Vicarious Law-keeping?

[Bible Highlighter]

It's a matter of perspective. I'm not a Dispensational Fundamentalist Christian so I'm not cornered into a literalistic perspective that disallows for nuances in meaning. I would contend that 1 John 1 is talking about a general warning to Christians to remain faithful, this portion is not teaching that our works help us remain saved, as your understanding logically concludes. It is important to have a proper context instead of isolating a verse for your pet doctrine. It is clear from 1 John 1 that we are deceived when we teach their is no sin in us, which your understanding forces us to conclude, for only those who never sin are saved. No, rather, we must confess that we have sinned (v. 9) and receive forgiveness. Your understanding is very narrow and based on a misunderstanding of the passage.

Not all Christians share the Dispey Fundie doctrine of "Eternal Security" as your wrongly assumed. You clearly prefer the Straw Man over the actual doctrine taught in scripture but for the reader I'll lay it out using the London Baptist Confession of Faith, 1689:

Chapter 17

—
PARAGRAPH 1
Those whom God has accepted in the beloved, effectually called and sanctified by his Spirit, and given the precious faith of his elect unto, can neither totally nor finally fall from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved, seeing the gifts and callings of God are without repentance, from which source he still begets and nourishes in them faith, repentance, love, joy, hope, and all the graces of the Spirit unto immortality;1 and though many storms and floods arise and beat against them, yet they shall never be able to take them off that foundation and rock which by faith they are fastened upon; notwithstanding, through unbelief and the temptations of Satan, the sensible sight of the light and love of God may for a time be clouded and obscured from them,2 yet he is still the same, and they shall be sure to be kept by the power of God unto salvation, where they shall enjoy their purchased possession, they being engraved upon the palm of his hands, and their names having been written in the book of life from all eternity.3

1 John 10:28,29; Phil. 1:6; 2 Tim. 2:19; 1 John 2:19
2 Ps. 89:31–32; 1 Cor. 11:32
3 Mal. 3:6

—
PARAGRAPH 2
This perseverance of the saints depends not upon their own free will, but upon the immutability of the decree of election,4 flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father, upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ and union with him,5 the oath of God,6 the abiding of his Spirit, and the seed of God within them,7 and the nature of the covenant of grace;8 from all which ariseth also the certainty and infallibility thereof.

4 Rom. 8:30, 9:11,16
5 Rom. 5:9, 10; John 14:19
6 Heb. 6:17–18
7 1 John 3:9
8 Jer. 32:40

—
PARAGRAPH 3
And though they may, through the temptation of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins, and for a time continue therein,9 whereby they incur God's displeasure and grieve his Holy Spirit,10 come to have their graces and comforts impaired,11 have their hearts hardened, and their consciences wounded,12 hurt and scandalize others, and bring temporal judgments upon themselves,13 yet shall they renew their repentance and be preserved through faith in Christ Jesus to the end.14

9 Matt. 26:70,72,74
10 Isa. 64:5,9; Eph. 4:30
11 Ps. 51:10,12
12 Ps. 32:3–4
13 2 Sam. 12:14
14 Luke 22:32,61–62​

The way you are misreading 1 John destroys the free and unmerited salvation Christians are given through Jesus Christ. You place the works of the sinner, the checked walk of the Saints, before the forgiveness of sin. This is utterly shameful and deceitfully wrong. Why? Because you are looking at your own self righteousness to say you and it can't. It makes no rational sense considering you dead in trespasses and sin and will continue to sin the rest of your life.

* Now, what you suggest is refuted in the same epistle, because the Greek clearly teaches that regeneration/being born again takes before before we believe.

Our salvation is not based on what we do but what Christ has done.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

Well, you did not offer a word for word commentary on 1 John 1:7.
I will ask you again to do so please.
I want you to offer the commentary and not somebody else, as well.

As for nuances in meaning:
How many ways is there to interpret a blueprint in building a plane or a house?
Can you imagine the disaster that would take place if folks took your approach to building planes and houses? How much more should we treat God's Word which provide for us the words of eternal life?

As for my assuming I am only aware of Eternal Security:
This is simply not the case. I am aware of those who deny Eternal Security and yet they hold to a sin and still be saved gospel or Belief Alone-ism. Free Will Baptists deny Eternal Security, but they do not think sin can separate a believer from GOD. I merely mention Eternal Security because it is one of the more popular beliefs out there that holds to Belief Alone-ism or a sin and still be saved gospel. In fact, many times I will say within my posts "Belief Alone Proponents" and or "Eternal Security Proponents." (to help to distinguish that there are folks who believe differently). The phrase "Belief Alone Proponent" is more generic and can refer to either Eternal Security proponents and or Non-Eternal Security Proponents who hold to Belief Alone Salvationism.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

And for the record using crazy highlighted font is just annoying and distracting. Your point can be made without all the nonsense.

