Originally posted by freeatlast:
No the verse is not fopr lost people. It is to show the truth about who ius saved. No one who practices homosexuality can be saved.
No, freeastlast, you're wrong. First, you apparently didn't get what I wrote to start with. You are right, the letter is written not for lost people, but to identify who is saved and who isn't. You're wrong, however, in the way you present the teaching. (I didn't expect you to admit it, however, as I did look at your website in your profile, and it's all about what makes a "real" Christian and what doesn't. Methinks you're hung up on one issue, and can't see for your blinders... John identifies who is a Christian and who isn't by addressing the issue of apostasy in the church. You are eisegeting from 1 John 3.
This letter was written to the Ephesian church in order to repudiate the Gnostics who had gone out from them. John writes very clearly that by their going out from "us" they proved themselves not to be "of us."
You are removing the teaching in chapter 3 from the entire context of the epistle to make it say what you want it to say. The text does not support your position if you do a proper exegesis of it.
I John 1:9 is not just talking about confessing our sin to God. It is talking about confessing our sin to each other as well, not as Catholics do, but as recognition of our imperfection and the presence of sin's presence and power within us. To sin at all is to practice sin. To say, as the Gnostics were doing, that we have no sin, is to fail to confess our sin to each other. The sin that they were practicing is very clear. They repudiated the gospel of the Incarnation up to and including the substitutionary atonement and bodiliy resurrection of the Lord Jesus and personal faith in that alone for salvation (salvation by grace through faith) and they said that they had no sin, because they had retreated from society. Asceticism. This is the danger of asceticism, the saying that we have no sin in us. The sin of these men was the sin of apostasy. This isn't about sinful "lifestyles" like homosexuality. This is about the sin of apostasy.
Therefore, you can't apply it the way you do. In fact, according to the text, you are guilty of one of the two sins of these apostates. They said they have no sin.
To say you do not practice sin is one of the very sins of "character" (e.g. continually practicing) about which John writes! It stems, specifically, from a repudiation of the gospel itself. If you say you have no sin and you repudiate the gospel, you are an apostate and not saved. THAT is what 1 John is teaching. To say otherwise is to flat out divorce it from its context. It can be no other way in the light of Scripture. My point: If you say you have no sin in you, then you are sadly misinformed about yourself and you are, in point of fact, guilty of one of the two sins that John identifies in this letter as being practiced.
One question we need to ask ourselvess about homosexuals is whether or not that person has made a profession of faith, whether they really do believe the gospel itself, and whether they now repudiate that confession. Are they backslidden or apostate? Do they struggle with sin? Real Christians struggle with sin. Unbelievers do not struggle with sin. Do they repudiate the gospel? Have they fallen away from evangelical doctrine? If that is the answer, they are apostate and not saved at all and never were, in which case you are correct. If the answer is not all three, then they may be backslidden. Regardless,
John wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit you are not so inspired. You do not know what is going on in the heart of that man or woman. If you did you could make the blanket declaration you're making.
The root of this entire blik you have is found on page one of this thread and on your website. "There is no such thing as backsliding. You declare this a false teaching." You are, of course, aware, that not even the most hardcore Calvinists (of which I myself am a five pointer), say that there is no such thing as backsliding. This is one doctrine over which Calvinists and Arminians are generally united in agreement. Backsliding can and does occur, or else there would be no warnings about the perils of falling into sin. It would negate, in large measure the rebukes of Paul in 1 Corinthians and the warnings against apostasy and backsliding both found in Hebrews, among other texts. It is soundly outside the boundaries of orthodoxy to allege what you are saying about this doctrine. Not even the most hardcore believer in perseverance of the saints would say what you say on this issue.
Scripture is clear on this issue. There is apostasy, and there is backsliding. You have confused the two by uniting them together.
Salvation is not of works, it is of God from beginning to end. Sanctification itself is, however, cooperative, and while in standing we may be saint, in daily life our state is both sinner and saint simultaneously. We can fall into grievous error doctrinally and morally. If a person comes back he was saved. If not, he may not have been. In the end, if we know that he meets the definition of apostasy, he most likely was not. To make blanket statements as you do is just plain unbiblical.