This topic will be rather long as I will be dealing with total forgiveness in this topic. I will be arguing against the need for parental forgiveness as taught in the churches today and will show that we are completely forgiven in Christ.
Another unscriptural statements that I often hear pastors say to a person is, "You need to still confess your sins to God because you have been forgiven once for all judicially but now you still have need to be forgiven parentally"??????????????? I don't know about you but this one always bugged me. I always thought, "If God has forgiven me of all sin and all His wrath was fully satisfied with the death of Christ that fully paid for my sin then why does God still hold me accountable for my sins to confess them when He supposedly has forgiven and forgotten them?" He clearly did not forget them if He has to wait for me to confess them. I really didn't get the impression that God has forgiven me as far as the East is from the West as stated in Hebrews with such a teaching. It makes me feel that God now needs to forgive our sins twice. Think about that for a second, God has already forgiven the sins of tomorrow judicially but when you commit those already forgiven sins of tomorrow then He must cleanse you again parentally after you confess them and that seems quite odd. Arguing what we do as parents when our child sins is comparing humans to an almighty God and I hope you can see the problem with that?? God knows our sins of tomorrow and has forgiven them, but we as parents do not know what our child will do tomorrow.
Pastors rely heavily upon the Old Testament to come up with this teachings of making short accounts before God. They teach that you have to enumerate each of your sins daily before God to remain in fellowship with Him. They teach that if you do not confess your sins then God cannot bless you and that He will not hear your prayers.
We do not live under Old Testament conditional blessings. Conditional blessings are "Do this and I will bless you." We live under unconditional blessings today because of the death of Christ. Unconditional blessings are "Do this because I have already blessed you." Ephesians 1:3 teaches that we have been (past tense) blessed with all spiritual blessings in the heavenlies. We appropriate such blessings through faith and not by being good. We are to live by faith and not by a list of dos and don'ts.
Pastors take a verse in the Old Testament where David was praying for God to reveal his secret sins. They take that verse and tie it to 1st Corinthians 11 where Paul told the Corinthians to examine themselves to make sure that they are not eating and drinking of the Lord's table unworthily. They take verses from Jesus that was still speaking under the Old Testament as I will soon share on forgiveness.
The Bible says,
"In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins" (Colossians 1:14).
"And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses" (Colossians 2:13).
Colossians 1:14, the "forgiveness of sins" is in the present tense and that is worth noting since those that believe you can lose your salvation will always claim that the present tense means continual action except when it comes to this verse. They will claim that it means that all of your sins up to this day are forgiven proving that they talk out of both sides of their mouths.
A believer is forgiven of all sins (past, present and future). You must realize that your forgiveness is not conditioned upon your works. Remember, we no longer live under a system of conditional blessings anymore. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are not New Testament books even though they are categorized in your Bible that way. The new covenant could not begin until Christ died as told in the book of Hebrews. Christ was speaking under the OT of conditional blessings. Jesus commanded that we forgive to be forgiven and that would be an example of conditional blessings. The apostle Paul said that we are to forgive because we have already been forgiven. You will never find Paul once telling the carnal Corinthians to confess their sins. You will never once find Paul telling us to confess our sins to God anywhere but only that we should confess our faults to one another (people we have wronged). Compare now the words of Jesus to that of Paul and you will see the difference between conditional blessings of the OT and unconditional blessings of the NT:
Jesus said:
"For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:
But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses" (Matthew 6:14,15).
"And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you."
"Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye" (Colossians 3:13).
Jesus commanded people to forgive to be forgiven as a condition, but Paul commands us to forgive because we have been forgiven unconditionally. Pastors try to intertwine the two verses together into, "We have been forgiven once and for all judicially but now we have need of being forgiven daily parentally." Not taught in Scripture but assumed to be. The fact is, Jesus made it clear that we need to forgive our brother to be forgiven prior to His death at Calvary and Paul stated after the death of Christ that we now forgive others because we ourselves have been forgiven of ALL sin.
