Galatians Discussion

[Onesimus63]

1Jo 3:9, Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

I think that you have merely presented an argument against the plain reality of the above scripture.

The weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for the pulling down of strongholds.

So, Peter plainly states to those he states are born again:
rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind

Yet you, refuse to accept the scripture, because, there is only one commandment here that really matters isn't there
''Thou shalt not admit to error.
Spurgeon was called the prince of preachers, concerning 1John 3:9, he said that in our born again nature we cannot sin, but in our flesh, we will sadly continue to sin. Now if you believed that, you would be able to bring scripture into cohesion, instead of contradiction. Many take the view 1John3:9 refers to a lifestyle of continuos sin. Either way, scripture can then come into cohesion. You have to read the bible as one whole book, not just grab a few verses and give a literal interpretation of them.

So, Jesus said no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again. In your understanding, you can only be born again when you are wholly sanctified. So you are preaching a message of ''perform nigh on perfect or you will be cast into hell. That is the message of the pharisees in Jesus day. It is a cruel and heartless message and ignores the great love, mercy and compassion of God, without which no one will inherit eternal life. It ius easy to say you follow after the Holy Spirit every moment of your life, but you do not, your reality is not your statements. The phairsees did not attain to what they demanded of others either. Your gospel message is akin to parents throwing a child out of the house if they did not perfectly obey the rules and not letting them back in unless they earnestly repented(if at all) And I am obviously not referring to 18 year olds!!

 

[Moses_Young]

The phairsees did not attain to what they demanded of others either. Your gospel message is akin to parents throwing a child out of the house if they did not perfectly obey the rules and not letting them back in unless they earnestly repented(if at all) And I am obviously not referring to 18 year olds!!

Why aren't you referring to 18 year olds?

 

[Onesimus63]

No, they don't go to hell. If someone who is justified dies without becoming born again, their entire sanctification (being born again) comes with a glorified body.

But the point that I would make is that entire sanctification is an obtainable goal in this life and therefore we ought to continue to strive for it.

I believe that if anyone has attained to it, they would be unaware of having attained to it (Job 9:21, Isaiah 42:19, John 9:41).

They would consider that they still have room to grow and would continue to press on toward the goal; being unaware that they have obtained it (Philippians 3:12-15, esp. v.15).

You are born again at conversion. The Holy Spirit enters your life and Christ dwells in you by faith. You are then a new creation as the bible states. It seems to me the only reason you refuse to accept what nearly everyone else does is because it would break the commandment:
Thou shalt not admit to error

 

[Onesimus63]

Why aren't you referring to 18 year olds?

Children.

 

[Grandpa]

Well Grandpa, if you know as much as you think you know, you are blessed indeed.
BTW I am not SDA.

Some things are super obvious based on repetition in scripture.

I think most people can understand.

 

[Onesimus63]

Some things are super obvious based on repetition in scripture.

I think most people can understand.

Let me explain what I hoped people might have gathered, for I was NOT endorsing sda belief in the following:


'''SDA mmebers put it in a variety of ways.

You are justified by faith in Christ and are not under the law. You remain justified and not under the law as long as you do not break the law

You are justified by faith in Christ, that is your righteousness before God. However, love is the fulfilment of the law, so if you break the ten commandments you show you do not have the love of God in you, and therefore can no longer be justified

You are righteous apart from obeying the law, you are not under the law, however, if you follow after the Holy Spirit you will not break the ten commandments, so if you do break them, you can no longer be justified.

Jesus said if you love Him you will obey his commands. All of Jesus commands are derivitives of the Ten Commandments. So if you fail to keep that law you show you do not love Jesus.

It always comes back to the Ten Commandments, an expression used by no Apostle in any of their letters'''

Please note, I was comparing the fact that no Apostle writing in the NT uses the phrase ''the ten commandments'' with many believers who do today. So it should have been plain I do not endorse that. The law God wants you to follow is written in your mind and placed on your heart, it is part of who you are, it is in your dna so to speak. Therefore, to go around telling people they should obey the ten commandments is not to understand the new covenant. It is looking to an external law as it were. The law under the new covenant is internal, not external. If you know your twelve times table, would you need anyone to continually tell you ''you must learn your twelve times table? I have found, all who stress ''the ten commandments'' in reality believe in a justification of obeying them, no matter how skilfully they try and impress otherwise, and they ignore, in reality one of the two main points on which the new covenant is built:
Their sins and lawless deeds I will remember no more.

