ARCHIVE: Free From Sin - 1 John

[Nathon Detroit]

This still sounds confusing and practically not different than sozo's view.

My view and Sozo's view are very similar.

Where we differ is....

- Sozo says Christians CANNOT sin. (however they can just do "stupid things")

- I say Christians CAN SIN but that sin is covered by the blood of Jesus.

- You say... Christians CAN sin and must put Jesus back on the cross and ask for forgiveness.

If the sins are automatically covered, then there is righteousness even while persisting in unrighteous adultery.

Righteousness is accounted to us from God through Christ's faithfulness on the cross.

It has nothing to do with anything we do.... or do not do.

Each act and motive stands on its own basis and is judged that way. The standing before God is a different issue. The believer who continues to commit adultery is identical to the one who feels conviction and ceases the behavior. Both are forgiven and cleansed regardless of their behavior?

Assuming they have been crucified with Christ, of course!

I do not see this in Scripture. I am not saying that one loses their salvation, but they cannot say they are walking in the Spirit if they are in the flesh.

We can give in to our flesh but that doesn't mean the Spirit leaves us.

The Spirit is our guarantee, our irrevocable gift.

Grace is only grace if we need not work to keep it.

 

[elected4ever]

Yeah... I read some of that and that is one of the main reasons I decided to attempt to straighten Sozo out on this thread.

Tragically Sozo has a massive self control problem and is incapable of discussing biblical issues with people.

The really sad part is apparently Sozo has convinced some of the brighter TOL'ers (Lighthouse and Jefferson) of this silly theology. Tragic! :shocked:

Who are you to give advice to anyone. You don't even know the what salvation is.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Godrulz... I would rather not get into a discussion on faith plus works etc. on this thread. I would rather stay focused on Sozo's claim. Thanks!

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Who are you to give advice to anyone. You don't even know the what salvation is.

Thank you.

 

[elected4ever]

I apologize for post 122 knight, That was meant for pea brain godrulz. For some reason it got attached to yours. Completely unintended. I tried to delete it but it wouldn't go away.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

I apologize for post 122 knight, That was meant for pea brain godrulz. For some reason it got attached to yours. Completely unintended. I tried to delete it but it wouldn't go away.

Ahhhh!

No problem. :up:

 

[godrulz]

:dizzy: tsk tsk

You are slowly becoming like the dark side. Hate not, Luke. Love, you must

 

[godrulz]

You say... Christians CAN sin and must put Jesus back on the cross and ask for forgiveness.

Hebrews refutes this concept. This is why I reject animal sacrifices and Catholic Mass. The cross cry "It is finished" is true. He does not die again every time we sin. The perfect provision is a once for all sacrifice. Just as it is not unconditionally applied to all men (universalism), so it is not applied to non-existent sins. He calls us to confession, repentance, and renewed obedience. I John 1:9 does not imply He has to die again every time a Christian sins (even in your circumcision view). His death is not a literal payment. If it was, universalism would be true. Forgiveness and restoration of intimate fellowship should not be confused with initial justification where our past sins were forgiven (does not mean blotted out of our memories). The same blood that forgives past sins, forgives future sins, but not before they are committed, Mr. Open Theist (otherwise there is no logical reason to not sin or to stop sinning).

We can give in to our flesh but that doesn't mean the Spirit leaves us.

The Spirit is our guarantee, our irrevocable gift.

Grace is only grace if we need not work to keep it.

I agree that the Spirit does not leave us. I do not believe in hyper-Arminian insecurity, but affirm the security of believers even if they sin (unbelief is a unique sin that cuts us off from His person and work). We can not say we are walking in the Spirit in that area if we are walking in the flesh (Pauline teaching).

Just as the saving work of the Spirit can be resisted before conversion, so the keeping grace and power of the Spirit can be resisted (apostasy is the extreme...less severe is the warning to believers to not quench or grieve the Spirit....we are not hyper-Calvinists, but free will theists).

 

[godrulz]

Godrulz... I would rather not get into a discussion on faith plus works etc. on this thread. I would rather stay focused on Sozo's claim. Thanks!

Yes, sir! I hear and obey :up:

Do not :banned:

 

[godrulz]

I apologize for post 122 knight, That was meant for pea brain godrulz. For some reason it got attached to yours. Completely unintended. I tried to delete it but it wouldn't go away.

I am going to get an MRI or CT scan to prove you wrong. Mind you, a coconut up there does not prove it is intelligent matter. Now where are my keys and wallet? :think:

 

[Lighthouse]

But not only that... it isn't biblical!

Yes, it is.

The Bible clearly destroys this view as I have demonstrated on this thread. Paul does not agree with Sozo, you and e4e, plain and simple.

Actually, all you've done is show that you don't actually know what we are saying. Of course, with e4e that's quite easy to understand. I'm not sure he knows what he's talking about most of the time. And, with Sozo, I understand that as well, because he doesn't always explain himsefl fully before getting too angry to take the conversation any further. And as for me, I will get to the answer with time...

Fruitful maybe. I hope so. I hope you will read the passages I have posted. After reading those verses I think you should change you stance on this issue.

Some of those verses are the very reason I came to this stance.