What about 1st John 1:9? Since there is not one verse from the book of Acts to 2nd Peter or from 2nd John to Revelation that tells us to confess our sins to God then all that pastors and others can do is use one verse and turn it into a teaching of how we need to keep short accounts with God in the New Testament. They teach how God now needs to forgive us parentally even though He has forgiven us entirely judicially. Again, such people first have to rely heavily upon OT teachings and might even quote Proverbs 28:13. However, if you study confession in the gospels (Matthew to John) then you will notice that confessing sins does not mean to enumerate them one at a time. In Matthew 3:6, it reads:
"And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins."
Now if you remember, John was baptizing a large crowd of people. Do you really think that a man was standing in the water confessing that he was looking at some lady the other day lustfully? Or that he cheated on his taxes? John the Baptist would have had a very long day if everyone needed to enumerate each one of their sins. The Pharisees came there and didn't feel the need for baptism because they didn't see themselves as sinners. Baptism with John the baptist was to identify you as a sinner and they did so by going to him to be baptized. You were confessing (agreeing) back then by being baptized that you were a sinner and that is the confession.
Now in first John, John was dealing with gnosticism who denied that they had a sin nature. John was stating that one needed to confess (agree with God) about ones sins. Gnostics denied having even a sin nature and to do so was to remain in darkness. Their confession or admitting of their sins had nothing to do with confessing each and every sin that they had ever done. This is not a command to make daily confessions. Those that have come to God for salvation are confessing that they are indeed sinners in need of a Savior. We confessed our sins but do realize that all of our sins are forgiven. How can you be eternally forgiven and not forgiven parentally? This is where pastors/teachers have to resort to giving you examples in your life as a parent. They will tell you that your child will always be your child and you will always forgive them but when they wrong you then it hurts the relationship and an apology is in order even though they are forgiven anyways. Sorry, God is not a human, so we will not be sent to our rooms with no dinner indefinitely until we confess our wrong doings. They cannot prove it with Scripture so they have to rely on us sinful creatures and somehow prove that God will react to wrong doing just like we do now.
The fact is, 1st John says that if one confesses his/her sins then they will be forgiven of ALL unrighteousness. Compare the word "all" to Paul on forgiveness and it should be clear that such a phrase is for those not yet saved. Only the unsaved need to be forgiven of all unrighteousness and that is exactly what we have been forgiven from according to the apostle Paul and John as I will soon share.
Confessing your sins has been a real problem for many believer's. Haven't you ever wondered if there was some sin that you forgot to confess? Haven't you ever got off your knees and realized you missed a sin and had to go back and confess again? Haven't you ever felt like just giving up because you keep confessing the same sin over and over again wondering if God is refusing to forgive your repetitive sin? I bet you have been told that if you do not confess each sin then God will not hear your prayers and that too is a lie. They will quote Psalm 66:18 showing that they have to run back to a system of conditional blessings. The day I stopped confessing my sins was wonderful. I didn't have any of the problems pastors claimed would happen and how I wouldn't be able to grow spiritually. It also made me more Christ conscious and not so sin conscious that led to my guilty feelings all the time along with frustration and so on.
1st John 1:9 is not a command to enumerate your sins but only that if one were to confess their sins that these Gnostics would not do was to have their sins forgiven. Believers however live in a perpetual state of forgiveness and are never commanded in this day and age of grace to confess their sins. Look at 1st John 1:7:
"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." (no command to confess unless people want to claim that such people are walking perfectly here??)
Jesus promises if we walk in the light then we experience forgiveness of sins. Look now at Ephesians 5:8:
"For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light."
You are now light in the Lord because you have been saved and this is regardless of your works. Paul then tells us to walk as children of light. Paul is asking us to live out in our walk as to who we now are in the Lord. Make your position match your walk. This again is the unconditional blessing that we live under in the New Testament. Now to be in the light is to have forgiveness of sins as Paul elsewhere declared that we have been forgiven of all trespasses and sins. The only thing affected by not walking in the light is to have hindered fellowship with one another. The solution is not to confess your sins and God will restore you to fellowship but to live obediently. If you fall on your rear end then get up. God never said once that we need to confess our sins to have fellowship as verse 7 never says that. You have to force verse 9 back into verse 7 and you have now changed Scripture to your own fancy. How do I know that if we sin that we still have forgiven of sins? Look at 1st John 2:1 and verse 12:
"My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" (Did you get that? "If any man sin" then we have an advocate and there is absolutely no command to confess sin here).
Verse 12:
"I write unto you, little children, because your sins ARE forgiven you for his name's sake."
Where do you see the command to confess? The whole book deals practically with obedience and yet those that are in sin are never told to confess their sins anywhere to get back into fellowship. 1st John 1:9 is being ripped from its context and being made to teach individual confession of sins and not sin itself that the Gnostics were denying.
How about examining oneself in 1st Corinthians 11 when we partake of the Lord's table? For years, I wouldn't partake of communion believing that there might be some hidden sin in my life that God would strike me dead for. One day the thought went through my head, "Why do I need to come to this table with my so-called holiness in order to partake of remembering what Christ had done for me when I was anything but holy?" I realized that baptists and others butchered this chapter into meaning "confessing your sins." You will never once find "examine yourself" to mean confess your sins. The sin that these Corinthians committed cannot be committed today since most churches use grape juice and unsalted crackers. The sin was their coming to the Lord's table and using it as their main meal and were getting drunk off the wine. They were disrespecting the Lord's table. That is why Paul told them to eat before they came there and not to turn the Lord's table into a party. They were to examine themselves in this area as to how they were approaching the Lord's table. Now I believe you will agree with me that if anyone in all of Scripture needed to be told to confess their sins then it would have been this church and yet you will find not one command to them to confess their sins to God. They were merely exhorted to examine themselves in respect to the Lord's table so that they will not sin again like they did and will not experience the chastening hand of God.
I brought out a few points for you to consider. This is really important as you should be aware that you are practicing something not taught to us believers today as your sins truly are forgiven as far as the East is from the West. The apostle Paul had written most of the New Testament and why wouldn't he have made a comment on it if we are to confess our sins? Do you not see that pastors place so much emphasis upon confessing sins when Scripture in the New Testament (after the death of Christ) does not??? It's a little strange when a pastor will tell you that your lack of assurance of salvation is because you probably have an unconfessed sin in your life and yet not one verse of Scripture teaches that, but they rely on the OT where David said "restore to me the joy of thy salvation" as somehow meaning that David doubted his salvation because of sin. It's a little strange that church services will have to have a time where people are to so-called examine their lives for unconfessed sins so that they can partake of communion when that is nowhere taught in Scripture. It is a little strange that Paul deals with sinning believers and never once tells them to confess their sins because they are out of fellowship with God. It is strange to me that Paul teaches that all of our sins are forgiven but never goes into this other sin category that we now live under where our sins are being held against us until we confess them as taught by mostly legalistic teachers though not all. This list can go on and on.
Below are some links for you to visit as they deal with this teaching of having to confess your sins as being wrong today. I hope you will find time to read them if you really are curious.
http://sg.geocities.com/saltandlight5/trueconfession.html (please read this article as it is quick and to the point).
http://www.gospelfortoday.org/jteachings/forgiven.htm (very good article!!!! Please note, this article was written by those that believe in universal salvation that I strongly reject. However, this site does offer some wonderful free grace articles that can be enjoyed.)
http://www.ccwonline.org/confessism.html
http://www.realanswers.net/realaudio/forgiveness.htm
12 comments:
Dave, please understand that I'm not trying to convert you to the confessionalism view. As I've said, I'm undecided. What I'm trying to do is to make you more consistent with your own view.
