I'm going to comment on this as that was the first of your post.
In these times I think it incumbent for those who are in Christ to seek understanding beyond their own when reading scripture. If we read those two verses as is we think those redeemed in Christ are being told they're still sinners. That's not the proper understanding intended nor is it the language used to afford that understanding.
"If..." , is the key word there.
That is why the study of the word as intended to be understood in grammatical phraseology is vital I think.
Lastly, your posts would come across as more genuine if rather than cut and paste of scripture you would enter the discussion with your personal remarks. Otherwise your posts are of no use because they do not ascribe context.
Are you familiar with the member, MessageOfTheCross? They also post in the same way here.
Source for this excerpt:
https://beta.biblegateway.com/resources/ivp-nt/Atonement-Christ
The Atonement of Christ (1:6—2:2)
These verses contain six if-clauses. Three of them (vv. 6, 8, 10) are claims that the author views as false deductions to draw from the belief that
God is light. These claims may be slogans or summaries of the position of the dissidents who have left the fellowship. Apparently each claim is based on the assumption that if God is perfect light, then those who are God's children are perfect light as well. While the secessionists may echo the author's teaching, they distort it at crucial points.
Although John speaks in the first person plural ("we"), this does not necessarily imply that any of his readers, those who have remained faithful, are actually making such claims. Rather, he is using a rhetorical device to make vivid the danger of adopting this viewpoint: "Now imagine if we were to say. . . ." To each of these false statements, then, John advances a theological counterclaim (1:7, 9; 2:1). Each counterclaim consists of two parts: first, he refutes the secessionists' claim to be with out sin, to be light as
God is light; second, he affirms the importance of the atoning work of Christ for the sinner. Indeed, these two are integrally related, for to deny one's sin is ultimately to deny the need for Christ's atonement.
I can see you are new.
Welcome.
I have been posting context and commentary for years. (Here even, I have recently made this account because I wanted a new username)
The thing is if you believe you do not sin, you are wrong.
You belittle what sin is and elevate yourself.
If you think your "small" sins are any less filthy than someone who is not covered with the blood of Christ and seen as spotless, you are wrong.
This thread is called
"
Why do so many Christians end up in Hell?"
But the fact is, not one of God's born again children end up in hell.
If you believe your walk defines wether or not you are His, you are wrong.
He is how we are saved from the just punishment we deserve from when we were His enemies.
Once we are His children, we are kept by His power.
If you are trying to make the habitual sin compared to occasional sin argument, that is weak.
If you fail at one point you are guilty of all.
A better difference to point at between when we were His enemies to when we became sons, would be the change of heart (His works in us) opposed to the changes that can be seen by man with limited knowledge and vision. (our own works)
While enemies -> bound by sin and love it, find joy in it, work towards gaining the things we desire without the feeling of failure...
While sons -> freed from sin through Him, hate it, regret it, find pain in it, pray for deliverance from it
Hebrews 12
6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.
_______
As sons already, we will still sin.
God does not need to chasten one who does not make mistakes. (and it would not be a mistake if we didn't submit to His righteousness)
The verses you danced around before you posted towards my comment directed at a brother explain our new nature, our old nature but how as new creatures our assurance rests in our Savior Jesus Christ.
Not our walk or the things man can see like so many like to point to.