Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
Exegesis of 1 John 1-2:2
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 05. 2019
- #bible
Went a lot longer than I expected to on 1 John 1:5-2:2, but hope it is helpful for those who enjoy close discussion of the flow of a key text.
All production and credit belongs to Alpha and Omega Ministries®.
If this video interested you, please visit aomin.org/
“If you really recognize the massive debt that has been forgiven to you…why would you want to add to that?”
I have recently been asked “if Jesus died for only the elect then what does this verse mean?” Thanks for explaining this!
Don't be fooled by this video.
@@davidmeissner5010 stop being fooled by man centered theology that says man takes credit for salvation
Who did Jesus say he died for? John 10 :14-17.@@davidmeissner5010
I am an ELCA Lutheran from South Carolina. Today (April 11, Easter 2), this was our Epistle Lesson of the Day.
Thank you so much for this, really helped.
This is false teaching. Trust what the text says not what man says it can't mean
In other words, Jesus is not just the only way for us, but He is also the only way for everyone in the whole world. There is no other name given, and there is no other sacrifice for sin. Therefore, this verse doesn't teach universalism - it teaches the exact opposite.
Just to answer your question dr. White. The potentiality in verse 2 comes from:
1:6 "if we say"
1:7 "if we walk"
1:8 "if we say"
1:9 "if we confess"
1:10 "if we say"
2:1 "...so that you may not....if anyone sins..."
And then it continues:
2:3 "if we keep"
Etc.
Regardless, I thank God for you and your ministry, God bless you my brother 🙏
"If" is not potentiality but conditional
@@bisdakpinoy3428 a condition implies possibility my friend. Unless you want absolute determination, which would mean the conditional is not conditional, but rather hypothetical
Thank you...! That was very good...!
This is why the original language is important to study. The Greek word there for world means orderly arrangement. Doesn't mean every person on the planet that ever lived.
So white is absolutely perfectly correct. It means all kinds of people not just us, in the orderly arrangement.
He is the sacrifice for people in Asia, India, Europe and everywhere. All over the world.
You'd never come to this understanding of the text without a commitment to calvinism.
How else could God have said Christ died for all? If all, every and the whole world aren't good enough for the calvinist then what is? Christ died for the whole world, like scripture clearly tells us. Not all kinds from within the world. Let scripture inform you rather then allowing your paradigm to tell you what the text can't say.
@@coryalbright9798
I'm not a Calvinist.
Yes I do come to that conclusion without Calvin. It has nothing to do with Calvin.
You don't study the original language obviously.
Ok well your still informing the text with your presuppositions regardless of the label you put onto it
@@coryalbright9798
That's what you think. Do a Greek word study on kosmon and get back to me.
Check the strong cyclopedia and Hastings.
If you're going to reject scholarly work you might want to read the scholarly work 1st.
@@billyr9162 Looks like my response didnt post idk why.... world doesn't mean world all doesn't mean all right? LA is a man made doctrine which your twisting scripture to defend. Why not just let scripture mean 2hat it says? It's stunning to see the presuppositions brought to the text by the james whites of the world. It's following tradition instead of scripture. Are the ones condemned for unbelief in John 3.18 then condemned for unbelief in a savior who didn't die for them?
and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.
Colossians 1:20 ESV
For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.
1 Timothy 4:10 ESV
Trust God to say what he means.
The Big Picture as I understand it:
• Jesus was sent by His Father to save His sheep, God's elect, His chosen Bride (betrothed to Him by his Father), the 'ekklesia' or 'called out assembly' (poorly rendered 'church' in many Bibles), whose names were written in the Lamb's Book of Life before creation (John 6:35ff; John 10, 17; Eph. 1:4-5, 11-14; 2:8-10; 5:25-27; Rev. 13:8; 21:27).
• The Son was sent by His Father according to a (new) covenant between Him and His Father (Heb. 8-10).