God and the apostle Paul disagree.

No, they don't.

That's where you are dead wrong according to the Bible.

Christians sin. The beauty is, through Christ's work on the cross God covers EVERY sin (past present and future) that is the gospel.

Do you realize that your argument is no more than a fight to call "sin" something else? There is NO payoff to your argument. There is no plus side. Even if you convinced somebody that Christians cannot sin the only thing you would have accomplished is you no longer call rape a "sin" for a Christian, instead you call it a "stupid act" (as e4e acknowledged). What is the point? You would still need to explain that God covers "stupid acts" for those saved by the blood of Christ.

Bottom line is...
The assertion that Christians cannot sin is biblically inaccurate. Confusing. Pointless. And has no apparent up-side.

Dump it and move on. :up:

He does not cover them, He removes them. He has removed sin itself from us. Christ became sin, to remove it from us.

Do you want to know the three definitions, and why I believe the way I do?

 

[Lighthouse]

Yeah... I read some of that and that is one of the main reasons I decided to attempt to straighten Sozo out on this thread.

Tragically Sozo has a massive self control problem and is incapable of discussing biblical issues with people.

The really sad part is apparently Sozo has convinced some of the brighter TOL'ers (Lighthouse and Jefferson) of this silly theology. Tragic! :shocked:

Sozo isn't the one who convinced Jefferson. I am. And, also, if it weren't for Sozo convincing me of this, I wouldn't believe in eternal security. Then who knows where I might be?

 

[koban]

:dizzy: tsk tsk

You are slowly becoming like the dark side. Hate not, Luke. Love, you must

Yeah, but they have cookies. :sigh:

 

[godrulz]

He does not cover them, He removes them. He has removed sin itself from us. Christ became sin, to remove it from us.

Do you want to know the three definitions, and why I believe the way I do?

Sin is not a substance that is 'removed'. It is a volition that no longer exists. If one commits adultery 20 years before conversion, it is a past sin that does not exist to be literally removed. Justification means that He treats us as if we never sinned. He does not count or hold it against us based on a substitute for the penalty of sin, the Lord Jesus Christ. Without Christ, the demands of His holy law would be required (death). Without shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness. This satisfies God's love and holiness. We are cleansed and forgiven, just as if we never sinned (though it does not change the fact that we did sin nor does it mean that he/we literally forget it).

 

[godrulz]

Sozo isn't the one who convinced Jefferson. I am. And, also, if it weren't for Sozo convincing me of this, I wouldn't believe in eternal security. Then who knows where I might be?

You do not have to believe in OSAS (Calvinistic) to have assurance from the Holy Spirit that you are a child of God. You can have biblical assurance without convincing yourself of a doctrine that gives some people (apostates) false assurance. Believers are secure. You are a believer. You should have assurance. If you ever decided to hate God and become a Satan worshipping pig, then you should not have assurance nor hope. It also does not mean that you were not a Christian all of these years. Fortunately, neither you nor I have any propensity to forsake the One who died for us so it is a moot point.

 

[Lighthouse]

Sin is not a substance that is 'removed'. It is a volition that no longer exists. If one commits adultery 20 years before conversion, it is a past sin that does not exist to be literally removed. Justification means that He treats us as if we never sinned. He does not count or hold it against us based on a substitute for the penalty of sin, the Lord Jesus Christ. Without Christ, the demands of His holy law would be required (death). Without shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness. This satisfies God's love and holiness. We are cleansed and forgiven, just as if we never sinned (though it does not change the fact that we did sin nor does it mean that he/we literally forget it).

12As far as the east is from the west, so far hath He removed our transgressions from us.

-Psalms 103:12
​

 

[godrulz]

12As far as the east is from the west, so far hath He removed our transgressions from us.

-Psalms 103:12
​

Nice poetic language that expresses a spiritual truth. Psalms is not a didactic, wooden literalism passage. It also is couched in Old Testament imagery of animal sacrifices and ritual. As the lightning comes from east to west, so will coming of Son of Man be. Other passages imply He does not hold our sin against us. It does not mean He gathers up our sins in a box and throws them in the garbage. Lying is not a thing that makes sense with spatial analogies (east/west)...figure of speech?

 

[Ecumenicist]

After the resurrection, Jesus was healed, but He still bore hte scars. Those were His witness.

Even with our sins cleansed, we still bear the scars, as a witness to what we have been through,
and how God's Grace has redeemed us.

Dave

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Hebrews refutes this concept.

Hence the name of the book... "Hebrews".

 

[Nathon Detroit]

He does not cover them, He removes them. He has removed sin itself from us. Christ became sin, to remove it from us.

That is nothing more than doublespeak.

After all... you DO believe that Christians do things that are bad and wrong, correct?

Some Christians steal..., use profanity, and even worse!

You do believe that right?

Yet you think that when a Christian does these "bad things" they are no longer called "sins", big deal! A name change for bad behavior! What is the pay off? Christ still needs to cover the punishment for these "bad things" correct?

When Jesus hung on the cross it meant far more than a name change for bad behavior.

You are preaching a hollow, unnecessarily confusing inaccurate gospel message.