"If" or "When"? - 1 John 1:9

[Lambano]

Don't be discouraged by laypeople. They are naturally intimidated by scholars. Laypeople tend to be very lazy. The idea of training oneself in the Greek NT is a joke to them. Reading the layperson's posts is rather an exercise in futility. But, that is just my opinion.

I learned a long time ago not to take these internet forums too seriously. Half the people here are certifiably nuts, but which half changes from topic to topic. And sometimes from post to post.

Somewhat of a surprise to me, the one thing I do take seriously on this forum is the prayer requests.

 

[Jack]

Not a matter of not understanding. Just curious about the seemingly poor word choices.


Isn't that a pretty fair presumption? That we will sin?


Is that true? We sin in ways that we do not even know.

[

BIG difference in committing a sin and LIVING in sin. I.E. being gay is living in sin! If someone commits a gay sin and truly repents he will be forgiven. If someone continues to be gay he is not forgiven. That's why Jesus said gays will burn in Hell FOREVER!

 

[KUWN]

Good to know, thanks.

What do you think is the biggest general misunderstanding that Christians have about where our New Testament came from?

[

I am embarrassed that I don't quite understand what you mean by "where our NT came from." This looks like a good question. Can you clarify the question so I am answering the correct idea? Are you talking about where our versions/translations come from, or where our Greek manuscripts came from. Just a little clarification should be all I need. Sorry for not quite understanding.

 

[Lambano]

I am embarrassed that I don't quite understand what you mean by "where our NT came from." This looks like a good question. Can you clarify the question so I am answering the correct idea? Are you talking about where our versions/translations come from, or where our Greek manuscripts came from. Just a little clarification should be all I need. Sorry for not quite understanding.

Probably should add questions about who established the canon and how that process went down.

Maybe something about the Synoptic Problem, Q, the Gospel of Thomas...

 

[St. SteVen]

I am embarrassed that I don't quite understand what you mean by "where our NT came from." This looks like a good question. Can you clarify the question so I am answering the correct idea? Are you talking about where our versions/translations come from, or where our Greek manuscripts came from. Just a little clarification should be all I need. Sorry for not quite understanding.

Good question. Sorry that I wasn't clear.

Perhaps your religious upbringing was different than what most of us raised in evangelical Protestantism was.
We were told that the Bible was God's word, cover to cover, every word inspired by God. Inerrant in every way.
That God used human writers to pen the whole thing. He picked up a pen in the hand of Moses
and didn't put down his pen until he finished writing the Revelation through John.

There was NEVER any talk of the canon. When Josh McDowell came on the scene,
he offered apologetics about the accuracy of our original manuscripts. I found this to be very
encouraging that there was actual evidence that the Bible was trustworthy.

It was another decade or more before I learned the truth about where the Bible came from.
And another decade before I learned that we don't have the original manuscripts.

There is a HUGE difference between "where" we were told our NT came from and where it ACTUALLY came from.
That the canon was collected and voted on by the RCC and even that there were several canons.

Based on your experience, I wondered whether there was anything interesting that common church folks don't know.

Perhaps my question is still too broad. How do you view inerrancy? (for example)

[

 

[KUWN]

Probably should add questions about who established the canon and how that process went down.

Maybe something about the Synoptic Problem, Q, the Gospel of Thomas...

This is a good question. It would be hard to do justice to the Canon topic in a forum like this, I will give you some information. The Apostles themselves played a crucial role in the Canon during the first century. During the first century, as copies were being made, the Apostles were able to confirm whether or not a copy (manuscript) of the NT documents was accurate or not. The first century had many manuscripts that the Apostles testified to as being genuine. Peter told his readers the Paul's letters were sometimes hard to understand. There was no question as to which manuscripts were from Paul. The teachings of the NT were largely known in the first century.

So that, during the first century, it was pretty much impossible for someone to create a manuscript that didn't belong in the Canon but found its way in there. Remember that Paul told the Thessalonians not to be disturbed as if they got a letter from us teaching an unorthodox doctrine. All manuscripts were examined by the Apostles and their associates to ensure the word of God was preserved. By the end of the first century, the core Christian manuscripts/doctrines were already part of the canon. FYI, they did not call it a canon in the first century. They were affirming which documents were from the Apostles or their associates. Getting their cue from the way the OT was put together, the early Christians began putting the NT together, deciding which books belonged in the Canon.