• Jesus fulfilled this covenant by His blood -- He 'obtained eternal redemption' (Heb. 9:12) for all whom He represented in this covenant as their Great High Priest and Lamb of God who freely offered himself as an atoning sacrifice (or propitiation) to turn away God's holy & righteous wrath and satisfy & uphold His justice in saving sinners.
• God was 'well-pleased' with His Son's sacrifice. Jesus' offering of Himself was perfect, sufficient, complete, omnipotent & effective. It cannot fail to accomplish its ordained objective (John 17:1-3; Eph. 2:10).
After the Cross, during this present age (from Pentecost to Christ's return), Christ's Redemption is applied by the Helper, the Holy Spirit.
• Jesus calls, draws and renews all who are bought by His blood to faith in Himself by His Spirit (Titus 3:5).
• This applies not only to those who now believe -- such as at the time John was writing, i.e., "not for our sins only" -- it also applies to any and all "in the whole world" throughout time who are covered by Christ's propitiation (i.e., His wrath-quenching sacrifice) and who eventually come to faith in Him by His Spirit (1 John 2:2; John 17:20ff).
In conclusion:
• Each member of the Trinity is focused on the same goal: the Father chooses the elect/believers for salvation, the Son achieves salvation for the elect/believers, and the Spirit applies salvation to the elect/believers via the new birth and empowers them to grow in faith & holiness until they are glorified at Christ's return.
• Therefore, salvation is all of God, all of grace, and all to God's glory from start to finish.
Beautiful. Praise God!
Nice summary. It's good to have summary...a big picture...
Wow, I forgot I left another comment a month ago. Oh well, part 2.
This is a big fail for White. A huge 20 minute word salad and reading between the lines to make 'the whole world' (kosmos) mean something other than the whole world, specifically rather to mean only believers of the whole world.
You see, he needs this to mean something other than the entire world (all mankind) in order to support the Calvinist tenet of Limited Atonement; the idea that Jesus only died for the elect and that anything else means he somehow failed at salvation.
Does anyone really think John was not smart enough to clarify if he was only referring to believers of the world rather than the whole world (mankind)? I think he was and more specifically why he didn't put it that way. Because the blood of Christ was for the atonement of all sins for all man, not just the sins of the believer.
The fundamental flaw in Calvinism is that they conflate atonement with salvation. While Jesus died to atone for all sins, salvation is not given to any except they turn their hearts to Christ and accept him as their lord and Savior, denoting an act of will on the part of man; which Calvinists somehow interpret that to mean man saves man.
Calvinists cannot have man's act of belief either because it destroys yet another tenet of theirs, the tenet of Total Depravity, which is the thought that man is so depraved that he cannot consciously make any decision to follow Christ, but rather that God must give them a heart to follow Christ first.
I don't think that Jesus Christ wrote this word so that only those who had a degree in exegesis and hermeneutics could have salvation.
Then again, Calvinists do believe that everyone is either predestined to heaven or hell from before the foundation of the world so they likely think that only those heaven bound are able to interpret this word properly.
These are the kind of people that drive others away from Christ. Again, another mute point for Calvinists because they likely think that those driven away were not predestined to heaven anyway.
See the issue here?
I always have a hard time with this but kind of wondering if he is talking of future believers as far as who the world is. This passage kind of pulls me in this direction:
10 In this is love: not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins.
Modern English Version. Thinline Edition. Lake Mary, FL: Passio, 2014. Print.
Tom Well’s book “A Price For A People” is excellent on this and many other passages related to the nature, meaning, scope & effective outcome of Christ’s death. Easy to read & follow. Written warmly from a pastoral & patient teacher’s perspective.
Amen
Buddy, you just outlined how “World” usually means the world as it is antithetical to Christ. That doesn’t make your case. In fact, it makes the opposite case.