Thanks.

jm

That is your opinion that is not held by the majority of Christians. Many Christians like to highlight certain words in their Bible. I also appreciate it when other Christians bold a text or set of words they want me to see. It means they want me to see where they are coming from with the Bible. Sometimes folks just read past verses that you post, and or sometimes we simply do not see the words in the Scripture they quote. Bolding the words and highlighting them is a helpful tool. In fact, I like it so much, that my username is based on doing this. Even advertisment companies bold words for you to see to sell their products and or to get your attention. The goal is to get the person I am talking with to see what God's Word is really saying. You are the only one of a few people who do not like such a thing. I have helped people to see what God's Word said before with bolding the words within the Bible. I am not going to change on the account of a few who will most likely not agree with me anyways. Most find it helpful. So I will continue to be: "Bible Highlighter."

 

[JM]

Well, you did not offer a word for word commentary on 1 John 1:7.
I will ask you again to do so please.
I want you to offer the commentary and not somebody else, as well.

As for nuances in meaning:
How many ways is there to interpret a blueprint in building a plane or a house?
Can you imagine the disaster that would take place if folks took your approach to building planes and houses? How much more should we treat God's Word which provide for us the words of eternal life?

As for my assuming I am only aware of Eternal Security:
This is simply not the case. I am aware of those who deny Eternal Security and yet they hold to a sin and still be saved gospel or Belief Alone-ism. Free Will Baptists deny Eternal Security, but they do not think sin can separate a believer from GOD. I merely mention Eternal Security because it is one of the more popular beliefs out there that holds to Belief Alone-ism or a sin and still be saved gospel. In fact, many times I will say within my posts "Belief Alone Proponents" and or "Eternal Security Proponents." (to help to distinguish that there are folks who believe differently). The phrase "Belief Alone Proponent" is more generic and can refer to either Eternal Security proponents and or Non-Eternal Security Proponents who hold to Belief Alone Salvationism.

I added context to show your exegesis is a pretext to error.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

 

[JM]

That is your opinion that is not held by the majority of Christians. Many Christians like to highlight certain words in their Bible. I also appreciate it when other Christians bold a text or set of words they want me to see. It means they want me to see where they are coming from with the Bible. Sometimes folks just read past verses that you post, and or sometimes we simply do not see the words in the Scripture they quote. Bolding the words and highlighting them is a helpful tool. In fact, I like it so much, that my username is based on doing this. Even advertisment companies bold words for you to see to sell their products and or to get your attention. The goal is to get the person I am talking with to see what God's Word is really saying. You are the only one of a few people who do not like such a thing. I have helped people to see what God's Word said before with bolding the words within the Bible. I am not going to change on the account of a few who will most likely not agree with me anyways. Most find it helpful. So I will continue to be: "Bible Highlighter."

No one is suggesting marking up a Bible is helpful, what I am saying is your use of highlighting your own text, unless you believe it to be on par with scripture, doesn't need the highlighting.

Ever notice it's almost exclusively Disepy Fundamentalists that use this style of posting?

Keep doing you brother. We may disagree on the details but we agree that Christ is Lord.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I added context to show your exegesis is a pretext to error.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

I also added context to support what I said. But I asked for a word for word commentary. You did not give such a thing. So I am asking you again for you to give a word for word commentary on 1 John 1:7.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

No one is suggesting marking up a Bible is helpful, what I am saying is your use of highlighting your own text, unless you believe it to be on par with scripture, doesn't need the highlighting.

I disagree. Highlighting the Bible or bolding certain words does not change the content of the message of God's Word. Highlighting has been effective for me and others. Just because you personally do not like it is your own personal opinion or preference. Most do not have a problem with it. I like it when others do it for me, and I want to do the same for them. It helps for words to stand out that people are ignoring. In your case, I believe you are ignoring the words of 1 John 1:7. Hence, why I bolded the context of the verses surrounding it to help show you what it says.

Ever notice it's almost exclusively Disepy Fundamentalists that use this style of posting?

Do you mean dipsey?
Please understand that insulting (brethren you don't know) is not the way of the Lord, and neither is allowed on this forum.

Keep doing you brother. We may disagree on the details but we agree that Christ is Lord.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

I do not believe that we agree on what is required so as to make Christ our Lord.
The New Testament lays out the many requirements that shows how we can make Christ our Lord.
Jesus says we are to deny ourselves, pick up our cross, and to follow Him.
Jesus tells us to preach the gospel.
Jesus tells us to help the poor.
Jesus tells us to love the brethren.
Jesus tells us to love our enemies.
Jesus tells us that our righteousness must exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees or we will not enter the kingdom of heaven.
Hebrews 12:14 says to follow after holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord.