Andrew Wommack interpretation of 1 John 1:9

I got this one from Alive_Again's list of 'Free Anointed Teachings on MP3' in the Andrew Wommack section (3rd down from top).

It is a wonderful teaching of 1 John 1:9....AA might not like it, but it is wonderfully scriptural nonetheless, with great insight as to why this interpretation is right.

3rd down from top...then down to "General Teaching Series"...then the last link on the list.....

...or link thru here, then last on the list...
General Teaching Series - Audio Teaching - Andrew Wommack Ministries

Enjoy!

pk4yahweh said:

It makes the most sense when discussing the subject of salvation... and it would be impossible to correctly understand righteousness without this interpretation of 1 John 1:9.

Click to expand...

I absolutely agree with this.

Scottmcc1 said:

There is more to the Christian life than just getting saved. There is also areas of strength and walking with God. Sin will not send us to hell because Christ has already paid for it on the cross when we accept His gift of salvation. Yet there is the issue of being full of the Spirit. And there is a price to pay because of sin. We reap what we sow.

Click to expand...

Amen and amen!! Well said.

Can't wait until you take your notes and come back with commentary. Should make for a good discussion.

Scottmcc1 said:

Yes I agree with Andrew Wommack's interpretation of 1 John1:9. But boy, he sure threw me for a loop for the first 20 minutes of the teaching.

I don't like it at all when someone throws out a Scripture.

He hammered home the fact there were no other verses like it in the New Testament.

Click to expand...

Which is true: there is no other verse like it. Note: Andrew did not throw out 1:9. Not at all.

Scottmcc1 said:

Matthew 6:12 the Lord's prayer of asking God to forgive us of our trespasses.

Click to expand...

For what purpose? Since you already said you agree with Andrew over 1 John 1:9, then (without looking at all your other posts -- ok I'll look back....you said...
...earlier in this thread) so I will assume you are OSAS.

If you are, then what is the Father "forgiving us our debts" (Matt 6:12) for? v14-15 - if you forgive, your heavenly Father forgives you; if you don't forgive, your heavenly Father doesn't forgive you.

Scott, if you are OSAS then what if you don't forgive someone's debts?

Scottmcc1 said:

And Matthew 18:35 along with Psalm 51:10f

Click to expand...

Hmm.
Do you think that this ("deliverd him to the torturers") is a picture of being sent to hell? Then the rest of the sentence tells us that a man can get out of hell if "he should pay all that was due." This is not about salvation. This is not like 1 John 1:9 which tells us to confess our sins and we will be saved. This is [daily] repentance to return to the blessing of God and not remain in the curse (torturers).

Scottmcc1 said:

James 4:6f

Click to expand...

This is not about salvation either. The first part of chapter 4 is telling us that we need to be humble, for pride will cause us strife. Pride plants us in the curse. It delivers us to torturers, if you will.

The problem is that we all too often like to take terms like v4 "to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God" and immediately we want that to be a judgement unto hell. It isn't. It is saying that actions herein (having worldly lusts) puts us at odds with God. It is not what He likes nor desires for you. It's like a small child making his daddy angry -- he won't love you any less, but you are going to get a spanking. Your dad didn't toss you out in to the streets for the neighborhood bullies to come beat you up. No, he chastised you to correct your actions. But he never let go of you and he never stopped loving you.

Scottmcc1 said:

all were and are key Scriptures for me to keep a humble heart towards God, stay clean and not stay in pride.

Click to expand...

Absolutely!! They are attitude adjustment scriptures -- not loss of salvation scriptures.

Scottmcc1 said:

But he made up for that by hitting the ball out of the park with the rest of the teaching by showing we ask forgiveness so that we don't give the devil an opportunity in our life with sin.

Click to expand...

So if we do fall into pride, and we give the devil opportunity -- what comes of it? Hell?

Scottmcc1 said:

I think the first part of that teaching could of been done better.

Click to expand...