You say that believers walking in darkness have fellowship with God, just not with other believers. 1 John 1:6-7 makes it clear that they neither have fellowship with God nor other believers (see also 2:9-11, etc.)1 John 1:6 says believers walking in darkness are lying when they say they have fellowship with God. Based on this, you just can't argue that 1 John 1:7 refers to being in the light positionally, when the word "walk" is used just like in verse 6. Te only way you can maintain FG while holding that 1:9 refers to Gnostic unbelievers is to differentiate between perpetual forgiveness and fellowship. You have to argue that those out of fellowship in 1:6 still have perpetual forgiveness. Those in 1:7 have both perpetual forgiveness AND fellowship since they walk in the light.
Dave, just affirm this and the conversation will be done! It's gone on for so long because you never acknowledged 1:6. You can say the people in 1:6 are out of fellowship, but they don't have to confess since they have perpetual forgiveness. They just need to turn from sin.
1:6 - believers out of fellowship. You have forgiveness. Don't confess, just turn from sin and come back into fellowship.
1:8-9: Gnostic unbelievers. Acknowledge sin, believe in Cross/Resurrection for eternal life.
6 If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.
7 But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.
Danny, you need to get your point across in just one post. If you look at the 4 comments you posted to me then you will see that they basically utter the same things.
1st John is an incredibly hard book. What I write might shock you some as I do have an alternate position that I do hold to 1st John. It is not a LS approach and it is not the typical FG approach. Certain wording makes me question John's purpose. I will give only briefly what my alternate position is. I did say that I do not agree with Bob George on 1st John even though much of it makes sense. He seems to believe that a Christian will not continue in sin stuff as he sees it in 1st John and that I disagree with. Your constant pounding me with 1st John 1:6,7 leaves me with no option but to explain my alternate position that I am still studying on. I do not make radical decisions. If I were to accept the alternate position then it doesn't alter at all my position on FG as you will see. You might not agree but at least you will see that it harms nothing.
Sometimes the wording seems to indicate that a false teacher can be determined by their lifestyle and words. Only those that are in true fellowship with God can be in true fellowship with one another. There has to be an agreement as to what we believe. Many argue that 1st John isn't dealing with just tests of fellowship but with the salvation of actual individuals. A child of the devil being compared to a child of God is hard to argue as meaning that a child of God by sinning is acting like a child of the devil when the person is literally being called a child of the devil. The fact that false teachers is everywhere talked about makes me really question if John was speaking primarily about them.
I do believe in free grace and that we know that we are saved by Christ alone. Works are not a secondary assurance as taught by some out there. Works are the direct result of proper thinking and applying Scripture. If a person doesn't have assurance of salvation then change will be virtually impossible. If a person sees himself as guilty, worthless and so on then change will be virtually impossible.
I do believe it is possible for a child of God to act like a child of the devil. I question some things about 1st John because John clearly differentiates a child of God from a child of the devil. It is hard not to when Jesus in the book of John refers to the unsaved Pharisees as being of their father the devil basically implying they are children of the devil. I honestly believe that a false prophet that were among them were clearly manifesting a bunch of traits that was not common to John's group and he was pointing it out. I do not see 1st John as a guideline in how to determine who is saved in our church today and I am going to make that clear now.
Let's pretend that there is a group of cultists and I will give them the name 'Listerine' as I am looking at a bottle of it on my desk. This Listerine group claims to be Christian and has been going to church disguising themselves as one of them but looking to pervert the church. I have studied them and they live a certain way and they teach certain things that I can warn my congregation on how to spot them.
The Listerine group enters my church and one warning could be that they have excessively clean smelling breath. They wear their hair in pig tails. I give multiple examples so that they can be easily recognized.
I'm sorry if my other sway bothers you but I sometimes question whether we (both sides of the issue) have it right. I sometimes have to question what I read in 1st John as possibly not teaching a test for fellowship as I certainly reject the teaching that it is the tests for life. It should be clear that John is repeatedly talking about false prophets and giving all the warning signs. I do see John repeatedly talking to us about abiding in Christ in the midst of it all.
I do know that a believer can habitually sin. I love the newer translations because they goof up with the present tense. The one (either NIV or NASV) will translated 1st John as saying that we cannot continue in sin and yet the other version translates 1st Timothy 5:20 as referring to a believer that continues in sin. So one version says that a believer cannot continue in sin and the other version argues a believer who continues in sin.