The Muratorian fragment is a list of the canonical books of the NT in approximately 170 AD. Already, 22 of the 27 NT documents were part of the canon. From there, the remaining books were evaluated based on whether or not they could show Apostolic authority, and whether or not the teachings within the book agreed with the established orthodox doctrines already defined by the 22 books already part of the canon. It was a rather simple process putting the NT together, but it was a time-consuming process.

We can be assured that the 27 books of the NT are the ones God preserved. That was a rather quick overview of some of the Canon. I may write more later, but for now, I just wanted to get the big picture out there.

 

[KUWN]

Good question. Sorry that I wasn't clear.

Perhaps your religious upbringing was different than what most of us raised in evangelical Protestantism was.
We were told that the Bible was God's word, cover to cover, every word inspired by God. Inerrant in every way.
That God used human writers to pen the whole thing. He picked up a pen in the hand of Moses
and didn't put down his pen until he finished writing the Revelation through John.

There was NEVER any talk of the canon. When Josh McDowell came on the scene,
he offered apologetics about the accuracy of our original manuscripts. I found this to be very
encouraging that there was actual evidence that the Bible was trustworthy.

It was another decade or more before I learned the truth about where the Bible came from.
And another decade before I learned that we don't have the original manuscripts.

There is a HUGE difference between "where" we were told our NT came from and where it ACTUALLY came from.
That the canon was collected and voted on by the RCC and even that there were several canons.

Based on your experience, I wondered whether there was anything interesting that common church folks don't know.

Perhaps my question is still too broad. How do you view inerrancy? (for example)

[

Just a quick note here. We do not have the original manuscripts, but we do have the original words of the NT preserved in thousands of manuscripts. Dan Wallace put it this way: We have 103% of the NT, we just need to remove the dross.

You say that the RCC voted on the canon. The canon was largely fixed by the end of the first century, long before the RCC existed.

I believe inerrancy ONLY applies to the original documents written by the Apostles and their associates in the first century. Inerrancy does not apply to Translations/Versions. Inerrancy describes the Holy Spirit's guidance of the original manuscripts. The Holy Spirit did not ensure that the copies of the original manuscripts were error free. with thousands of manuscripts today, the word has been preserved. There are no two Greek manuscripts that are alike.

You mention several canons. I would disagree with that statement. There were Satan's cohorts trying to introduce new manuscripts into the canon stream, but they were too easily identified. Paul showed no concern for the false apostles in 2 Thess who presented the Thessalonians with false letters.

Liberals today distort the historical reliability of the NT Canon. We have the word of God today in the Greek manuscripts. 103% of it.

It is not clear which form of the word "have" in Rom 5.1 is the word of God. The manuscript evidence does not indicate which form of "have" is the correct one. This should not bother you because no cardinal doctrine is in jeopardy in the variants of the NT manuscripts.

 

[St. SteVen]

This is a good question. It would be hard to do justice to the Canon topic in a forum like this, I will give you some information. The Apostles themselves played a crucial role in the Canon during the first century. During the first century, as copies were being made, the Apostles were able to confirm whether or not a copy (manuscript) of the NT documents was accurate or not. The first century had many manuscripts that the Apostles testified to as being genuine. Peter told his readers the Paul's letters were sometimes hard to understand. There was no question as to which manuscripts were from Paul. The teachings of the NT were largely known in the first century.

There were several books written in that time frame that were not included for consideration in the canon.
Books that we call writing of the early church fathers. Like the Didache, for example.

[

 

[St. SteVen]

I'll get some backlash on this one. What's new? - LOL

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. - 1 John 1:9 NIV

If? (or when?) I checked the KJV. It also says "If". ???

What do you make of this? Why does it say "If" instead of "When"?

1 John 1:8-10 NIV
If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.
9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.
10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us.

[

 

[KUWN]

1 John 1:8-10 NIV
If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.
9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.
10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us.

The eav (if) is likely a present general condition in which the subject is distributive (if any of us...) The subjunctive is thus used because of the implicit uncertainty as to who is included in the WE. This is a third class condition.

 

[Taken]

I'll get some backlash on this one. What's new? - LOL

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. - 1 John 1:9 NIV

If? (or when?) I checked the KJV. It also says "If". ???

What do you make of this? Why does it say "If" instead of "When"?

1 John 1:8-10 NIV
If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.
9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.
10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us.