Listen again. Leave presuppositions behind. It is actually quite good. And remember the topic is confessing sins unto salvation (1 John 1:9).

pk4yahweh said:

Originally Posted by Scottmcc1
Sin will not send us to hell because Christ has already paid for it on the cross when we accept His gift of salvation.

...earlier in this thread) so I will assume you are OSAS.


How does this statement give you the assumption that Scott is OSAS? This is exactly what both Andrew and Creflo teach about the power of the work on the cross - yet I don't think either of them are OSAS.

Explain this presumption for me Bob.

Click to expand...

I believe Andrew is OSAS. Listen here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIRx92DyHek&feature=related (And please, casual readers out there, don't make the mistake that Andrew is saying that all men are already saved or that the whole world is/will be saved.) But Andrew's has a little twist to his version of OSAS. He tries to harmonize the OSAS position with the lost salvation position. You can find the preaching of this through the link in the OP (here) and look for "Security of the Believer" (second down). His answer begins at 13:40 if you want to skip to the good stuff.

Creflo leans to not but I have never heard him claim one or the other position.

If one is not OSAS then it is sin that causes the lost salvation. The concept that Scott brings up in his next post -- can one CHOOSE to not go to heaven even if they are saved (and this is what Andrew actually teaches: OSAS, but you can choose to reject salvation -- you can't lose it, but you can throw it away) -- is an interesting one, but is not germain to the core question -- sin is. Lost salvation (in an Arminian world) hinges on sin and what sin does to the relationship between man and God.

I've heard two main camps on the "lost salvation" side. One is that sin -- any sin and any amount of sin -- is enough to sever the relationship, but God's mercy and longsuffering will hold out a chance for repentance (this solves the "commit sin and step in front of the bus" syndrome). The other is that sin is a continual process (here people will teach 1 John 3:9 "cannot sin" means that man will not continue to sin over and over) and it will take some time of disregard for your sinful state before God will decide that you are no longer saved.

Both of these (besides showing a mean and vengeful God) suffer by placing God in time -- as if He cannot see your ends from your beginning, your last sin from your first.

When one makes the statement that sin will not send you to hell it is from a OSAS position: unless they are playing games with words, for certainly what sends you to hell is a rejection of Jesus, but sin breaks the relationship and dictates a rejection of how Jesus has told us to live. If we take a non-word game stance, then one who believes that sin is detrimental believes that it is your sin, your tarnished soul, that leads away from God and into hell.

One of the bulwarks of OSAS is that Jesus paid for ALL our sins. There is no stain to be had even from future sins, so they cannot affect our salvation. Lost salvation camps believe that sinning most certainly affects our salvation.

And Scott says he's OSAS in his next post; so PPTHHPTHPFFTHPPPT!!!

So what say ye; am I missing something?

That is awesome. All the detail and pictures you paint herein are wonderfully accurate. We may have different ways of explaining these concepts, but the results are the same. Kudos to you, Scott.

Scottmcc1 said:

OSAS Once saved always saved. I don't believe God will take you to heaven against your will. I believe we can reject salvation after salvation. There are plenty of Scriptures that point to this. But I refuse to discuss it because no one will be convinced to change this basic doctrine. Or I have not seen it happen in 40+ years. People take a doctrinal position and reject others that contradict it. Such as Calvinism and Arminisum. The Bible seems to teach both at the same time. So I accept both at the same time and don't worry about it.

Click to expand...

And this above is true. There is no reason for the various doctrines to exist if there was not a germ of truth in each of them. Some truth and a couple of wrong turns.

So I'll give you something to think about: the blue part above. Calvinists believe in something called Irresistible Grace (the 'I' in TULIP). This at its very base means that when God extends His love to you (regenerates you) that you simply cannot help but respond in the positive. It is still your choice to respond, and you could (if you could) reject it; but it is so wonderfully irresistable that you will respond -- to them: in just the way that He predestinated you to.

So extend that into charismatic theology. God calls; we respond and accept His offer of salvation. God then regenerates -- and His touch is so wonderfully loving that now that you are saved you will not have desire to get away from this Love. So your willful rejection of salvation simply will not (it CAN, but it won't) happen. And yes, there is plenty of scripture that points to this.