You can clearly find all the sins listed of the false prophet in 1st John is my opinion that also points out his various false teachings too. This sometimes makes me think that John was pointing out a lifestyle and speech patterns that were very specific to this gnostic group of heretics just as I was using the Listerine cult as an example.
Can a believer hate? Of course. Can a believer commit murder? Of course. Can a believer habitually sin? Of course. This is why I do not believe 1st John can properly be referred as the Test of Life book as LS and others view it as. I have a hard time seeing it as a test for fellowship book as well in its entirety. I do see a specific group of false teachers being exposed here. A believer can hate but will they hate you for the message you believe? If I were to hate you Danny for your FG gospel then what does that say about me? Clearly these false teachers didn't hate these believers because they lost a game of checkers the other night but because of their beliefs. Obviously if a believer is hating another believer for losing in a game of checkers then such a believer is walking contrary to who he is and certainly is not abiding.
A believer can hate but a false prophet hating you because it relates to the apostles doctrine is one of the warning signs. A false prophet that denies that Jesus has come in the flesh is another warning sign. To deny Jesus is the Christ is another warning sign. A lifestyle of wanton sin is another.
Jesus spoke about wolf in sheeps clothing and that we could judge their fruits only by the message they preached. Clearly these men were standing out in both message and works. These were not men in sheeps clothing as their deeds confirmed all the more that they did not belong to Christ.
If I were to tell you that the Listerine cult will be in your church soon. You can spot them easily because they will pretend to believe your message but will show their true colors because they will deny free grace. They will openly practice sin and not even twitch. They will hate you and your message. They will deny that they have sin. You might have in your congregation those that are openly practicing sin but that doesn't make them the false teachers of the Listerine movement. You put it all together and you will have a strong case against a person that carries all the signs.
They went out from us because they never were of us is misunderstood by many. This clearly refers to false prophets and yet many teach that it refers to so-called Christians that stopped believing proving that they somehow were never saved because they stopped going to church. You and I know better and that it is the false teachers that this verse refers about. If they really were part of the apostles message that they claimed to be then they would have certainly continued with them in the apostles doctrine but they didn't.
Now back to Bob George. I hate his conclusion as to how a believer will be as I disagree wholeheartedly. If I can determine that a person is saved by their works then it is clear that works save. I know they try to say that works confirm that we are saved but that still means that works are needed no matter how you look at it. Pointing anyone to look at works to determine the salvation of another or themselves is dangerous. If a Jehovah Witness went to my former fundamental church then they would be readily received. It would be until they share their beliefs that we would know that they are false teachers. If another group shows up and believes that God allows the use of hallucinogenic drugs to create alter states to somehow bring you closer to God and they have a message of Jesus is a god then we have two things to identify them. Just because someone does drugs doesn't mean that they are not saved. However, the use of drugs for closer union with their god and the fact that they believe Jesus is a god singles them out.
So I do believe much of what Bob George states concerning 1st John makes sense but his ultimate conclusions is what I disagree with.
I simply do not see how to recognize false believers from true believers in 1st John as John was clearly identifying false prophets among them. I do not see false prophets as a synonym for false believers even though they are. I also do not see the entire book as teaching how one can have fellowship even though abiding is clearly taught throughout the book but it clearly is not the only theme. I do see a specific type of false teachers being singled out by their beliefs and lifestyle. In chapter 5, John makes it clear that we are saved by what we believe and not by our actions or that we need our actions to prove it. These false prophets clearly did not believe that message and hated them for it. These false prophets stood out making them easy to spot and kept other believers from being duped.
Danny, if you are going to keep this going with 4 to 5 long comments in a row then please start emailing me. I said that I do not like many comments in my blog because it takes away from the blog itself. Many people will not read the blog but the comments since it appears that something is going on by the tons of comments it received. My email address is freegracebeliever@gmail.com
Thanks,
Dave
p.s. Danny, you said, "Confession of individual sin is just acknowledging what you did was wrong, without actually asking for forgiveness. You receive parental forgiveness when you simply acknowledge the individual sin."