Preaching a message of ''perform nigh on perfect if you want to enter heaven'' is as far away as you can get from that which the new covenant stands on. Indeed, in my experience, love is the first casualty of stressing obedience to the ten commandments, and those who do stress that, I have always found to be those who commit the most sin

 

[Onesimus63]

Some things are super obvious based on repetition in scripture.

I think most people can understand.

OK, as you dont want to let this go, though in my view you are most unwise:

If someone else thinks they have reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more: 5 circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; 6 as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for righteousness based on the law, faultless.



So, if Paul is giving the thoughts of Saul, how did Saul know he was persecuting the church of God? He would never have believed that. It’s ridiculous isn’t it. Just as ridiculous as Paul stating Saul was sinless. It is plainly obvious Paul is speaking of his life as a Pharisee, he as a Christian is making statements concerning his previous life. And, Pharsees cleaned the outside of the cup, they obeyed the legalistic law blamelessly, as the NIV 1984 edition states:

As for legalistic righteousness faultless



In the time of Herod king of Judea there was a priest named Zechariah, who belonged to the priestly division of Abijah; his wife Elizabeth was also a descendant of Aaron. 6 Both of them were righteous in the sight of God, observing ALL the Lord’s commands and decrees blamelessly.



Now, do you take from the above Luke is claiming sinless perfection for Elizabeth and Zechariah? He says they both observed ALL the Lords commands and decrees blamelessly. We really need to consider scripture, rather than just take a superficial look at it. If Elizabeth and Zechariah truly obeyed all the Lords commands blamelessly, what need would they have for a saviour from sin? And, they did not blamelessly obey the moral law did they! Best to look at repitition, I agree

 

[Onesimus63]

When would it have been POSSIBLE for Paul to know Romans 7:14? Only when he became Christian. He COULDN'T know this when he was a pharisee.

He couldn't know any of Romans 7 as a Pharisee.

As you want to continue chatting, lets take the above again. For you, with your statements are trying to say it is proof Paul is speaking of his christian life in romans 7:7-11&14-24.
Supposing you, followed the wrong path in seeking God, much problems would arise from that, but you could not understand at the time why things were happening as they were. Then, you follow the correct path, and learn from the true Christian faith. Once you have learnt, your eyes are opened, so you can look back to your former mistakes, speak of them, and understand what went wrong. That should not be too hard to accept. And that is what Paul was doing in romans ch7. I'm afraid your comments speak for themselves. I will leave it at that

 

[justbyfaith]

So, Peter plainly states to those he states are born again:
rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind

Yet you, refuse to accept the scripture, because, there is only one commandment here that really matters isn't there
''Thou shalt not admit to error.
Spurgeon was called the prince of preachers, concerning 1John 3:9, he said that in our born again nature we cannot sin, but in our flesh, we will sadly continue to sin. Now if you believed that, you would be able to bring scripture into cohesion, instead of contradiction. Many take the view 1John3:9 refers to a lifestyle of continuos sin. Either way, scripture can then come into cohesion. You have to read the bible as one whole book, not just grab a few verses and give a literal interpretation of them.

So, Jesus said no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again. In your understanding, you can only be born again when you are wholly sanctified. So you are preaching a message of ''perform nigh on perfect or you will be cast into hell. That is the message of the pharisees in Jesus day. It is a cruel and heartless message and ignores the great love, mercy and compassion of God, without which no one will inherit eternal life. It ius easy to say you follow after the Holy Spirit every moment of your life, but you do not, your reality is not your statements. The phairsees did not attain to what they demanded of others either. Your gospel message is akin to parents throwing a child out of the house if they did not perfectly obey the rules and not letting them back in unless they earnestly repented(if at all) And I am obviously not referring to 18 year olds!!