Anyway, this post you made is wonderful. Excellent job!

Scottmcc1 said:

I am at peace with a hole in my doctrine. Because I see holes in all doctrinal positions. God doesn't move because we have the correct doctrine but because we actually have the audacity to take God as His word.

Torturers is a picture of an unclear conscience. And the result of it.

1 John 1:9 does not say confess your sins and you will be saved. Sins are forgiven. In the sense that it has quenched the Holy Spirit. 1 Thes 5:19

Again James 4 is talking of repenting of sin that quenches the Holy Spirit within us. Just as Matt 6:12 and 1 John 1:9 and Psalm 51. There was no indication that David was being removed from his place with God in the Old Testament.

So if we do fall into pride, and we give the devil opportunity -- what comes of it? Hell?
No. But we lose effectiveness. And pride and faith can't coexist. Hab 2:4, John 5:44, Jer 18:15 So without repentance we can't please God. Hebrews 11:6

1 John was written to Christians. So to say v9 is a call for salvation is not the best use.

Do you believe repentance is not necessary for salvation? Acts 3:19; 26:20 I think at times repentance follows salvation. How could one truly come to God if they want to remain in their old life?
Do you believe one can be saved by dead faith? James 2:17

Thanks for the discussion
John 8:32

Click to expand...

pk4yahweh said:

Interesting...

Im gonna think on this a bit... but thanks for clearing up the point here! I really hadn't even pictured Andrew as OSAS - (and I'm not convinced that his "twist" keeps him in that camp).

Click to expand...

OSAS is about not losing salvation due to your sinful action. Being able to choose does not equate to a situation where God removed your salvation leaving you in need of repentance. My personal belief is that this choice is not possible.

Coincidentally - there is plenty of talk going on about Whitney Houston possibly dying from alcohol/drug overdose... yet a large contingent of Christians are saying she was a believer and is in heaven.

Click to expand...

Last I heard she likely took a strong anxiety med (legal) and likely fell unconscious and drown. Sad. Whatever sin she may have committed lately, they were paid for if and when she accepted Jesus.

Not sure how I feel about those types of teachings - compared to what Andrew is saying.

(Not that I'm trying to open THIS can of worms!)

Click to expand...

Why not? It would be fun and informative. Your input would be very helpful.

Scottmcc1 said:

People (usually teenagers) want to know what you can do (sex, booze etc) and still be saved.

My answer has always been that God did not address that question. God wants us to press towards perfection. Be ye holy as I am Holy. 1 Peter 1:16 Be ye perfect as I am perfect. Matt 5:48 A mind set on what we can do for ourselves (the flesh) keeps us from walking in the Spirit. Romans 8:5,6

Wommack did a good job of not promoting sin because of grace. He showed very well the consequences of sin.

Click to expand...

Those of us who teach OSAS must be careful, like Paul in Romans (I'm on my phone so I can't insert copious amounts of scripture) of making it look like sin is now neutral. Paul tells us that we cannot take an attitude that we can just go out and sin now that we have liberty. Sin still affects us, just not salvifically. It still moves us out of God's will and into the curse. There is lack, poverty, sickness, disease out there. Sin is NEVER ok in any sense of the word. We must strive to live righteously and to do God's will in our lives.

pk4yahweh said:

See - this is what I have a huge problem with regarding the OSAS belief. The extreme position on this is that if someone "accepted" Jesus then they are good to go despite what their life looks like. In an effort to not allow works to take too important of a position - we throw it away as a measuring stick.

Click to expand...

First, I want to reference my other post, which I think is important to this topic: http://www.christianforums.com/t7630501-post59806257/#post59806257

Second, there is the easy OSAS way out: were they really saved in the first place? And I don't say this in an aloof manner, but I mean it seriously. So perhaps it will come out in our talks herein.

pk4yahweh said:

If someone responds to the 34th verse of 'Just As I Am' when they were 9 years old... and then lives a life of sin - ignoring God completely for the rest of their life... then it really would be an insult to place them in heaven (like the world always seems to do).