You know most would disagree with you on that. They do believe in enumerating each and every sin. They even go as far as saying that if you are struggling with your Christian walk then you need to seek God's face and see if there might be some unconfessed sin.
I do not confess sin every day. I certainly do not get on my knees and agonize over what I did wrong during the day. Sometimes I recall some sin I did during the day and might tell myself to be on the guard tomorrow for it without getting on my knees making confession to God over it.
I do not agree that I would be out of fellowship if I didn't confess my sins because I am a child of light and have been forgiven of all sin. Parental forgiveness is made up from this verse only. I still like to know why the silence from Paul if it were required???
Let's face it, there are many that would not consider you in fellowship because you do not individually confess your sins. Most churches out there do believe this.
Here are some quotes:
"It is by confessing our sins that we receive the forgiveness which we need when we fail God. Of course, our sins do not result in the loss of eternal salvation. But they do interrupt harmonious personal relations with God our heavenly Father, and forgiveness restores that harmony." (Zane Hodges).
"Let us therefore be quick to recognize when we have transgressed and equally quick to come to Him, acknowledging our sins in true contrition, neither depending upon any emotional effort on our part for forgiveness, nor disingenuously making such confession only by rote or for show."
"My believing brethren, we shall never cease to be sinners as long as we are in the body. Every day we shall find something to deplore in our thoughts, or motives, or words, or deeds. Every day we shall find that we need the blood of sprinkling, and the intercession of Christ. Then let us keep up daily transactions with the throne of grace. Let us daily confess our infirmities at the feet of our merciful and faithful High Priest, and seek fresh absolution." SAY WHAT????
I will always believe that 1st John 1:9 is speaking to the unbeliever because what believer of verse 8 will say that he has no sin? If he is a believer then he has already made such a confession when he came to Christ for forgiveness.
I can now take your words Danny and quote many famous authors that will claim that you are not confessing your sins correctly and are walking in darkness. Would you agree with them?
Hey Dave. Your reply was awesome! You're absolutely right that there are signs of unsaved false prophets being discussed throughout 1st John, as well as tests-of-fellowship for believers sprinkled throughout. The tests-of-fellowship for believers frequently pop up after the explanation of Gnostic heresies, since Gnostics were having a negative effect on the believers. I thought the Listerine cult example was a perfect illustration of unsaved false teachers.
Yes, believers can hate each other, but false prophets can hate believers for believing the FG message and for believing that Jesus came in the flesh. And yes, you're right believers can live in sin (because of Gnostic influence in this specific situation), and the Gnostic false prophets can show their unsaved nature by both their rejection of basic Christian beliefs as well as their immorality.
You're right, we can reject false prophets by both their message and lifestyle. We know that if they reject basic Christianity and live in sin, they are unsaved false teachers. A believer on the other hand,who affirms the Gospel but lives in sin, is a child of the light walking contrary to his new nature.
Dave, again, this was excellent. 1 John addresses unsaved false teachers and includes some tests-of-fellowship for believers, but is primarily focused on the false teachers.
This is my favorite excerpt from your response:
(begin quote) "You can clearly find all the sins listed of the false prophet in 1st John is my opinion that also points out his various false teachings too. This sometimes makes me think that John was pointing out a lifestyle and speech patterns that were very specific to this gnostic group of heretics just as I was using the Listerine cult as an example.
Can a believer hate? Of course. Can a believer commit murder? Of course. Can a believer habitually sin? Of course. This is why I do not believe 1st John can properly be referred as the Test of Life book as LS and others view it as. I have a hard time seeing it as a test for fellowship book as well in its entirety. I do see a specific group of false teachers being exposed here. A believer can hate but will they hate you for the message you believe? If I were to hate you Danny for your FG gospel then what does that say about me? Clearly these false teachers didn't hate these believers because they lost a game of checkers the other night but because of their beliefs. Obviously if a believer is hating another believer for losing in a game of checkers then such a believer is walking contrary to who he is and certainly is not abiding.
