the 1920s, Amy rescued hundreds of orphaned children -- especially little girls that would be dedicated to Hindu gods for use in sexual temple rituals. By God's wonderful grace, some had miraculously escaped from such pagan slavery and were led to the Irish "mother" who lovingly cared for each child God sent her. In 1931 she prayed, “God, please do with me whatever you want. Do anything that will help me to serve you better.” That same day, she fell, suffering fractures that would cripple her for the rest of her life. Not one to be discouraged or bitter when faced with pain or persecution, Amy now had the opportunity to demonstrate God's faithfulness before a much larger "host" of witnesses. While her growing children had continual freedom to enter her bedroom and share their hearts with their beloved "mother," she now had the quiet times that allowed her to write books, poems, and letters that were translated and shared around the world. "Great is Thy faithfulness," O Lord! "Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross..." Hebrews 12:1-2 ~NO SCAR?

Hello D. Adrien, please elaborate a bit, as I'd like to make sure that I'm understanding the point that you're making (also, are you referring to St. Francis specifically, or to preachers, witnesses and missionaries in general, as those who fall short of the word that they are preaching?). If it is St. Francis, remember that he was an itinerant preacher/missionary who went from town to town to town, sometimes preaching in as many as five different cities/villages on the same day, to the people who lived in each of these places and, apparently, sometimes to their cows, too :) (he must have taken Mark 16:15 VERY literally) :) Thanks! God bless you!! --David

Hello D. Adrien, thank you for your reply and thoughts I agree with what you just said with a single exception, those of us who have been born again and justified, and who are now in Christ as a result (because we truly are being made less and less rotten and more and more Christlike throughout the balance of our lives here by God (principally), but also by the good/righteous influence of our fellow believers (especially those who are more mature in the faith than we are), because we end up walking with/being influenced by those who have spent their lives walking closely with and being influenced by Him The problem with the "apples" of this world is that while most appear to be healthy on the outside, they are already corrupt on the inside and therefore, beyond our help in their present state .. cf Luke 6:43-45. They can't be healed or made better somehow, because they/we are all born with an incurable disease of the heart. Instead, they need to be ~changed~ from the inside out (just like we were .. e.g. Ezekiel 36:26-27) by the only One who can, the Great Physician. God bless you!! --David

Hello Neighbor, I'm going with "not". Judaism has had a problem since A.D. 70 since animal sacrifices can no longer offered by the Levitical priesthood to redeem the people of Israel and/or the individual Jew from their sins (so that God can/will forgive them) because 1. the Temple no longer exists and 2. no one knows who the Levites are anymore (as all of the records of who belonged to which Tribe were also lost in AD 70). So, what has been taught for centuries now (by "Rabbinic Judaism") is that in the place of the burnt offerings (that were always used for redemption and the forgiveness of sins in Israel, until AD 70), sins are now forgiven simply by confessing them and asking God to do so (the basis for this now traditional belief being found in a single verse .. 2 Samuel 12:13, when David confessed to the prophet Nathan and Nathan told him that God had forgiven his sins .. even though no animal sacrifice had been made, apparently). A couple of problems with this (with what Rabbinic Judaism teaches, that is) is, 1. why were the sacrifices EVER required to begin with, and 2. why did they continue from the time God forgave David until AD 70 if they were no longer necessary I've asked those questions several times and received no answer back from the Jews I've talked to, only consternation, and the belief that something must be wrong with me for even thinking that there might be a problem (with this particular Rabbinic teaching). God bless you!! --David

Matthew 5 14 “~You~ are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden; 15 nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. 16 Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.” In this passage we have the Lord Jesus who is, ~THE~ "light of the world" .. e.g. John 8:12, telling us that ~we~ are the "light of the world". I find this thought to be very humbling (to say the least) every time I consider it. Lastly, here's a wonderful song by Kari Jobe about this passage called We Are (if anyone would like to listen to it :)).

Or as Missionary (to India) Amy Carmichael said in kind,