Those who are not born again (by 1 John 3:9's definition) may in fact be justified and on their way to heaven; since He justifieth the ungodly (Romans 4:5). So no, I am not preaching the message of "perform nigh on perfect or you will be cast into hell". if anything, Jesus preached that in Matthew 5:20. But I am not preaching that message.

In gnosticism, what we do in the flesh doesn't matter because who we really are is who we are in the spirit. Therefore I can sin in the flesh and I would not be sinning with my spirit.

However, that is according to false doctrine.

In faithful doctrine, what I do in my flesh, I also do with the whole of my being. With the whole of my being, I walk either according to the flesh or according to the Spirit.

So, this doctrine is untrue and according to gnosticism, that says that I can sin with my flesh and I would not be sinning with my spirit; or, that, I do not sin with my born again spirit when I sin with my flesh; which is indeed what you have just purported.

 

[justbyfaith]

You are born again at conversion. The Holy Spirit enters your life and Christ dwells in you by faith. You are then a new creation as the bible states. It seems to me the only reason you refuse to accept what nearly everyone else does is because it would break the commandment:
Thou shalt not admit to error

Yet the Bible is clear that those who are born of God "cannot sin"...

So, what of those who convert and then commit sin afterwards?

I think that the scripture declares that they have not yet been born again; until they obtain the "second benefit" (2 Corinthians 1:15) of being "sanctified wholly" (1 Thessalonians 5:23-24 (kjv)).

So, those who convert and then sin after, are merely justified by faith while it cannot be said that they have been born again according to the scriptural definition of that term (in 1 John 3:9).

 

[justbyfaith]

Let me explain what I hoped people might have gathered, for I was NOT endorsing sda belief in the following:


'''SDA mmebers put it in a variety of ways.

You are justified by faith in Christ and are not under the law. You remain justified and not under the law as long as you do not break the law

You are justified by faith in Christ, that is your righteousness before God. However, love is the fulfilment of the law, so if you break the ten commandments you show you do not have the love of God in you, and therefore can no longer be justified

You are righteous apart from obeying the law, you are not under the law, however, if you follow after the Holy Spirit you will not break the ten commandments, so if you do break them, you can no longer be justified.

Jesus said if you love Him you will obey his commands. All of Jesus commands are derivitives of the Ten Commandments. So if you fail to keep that law you show you do not love Jesus.

It always comes back to the Ten Commandments, an expression used by no Apostle in any of their letters'''

Please note, I was comparing the fact that no Apostle writing in the NT uses the phrase ''the ten commandments'' with many believers who do today. So it should have been plain I do not endorse that. The law God wants you to follow is written in your mind and placed on your heart, it is part of who you are, it is in your dna so to speak. Therefore, to go around telling people they should obey the ten commandments is not to understand the new covenant. It is looking to an external law as it were. The law under the new covenant is internal, not external. If you know your twelve times table, would you need anyone to continually tell you ''you must learn your twelve times table? I have found, all who stress ''the ten commandments'' in reality believe in a justification of obeying them, no matter how skilfully they try and impress otherwise, and they ignore, in reality one of the two main points on which the new covenant is built:
Their sins and lawless deeds I will remember no more.

Preaching a message of ''perform nigh on perfect if you want to enter heaven'' is as far away as you can get from that which the new covenant stands on. Indeed, in my experience, love is the first casualty of stressing obedience to the ten commandments, and those who do stress that, I have always found to be those who commit the most sin

How does the law that is written on the hearts and minds of New Covenant believers differ from the ten commandments?

 

[Onesimus63]

Those who are not born again (by 1 John 3:9's definition) may in fact be justified and on their way to heaven; since He justifieth the ungodly (Romans 4:5). So no, I am not preaching the message of "perform nigh on perfect or you will be cast into hell". if anything, Jesus preached that in Matthew 5:20. But I am not preaching that message.

In gnosticism, what we do in the flesh doesn't matter because who we really are is who we are in the spirit. Therefore I can sin in the flesh and I would not be sinning with my spirit.

However, that is according to false doctrine.