A believer can hate but a false prophet hating you because it relates to the apostles doctrine is one of the warning signs. A false prophet that denies that Jesus has come in the flesh is another warning sign. To deny Jesus is the Christ is another warning sign. A lifestyle of wanton sin is another." (end quote)
Dave, once again, excellent! I now see how 1 John 1:8-10 can indeed be aimed at the Gnostics, since their doctrinal heresies are pointed out throughout the rest of the book (1 John 2:22, 4:1-6, etc.)
Now, as to those quotes from the confessionalist advocates, none of the quotes by themselves say that a person must say the words, "I'm sorry" to God. They mostly seem to focus on just acknowledging the sin with a humble attitude. Confess can mean to simply agree, without saying the words "I'm sorry." But Dave, like I said, you finally presented an excellent case as to why 1 John 1:9 is aimed at Gnostics.
Danny,
Thank you for the nice comments. I also like to point out that that was the first time you sent only one comment to me instead of 3 to 6!!!!!!
I'm still of the position that if I do not confess a sin doesn't place me out of touch with God where God refuses to bless until I confess. My position on confession in a life of a believer is how one lives his/her life and not the practice of 1st John 1:9. If I sin then what is my attitude toward that sin? Do I say, "Oh Well"? Such an attitude clearly shows something is serious wrong in my thinking. However, if later in the day I recall a sin that I committed and my attitude is, "That is not how I should be living in light of who I am in Christ" then such an attitude makes all the difference.
People literally take 1st John 1:9 to teach the bar of soap theory. You basically cannot move on until you personally confess that sin and then all barriers are removed from having fellowship with God. They do teach to personally enumerate each sin and confess and repent of them. God doesn't want you to come to Him saying, "I'm sorry, please forgive me" when you are already forgiven. In my opinion, such a belief can lead to a person that feels OK in sinning because he will confess it immediately after knowing that God will forgive and forget. God wants the heart that sinned changed and not a mere confession of each wrong that you have done. What good does confessing each individual sin daily if the heart doesn't change?
I had a boss years ago that had a foul mouth. He literally would cuss everyone out. He claimed to be a Christian and his wife who worked in the office would tell me that this boss of mine (her husband) would come back and ask God for forgiveness for this mouth of his. The only problem was that the boss would leave the office and come back out cussing again. Confessing sins is clearly not the answer here but this is how it is abused. People think that when they sin that they must only make a confession to remain in a forgiven state where God can bless them again. This mans heart needed to be changed.
If a person wants to get on their knees to confess any sin then they should realize that they are already forgiven of it and it presents no barrier between them and God as God removed all barriers in Christ. Too many Christians are questioning if God will be reluctant to forgive them because they are repeat offenders and end up with false guilt. I prefer to meditate upon what Christ has done for me and that whatever repeat sin I am doing will lose its power as I gaze upon Christ who died for me.
Hi Dave. I know, I only left one comment! You argued well for the mediating view of 1 John. John really is primarily tackling Pre-Gnostics and their denial of Jesus' humanity and their sin nature. John tackles the Pre-Gnostics right away in 1:1 when he affirms that the apostles saw Jesus with their own eyes and touched Him with their hands, revealing Jesus' true humanity. I'm now with you on 1:9 - it's dealing with Pre-Gnostics.
I'm still curious as to Matthew 6:14-15. You've affirmed that salvation has always been by Grace. How then do we deal with forgiving to be forgiven in the Pre-Calvary days, as demonstrated in Matthew 6:14-15? Also, I still think you should put a disclaimer next to the last two links, realanswers.net and ccwonline.org.
Here is the difference that I see:
"For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins" (Matthew 6:14,15).
Compare to:
"And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you" (Eph. 4:32).
Also:
"Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye."
I agree with Lewis Sperry Chafer that prior to the cross we have conditional blessings. God was essentially saying, "Do good and I will bless you. In this age of grace, God is now saying, "Do good because I already blessed you."