[

If….is the condition…(the requirement) for “then” (thereafter) to occur. ( IF / THEN )

“Thereafter”…(the “when”)…also has “conditions”, as it Applies to individuals.
(IF / THEN / WHEN / WHY)

For examples…
* confession from the Mind?
* confession from the Heart?
* confession to impress, fool a witness?
* a false confession*?
* confession made by one, For another?
* confession of sin against God?
* confession of “sin” or “trespass” against another?
* confession before bodily death?
* confession before Trib sent from Heaven?
* confession during Trib sent from Heaven?
* confession After dead body is raised up?

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Galgal]

Conditional or qualified statements contain conditions or qualifications. What is it about this you do not understand?

When presumes it will inevitably happen. If this were the case, then universalism would be correct doctrine.

A hot topic in America is whether gays will go to heaven. The simple answer is no unrepentant sinner will go to heaven. IF there is true repentance, including the abdication of ongoing willful sinning, THEN, forgiveness will occur. This indicates a process flow in addition to condition, i.e., the repentance is a precondition of the blessing to follow.

I suppose the double standard is that we are commanded to forgive unconditionally while our Creator retains divine conditions for this particular blessing. I say this particular blessing because Scripture also says the rain falls on the righteous as well as the unrighteous. Finally, the apparent double standard is THE PERVERSION OF EQUALITY that is all the rage in our decadent culture, confusing the power of the Creator with the obligation of the Created.

Hope this helps!

In order to confess sins, one must first have fellowship with one another. Sins are confessed in church.

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. (1 John 1:7)

Nobody has fellowship now, because the Body of Christ is crucified by the boundaries of denominations. Therefore, it is impossible to confess sins. The Blood of Christ cannot circulate in the Body cut into pieces. Sins are not washed away by the Blood, the Holy Spirit does not spread throughout the Body. Therefore, everyone remains in their sins and there is no life in Christianity, there is a surrogate for life in one's denomination. Christianity has become a cargo cult of savages who build mock-ups of airfields, wanting to receive a blessing from God. But there is no blessing, because Christians have crucified Christ.

 

[mailmandan]

Notice that - "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (1 John 1:9) is in contrast to - If we say that we have no sin, (present tense) we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us (1 John 1:8) and - If we say that we have not sinned, (past tense) we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. (1 John 1:10)

Certain folks seem to misunderstand verse 9 to mean that we "must confess each and every sin that we commit as we commit them" (keep a specific inventory of every sin) as an "additional requirement" to "remain cleansed" and "if we forget a sin, we are toast!" Who could actually write an exhaustive list of every sin they have ever committed or ever will commit? Sin is not only missing the mark by what we do but also what we fail to do. (James 4:17)

Believers "confess" (Greek - homologeó) speak the same/acknowledge/agree with God's perspective about their sins and have a settled recognition and ongoing acknowledgment that one is a sinner in need of cleansing and forgiveness in contrast with saying that we have no sin or that we have not sinned. (1 John 1:8-10)

 

[St. SteVen]

In order to confess sins, one must first have fellowship with one another. Sins are confessed in church.

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. (1 John 1:7)

Nobody has fellowship now, because the Body of Christ is crucified by the boundaries of denominations. Therefore, it is impossible to confess sins. The Blood of Christ cannot circulate in the Body cut into pieces. Sins are not washed away by the Blood, the Holy Spirit does not spread throughout the Body. Therefore, everyone remains in their sins and there is no life in Christianity, there is a surrogate for life in one's denomination. Christianity has become a cargo cult of savages who build mock-ups of airfields, wanting to receive a blessing from God. But there is no blessing, because Christians have crucified Christ.

The "mother" church refused needed reformation.
In that sense, the church had already crucified the Body of Christ through religious corruption.

Furthermore, there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus. (1 Timothy 2:5)
No need for a church or priest to confess sins.

1 John 2:1 NIV
My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin.
But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One.

[

 

[St. SteVen]

Who could actually write an exhaustive list of every sin they have ever committed or ever will commit? Sin is not only missing the mark by what we do but also what we fail to do. (James 4:17)

That's a great point.
We sin in ways we are not even aware of.
Sin is bigger than anyone can manage. We depend on God's mercy.

[

 

[Galgal]

The "mother" church refused needed reformation.
In that sense, the church had already crucified the Body of Christ through religious corruption.

Furthermore, there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus. (1 Timothy 2:5)
No need for a church or priest to confess sins.

1 John 2:1 NIV
My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin.
But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One.

