Yep, the Bible is replete with references of the conflict of the two natures. Two bad there is NO REFERENCE to the two natures in 1 John 3. The new nature is mentioned, but where is the old nature? IT"S NOT MENTIONED. What IS mentioned is the distinctions between those who have a new nature and those that don't. I.e those who are born of God and those who aren't.
Not By Works
- Thread starter dcontroversal
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Paul did not write 1 John and it is an example of horrible handling of the bible to transpose the two nature teaching of Paul unto 1 John 3 when it is not there. DO you do that with the rest of the book? With the rest of the Bible? DO you transpose the two natures anywhere and everywhere you wish?
Thanks for demonstrating HOW NOT to do biblical interpretation
Thanks for demonstrating HOW NOT to do biblical interpretation
Anyone who knows ANYTHING about biblical interpretation can read 1 John 3:6-10 and see that he is speaking of two different groups of people, those who have been born of God and those who haven't. You really have to destroy the text to make it about two natures of the believer. Verse 10 clearly shows that the context of verse 6 to the end of the chapter is talking about children of God vs children of the devil.
You have taken verse 6-7 out of context and amputed them and separated them from the rest of the chapter, and created an exegetical FRANKENSTEIN.
You have taken verse 6-7 out of context and amputed them and separated them from the rest of the chapter, and created an exegetical FRANKENSTEIN.
Undergrace asked me "if they do not?" to my statement that "works follow salvation". SO I guess it's clear to you that works of obedience after salvation are optional. OHHHKAAAAY.
Go back and read what she was replying to before you assume that what I am saying is religious blather. WE ARE HIS WORKMANSHIP CREATED IN CHRIST JESUS UNTO GOOD WORKS WHICH GOD HATH BEFORE ORDAINED THAT WE SHOULD WALK IN THEM.
GOOD Works after salvation are not religious blather. They are taught in Ephesians 2;10, Titus 2:11-15, and many other places.
Your irrational hatred of me is making you look foolish.
Go back and read what she was replying to before you assume that what I am saying is religious blather. WE ARE HIS WORKMANSHIP CREATED IN CHRIST JESUS UNTO GOOD WORKS WHICH GOD HATH BEFORE ORDAINED THAT WE SHOULD WALK IN THEM.
GOOD Works after salvation are not religious blather. They are taught in Ephesians 2;10, Titus 2:11-15, and many other places.
Your irrational hatred of me is making you look foolish.
I gave her several with Master and LORD in it. My guess is she did not think I could find one.
I included these two:
John 13:13 (NJB)
13 You call me Master and Lord, and rightly; so I am.
Jude 1:4 (ESV)
4 For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.
I included these two:
John 13:13 (NJB)
13 You call me Master and Lord, and rightly; so I am.
Jude 1:4 (ESV)
4 For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.
-
1
- Show all
Try to square YOUR improper interpretation with this Scripture:
2 Timothy 1:9 (CSBBible)
9 He saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began.
OBEDIENCE is Part of our LOVE, that comes after we are SAVED. LONG AFTER.
-
1
- Show all
First of all, I don't care if people have me on ignore.
Secondly, Paul didn't write 1 John! Catch up and read the posts, man!
Secondly, Paul didn't write 1 John! Catch up and read the posts, man!
Where did dcon say paul wrote 1 john?
🤔
-
1
- Show all
He is transposing Pauline theology regarding two natures onto 1 John 3:6-10.
a. Where do you see two natures in 1 John 3?
b. Verse 6 IS NOT talking about the new nature it is talking about believers.
c. What 1 John 3 is talking about is evident in verse 10. Go and read verse 10
d.1 John 3:10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.
e. This text is not talking about two natures. It is talking about two different types of people. Those who are born of God and those that are not.
f. DC is transposing "two natures" unto the text to make it fit his theology instead of making his theology fit the text.
a. Where do you see two natures in 1 John 3?
b. Verse 6 IS NOT talking about the new nature it is talking about believers.
c. What 1 John 3 is talking about is evident in verse 10. Go and read verse 10
d.1 John 3:10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.
e. This text is not talking about two natures. It is talking about two different types of people. Those who are born of God and those that are not.
f. DC is transposing "two natures" unto the text to make it fit his theology instead of making his theology fit the text.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Oh, so I am wrong about saying good works FOLLOW salvation? OOOOOHKAAAAY.
and I am wrong about saying that 1 John 3:6-10 is talking about those who are born of God and those who are not?
Where are two natures found in 1 John 3? I see the new nature, but I DO NOT SEE THE OLD MAN OF BELIEVERS MENTIONED ANYWHERE.
1 John 3 is not talking about two natures. It is talking about two different kinds of people. Those who have been born of God and those who haven't
SO where have I been proven wrong?
and I am wrong about saying that 1 John 3:6-10 is talking about those who are born of God and those who are not?
Where are two natures found in 1 John 3? I see the new nature, but I DO NOT SEE THE OLD MAN OF BELIEVERS MENTIONED ANYWHERE.
1 John 3 is not talking about two natures. It is talking about two different kinds of people. Those who have been born of God and those who haven't
SO where have I been proven wrong?
So I have wrong theology.
a. Good works follow salvation is wrong theology according to you. Let's tear Ephesians 2:10 and Titus 2:11-15 out of the Bible for gb9
b. 1 John 3 is not talking about those who are born of God in contrast with those who are not. Let's tear the entire rest of the book out of the Bible, (because the entire book contrasts those who are of God and those that aren't) and make 1 John two verses long. Just keep 1 John 3:6-7 and tear the rest of 1 John out of the Bible for GB9
c. Saying that Jesus is a believer's Lord is wrong theology, so let's create our own Jesus that is not Lord, but is rather someone who says "you can obey me if you want to, but it is optional."
a. Good works follow salvation is wrong theology according to you. Let's tear Ephesians 2:10 and Titus 2:11-15 out of the Bible for gb9
b. 1 John 3 is not talking about those who are born of God in contrast with those who are not. Let's tear the entire rest of the book out of the Bible, (because the entire book contrasts those who are of God and those that aren't) and make 1 John two verses long. Just keep 1 John 3:6-7 and tear the rest of 1 John out of the Bible for GB9
c. Saying that Jesus is a believer's Lord is wrong theology, so let's create our own Jesus that is not Lord, but is rather someone who says "you can obey me if you want to, but it is optional."
DC started it with his calling me dense as lead. He is always using ad hominems, and no one says anything about it. Double standards.
I'll tell you what. Show me proof that 1 John 3 is talking about two natures, and NOT a contrast between those who are of God and those who are not, LIKE THE REST OF THE BOOK.
I'll tell you what. Show me proof that 1 John 3 is talking about two natures, and NOT a contrast between those who are of God and those who are not, LIKE THE REST OF THE BOOK.