Prior to the crucifixion I see a clear command to forgive to be forgiven but after the crucifixion a command to forgive because we have been forgiven. The prior was conditional forgiveness and the latter is not. Nowhere do we see Paul preaching the same pre-crucifixion message. Take out a commentary and you will see that some will try to force the words of Christ into Paul's and that is a shame. It is clear that Paul did not focus any attention on confessing our sins to God but only our faults to another if we wronged them. We are now to forgive not to be forgiven but because we are forgiven.
Hi Dave. I agree with you on the Post-Cross forgiving other because we've been forgiven. What I'm asking about is the nature of the Pre-Cross forgiveness. Some people, as you know, try to argue that salvation was by works in the OT. Since you and I know that salvation has always been by Grace, and that there is only one kind of forgiveness, what happened to the OT believer who died while in a bitter and unforgiving state? Did that OT person's spirit/shade have a lesser experience in Abraham's Bosom than an OT believer who died in a loving,forgiving state?
Hey Dave. I see you posted my last response, but there was no reply from you. Are you researching to prepare an answer?
Hey Danny, no I was resting from commenting here for a day.
I cannot fully answer your question anyways. If you have any clear verses that answers that then please share. I know of those that believe in Compartmental theory and have strong reasons for it but mention Elijah or Enoch then they have no answer. I doubt we can fully answer every question. I just never spent enough time in the OT with that question in the back of my mind to fully investigate it and I doubt I will any time soon, sorry.
I've have been elsewhere arguing against a LS believer who erroneously made 1st Thess. 5:10 into meaning physical death to protect his false teachings.
Hey Dave. I want to briefly return to this topic. What do yo do with James 5:14-15? The man in verse 15 is certainly a believer based on verse 14. Yet his sins are only forgiven when he is healed. True, the sick man does not seem to have to make a confession, but his sins are unforgiven until he is healed. This is another point in favor of the distinction between judicial forgiveness and fellowship forgiveness.
Dan, I received your multiple comments. I am only posting this one as I only allow 3 comments normally. I do believe that many comments challenging blogs only serve to take away from blogs. I've seen some blogs that have over 100 comments and nobody seems to read the blog anymore that visits but wants to get in on the latest whatever. I am going to have to abide by what I stated a long time ago on my blog rules. This will be the last comment.
If you want to believe that James 5:15 teaches confession of sin to God then go ahead. Your only problem is that the passage does not teach that one must confess their sins to God. I only see in verse 16 that we need to confess our sins to one another. You show me the command there to confess sins to God or even show me anyone in that passage confessing their sins to God then I will believe it.
I personally do not see that passage as talking about sickness as in disease but a spiritual weakness. It was addressing weak and weary believers that would be refreshed that would come before the elders, so we are defining sin differently here.
Catholics might now claim that one is to approach the elders to have their sins forgiven as they have more grounds to stand on than that of individual short accounts that are erroneously being taught today. Look again at the verses:
14Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. 15And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven. 16Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective.
It's this prayer of faith where if he has sinned that he will be forgiven. Look at verse 16 because we confess our sins to each other and pray for each other so that we may be healed but never short accounts to God to remain in parental bliss or to experience this healing. In verse 14, others are praying and the prayer of faith is what heals and it is through this prayer of faith that forgiveness is granted and not through short accounts. Literally then, I can pray for you and have your sins forgiven by what is stated here and I doubt you would believe that. Now we can take this two ways, the Catholic version that we get forgiveness by seeking the elders of the church or by taking what we literally see here. I give the Catholics the theological edge over the Baptists short accounts here any day. Don't read into these verses.
Dan, there is no instruction here to prayer quietly when you realized you sin to remain in parental forgiveness with God. You are reading more into these verses than is stated. It is clear that if you are sick (weary) that you should call on someone else. If this is short accounts that you claim it is then one does not need others to pray to have your sins forgiven, but you can do it yourself at home alone.
Post a Comment