[

There was and is a need for a church. We must confess our sins to each other:

Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. (James 5:16)

The terrible delusion of Protestantism is that here I am - and God speaks to me directly. God is not somewhere out there in the empty air into which you pray. God is present here - in a brother or sister in Christ. If you are alone - then you are outside the Body, you are outside salvation. Because salvation is only in the Body of Christ. And the Body must be one.

 

[St. SteVen]

There was and is a need for a church. We must confess our sins to each other:

Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. (James 5:16)

Are you claiming that "each other" refers to someone besides a priest?
That is what it should mean. But I doubt that prohibits confession directly to God.
(See 1 Timothy 2:5 and 1 John 2:1)

The terrible delusion of Protestantism is that here I am - and God speaks to me directly. God is not somewhere out there in the empty air into which you pray. God is present here - in a brother or sister in Christ. If you are alone - then you are outside the Body, you are outside salvation. Because salvation is only in the Body of Christ. And the Body must be one.

God is omnipresent. He hears us when we pray. (inside or outside the church)
I don't believe that salvation is in the Church. Salvation is in God alone.

Are you Catholic, or Orthodox?
If you are Orthodox, doesn't that put you outside the Church?

[

 

[KUWN]

Nobody has fellowship now, because the Body of Christ is crucified by the boundaries of denominations. Therefore, it is impossible to confess sins. The Blood of Christ cannot circulate in the Body cut into pieces. Sins are not washed away by the Blood, the Holy Spirit does not spread throughout the Body. Therefore, everyone remains in their sins and there is no life in Christianity, there is a surrogate for life in one's denomination. Christianity has become a cargo cult of savages who build mock-ups of airfields, wanting to receive a blessing from God. But there is no blessing, because Christians have crucified Christ.

This is the weirdest theology I have ever read. It is so far out in left field that I would be playing along with you if I tried to respond.

 

[Galgal]

Are you claiming that "each other" refers to someone besides a priest?

This does not apply to a priest at all. Any disciple of Jesus Christ is a priest.

That is what it should mean. But I doubt that prohibits confession directly to God.
(See 1 Timothy 2:5 and 1 John 2:1)

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; (1 Timothy 2:5)

This is about the mediation of Jesus for us to receive the Spirit from God. Then we need to participate in the Body of Christ, in the Church. Salvation is only in Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ is now in the Body of Christ. If you are a Catholic or an Orthodox or a Protestant, then you have crucified the Body of Jesus with your confessions. A Catholic does not celebrate the Eucharist with the Orthodox, the Orthodox do not celebrate the Eucharist with the Protestants, the Protestants themselves have divided into thousands of denominations that have no fellowship and do not participate in the common Eucharist, all of them are crucifiers of the Body of Christ, who have lost salvation.

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: (1 John 2:1)

Read what is written next:

He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. (1 John 2:4)

All Christians have broken the main commandment of Jesus Christ about our unity.

That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. (John 17:21)

Those who separated themselves from all denominations are the same violators as all the others in the denominations. One person cannot be saved, because salvation is only in the Body of Christ. The Body of Christ is the totality of all His members. This Body is the Church, it is one and is not divided into confessions. But it was killed by Christians themselves.

God is omnipresent. He hears us when we pray. (inside or outside the church)
I don't believe that salvation is in the Church. Salvation is in God alone.

God is now in Christ, and Christ is now in His Body. If there is no Body (we cannot show it, gather together, outside of denominations) - then we are not saved. Redemption will be given to us not one by one, but to the whole Body at once, when the Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, comes.

Are you Catholic, or Orthodox?
If you are Orthodox, doesn't that put you outside the Church?

I don't consider myself to belong to any religion at all. My religion is Israel, I am from the tribes of Israel. (Don't confuse Israel with Judaism. I've never been to a synagogue.)

 

[St. SteVen]

St. SteVen said:
Are you Catholic, or Orthodox?
If you are Orthodox, doesn't that put you outside the Church?

I don't consider myself to belong to any religion at all. My religion is Israel, I am from the tribes of Israel. (Don't confuse Israel with Judaism. I've never been to a synagogue.)

That sounds like British Israelism.
How can you claim that all Christians are outside the Church, and therefore outside the Body of Christ, when you aren't in the Church?

The Unity and Division threads - Unified to one topic - Divided by links

Doctrinolatry - tribalism and division in the Body of Christ A follow-up to my Bibliolatry topic. Doctrine becomes an idol when it is used to support tribalism and cause division in the Body of Christ. Since doctrinal unity is impossible, allowing others to hold their own doctrinal opinions may...

www.christianityboard.com

[