In faithful doctrine, what I do in my flesh, I also do with the whole of my being. With the whole of my being, I walk either according to the flesh or according to the Spirit.

So, this doctrine is untrue and according to gnosticism, that says that I can sin with my flesh and I would not be sinning with my spirit; or, that, I do not sin with my born again spirit when I sin with my flesh; which is indeed what you have just purported.

Yes, I understand, your doctine brings scripture in contradiction with scripture, which proves where your doctrine is at.
I explained Spurgeons doctrine of 1 John3:9, I did not pass an opinion as to whether it was what I believed, so I was not purporting it. Please remember the ninth commandment.

 

[Onesimus63]

How does the law that is written on the hearts and minds of New Covenant believers differ from the ten commandments?

Well setting aside the wording of the fourth one, it simply means in our hearts we do not want to commit adultery, steal, bear false witness, covet etc. Those laws if you like are in our hearts and minds, they are part of our dna so speak, so no born again christian would need to be told they should obey the ten commandments, but there is much more in our hearts and minds than what is written in those laws

 

[Onesimus63]

Yet the Bible is clear that those who are born of God "cannot sin"...

So, what of those who convert and then commit sin afterwards?

I think that the scripture declares that they have not yet been born again; until they obtain the "second benefit" (2 Corinthians 1:15) of being "sanctified wholly" (1 Thessalonians 5:23-24 (kjv)).

So, those who convert and then sin after, are merely justified by faith while it cannot be said that they have been born again according to the scriptural definition of that term (in 1 John 3:9).

However, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again. Jesus told Nicodemus he was speaking of earthly things. Therefore, if your doctrine is correct, any believer who dies righteous/but not born again ends up in hell. Or possibly you believe in purgatory

 

[justbyfaith]

Yes, I understand, your doctine brings scripture in contradiction with scripture, which proves where your doctrine is at.
I explained Spurgeons doctrine of 1 John3:9, I did not pass an opinion as to whether it was what I believed, so I was not purporting it. Please remember the ninth commandment.

So, you do not believe in Spurgeon's doctrine on that issue? Why then did you bring it up?

Also, what scripture is in contradiction to the doctrine that I have set forth?

You keep saying that my doctrine contradicts scripture and yet, you never say what scripture I am contradicting.

For how can I be contradicting scripture when I am proclaiming the teaching of scripture? Unless you are saying that scripture contradicts scripture?

 

[Onesimus63]

So, you do not believe in Spurgeon's doctrine on that issue? Why then did you bring it up?

Also, what scripture is in contradiction to the doctrine that I have set forth?

You keep saying that my doctrine contradicts scripture and yet, you never say what scripture I am contradicting.

For how can I be contradicting scripture when I am proclaiming the teaching of scripture? Unless you are saying that scripture contradicts scripture?

I have repeated it endlessly from 1Peter

 

[justbyfaith]

Well setting aside the wording of the fourth one, it simply means in our hearts we do not want to commit adultery, steal, bear false witness, covet etc. Those laws if you like are in our hearts and minds, they are part of our dna so speak, so no born again christian would need to be told they should obey the ten commandments, but there is much more in our hearts and minds than what is written in those laws

I would agree with you there.

I would say that the law, as it relates to "law and gospel" in scripture, refers to every moral tenet that can be found in holy scripture.

And if it is written on our hearts and in our minds we will be obedient to it.

 

[Onesimus63]

Also, what scripture is in contradiction to the doctrine that I have set forth?

You keep saying that my doctrine contradicts scripture and yet, you never say what scripture I am contradicting.

1 Peter1:23 For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God.
Therefore(those Peter has described as born again), rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind. 2 Like newborn babies, crave pure spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow up in your salvation,

 

[justbyfaith]

I have repeated it endlessly from 1Peter

However, you are pitting that scripture as an argument against the plain meaning of 1 John 3:9; as though you might be able to nullify 1 John 3:9 with your argument.

 

[Onesimus63]

However, you are pitting that scripture as an argument against the plain meaning of 1 John 3:9; as though you might be able to nullify 1 John 3:9 with your argument.

Nice try! It is you with your literalistic understanding that pits scripture against scripture