Click to expand...

Third, I'd like to compliment my second with my "version" of Irresistible Grace. No I'm not Calvinistic in any shape. But I've always thougth that major Christian denominations can't have it all wrong -- in other words, where did they get the concepts that they believe in? A complete left turn and they got lost? Or was it because the concept has SOME level of truth in it?

So at this point, to review my position, and to exemplify it: (1) Sin is wrong and DOES affect us; just not salvifically. We need to repent of sin and get back in God's will. (2) It is very easy to say "Lord, come into my heart." It is another thing to mean it. I think people can intellectually act like a Christian and seem to actually be -- but as scripture tells us: their fruit will tell us the truth about them; and they may hide some of that truth for a very long time, but eventually their fruit will show. (A corollary to this is that there are some awesome atheists that put some Christians to shame when it comes to what looks like fruit.) And (3) if God calls, and we accept His gift, He then will regenerate our soul. We once were sinners but now we are saved by Grace. By Grace. By Grace. And in that regeneration we have been turned from a man who can do no good to a man who can and is instructed to seek after righteousness. In fact, God's Love is so "irresistable" that I think we will truly seek after Him. It doesn't mean that we won't go sideways (Peter still had an anger problem all through Jesus' earthly ministry; Paul admits that the sin in him does things that he does not want to do. Hmmm: "want to do." He wants to do good. He is now capable of seeking righteousness.

So, seriously, if one "gets saved?" but spends the majority of the rest of their life "ignoring God completely" then their fruit (as the Bible tells us) does not prove their heart, nor does it prove their conversion. They were never saved to begin with.

pk4yahweh said:

After living life rejecting God - they would not enjoy Eternal Life with Him anyway.

Click to expand...

Now having given you an understanding of why I say this: I agree perfectly with you.

pk4yahweh said:

Whitney Houston was a known drug addict and publicly struggled with alcohol abuse. Is it judgmental for me to be concerned that there are people teaching that she went to Heaven (and in essence you can live like that and go as well!)?

Click to expand...

I don't know Whitney personally. I do know that I've read stories about her returning to her church, singing there, worshipping there. I know that her last public song choice was "Jesus loves me this I know."

Hmm. dkbwarrior spent time in prison (he has not endorsed my position; I use his testimony only as an example. See here). Do we get concerned that he is teaching and preaching?? Do we think that he will be in Heaven? I do. Why? His fruit is real. Even if he takes a left turn tomorrow, God will not let him go.

pk4yahweh said:

Might as well go ahead and open this can up... it brings ALOT of questions into it... such as:

judgement vs discernment
holiness vs. faith


What do you guys think???

Click to expand...

Judgement of sin will happen. For the lost such judgement can cause sickness in this life (see Jehoram, 2 Chronicles 21:18-19) and eternal damnation. For the Chrisitian it is chastisement. Our sin will affect us and bring the curse; God will chastise us to get our attention; He will love us back onto the right track.

Discernment is a gift and the Holy Spirit will help you determine good and bad people to be with, good and bad situations to engage in. We need to be open to it, listen to it, and act upon it.

Holiness is what God imputes to us. We are to live righteously and it is God's Grace that allows us to do this. We are slaves of righteousness for holiness.

Faith is also given to us by God. It comes by hearing and hearing the Word of God. Our faith in Him will lead us into the righteousness that He clothes us in. Our faith is something that we need to use, and we need to exercise. If we don't, it will become little and weak. This will not cause God to let us go; but He will continue to hold and embrace us, chastising us if needed, and whispering in a small, still voice to come home. To get back on the right track.

pk4yahweh said:

(Maybe best to start a different tread about this one...)

Click to expand...

Actually I think this is right on target as a direction for the OP to take, so I don't mind keeping it here. Your choice. (I see you took the Whitney question there already....cool.)