So the whole world is just the world of believers? I see. So what you are saying is that Jesus DID NOT die and atone for the sins of all mankind, just Christians. Thou sayest it and thou shalt be held accountable for it.
we wont be known by our sin anymore, i think is the idea. 3:20
In other words, we know Calvinism is true therefore we will interpret this verse with that in mind. We will even leave the plain English teaching and try and drum something up in the Greek. Because, we know that 99% of English speaking Christians don't speak Greek and we will be able to pull the wool over their eyes. Beware of a man who has to go into the Greek to prove his doctrine. If he can't prove it in the English then the doctrine is wrong.
Dr James and probably all calvinist AND armineans do not properly differentiate the difference between Propitiation and Substitution. Both can be seen in Lev 14:1-9 and 16:7-10. Propitiation (the first goat)is primarily towards God (the owner of the field Ruth 4:5 Mt13:44)and deals with His wrath against sin as against His holiness. Substitution is towards man or the elect (the treasure) it deals with the One who "takes away the sin of the world" or the One who bore the sins of many Heb 9:28. Dr White always brings up the "14 different ways" John uses "world", gives only one example from after the verse, and then reinterpret the phrase "the whole world" to "so many others" and "out of every tribe tongue and nation" a phrase in Revelation which wasn't written yet. So he is now doing what he says not to do by bringing in presuppositions into the passage. Christ did not bare the sin of every person only the elect(substitution) but he shed His blood to satisfy the righteous requirement of the law (obedience) for the whole world (propitiation)
Here are 10 senses or ways "world" is used by John in the NT, cited by John Sampson on his Effectual Grace website:
The word “world” (Greek: Kosmos) appears 185 times in the New Testament: 78 times in John, 8 in Matthew, 3 in Mark, and 3 also in Luke. The vast majority of its occurrences are therefore in John’s writings, as it is also found 24 times in John’s three epistles, and just three times in Peter.
John uses the word “world” in ten different ways in his Gospel.
1. The Entire Universe
John 1: 10 He was in the world (planet earth), and the world (planet earth and by implication all creation) was made through him, yet the world (the people of the world) did not know him.
John 17:5 And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.
2. The Physical Earth
John 13:1 Now before the Feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that his hour had come to depart out of this world to the Father, having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end.
John 21:25 Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.
3. The World System
John 12:31 Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out.
John 14:30 I will no longer talk much with you, for the ruler of this world is coming. He has no claim on me…
John 16:11 concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.
4. All humanity minus believers
John 7:7 The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify about it that its works are evil.
John 15:18 If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you.
5. A Big Group but less than all people everywhere
John 12:19 So the Pharisees said to one another, “You see that you are gaining nothing. Look, the world has gone after him.”
6. The Elect Only
John 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
7. The Non-Elect Only
John 17:9 I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours.
8. The Realm of Mankind
John 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him.
(this is very probably the best understanding of the word “world” in John 3:16 also)
9. Jews and Gentiles (not just Israel but many Gentiles too)
John 4:42 They said to the woman, “It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Savior of the world.”
10. The General Public (as distinguished from a private group) - not those in small private groups
John 7:3, 4 So his brothers said to him, “Leave here and go to Judea, that your disciples also may see the works you are doing. For no one works in secret if he seeks to be known openly. If you do these things, show yourself to the world.”
Seeing this list can be very helpful - especially when traditions reign supreme in some people’s minds that “world” always means all people everywhere. Sometimes it does, but most of the time, it does not. It is a tradition that is very strong but one that cannot survive biblical scrutiny.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
I would take exception with number 6. In John 3:16-17 it seems that John is using "world" in an ethical or moral sense, as "realm of sinners". B.B. Warfield took this view in his essay "God's Immeasurable Love" (worth looking up and reading). John is expressing astonishment that God -- the holy God who is a consuming fire and cannot even countenance or look upon sin -- might love sinners ("the world"), might give His Son to save them, and eventually save them, without specific reference to any individuals except those who are collectively described as believers in His Son.
So God so Loved the Believer that He gave His only son?
I think I can confidently say that there is absolutely no way you can “add“ to your sin list.
Christ paid for every sin you commit from life to death if you believe in Him.
Our hope, prayer and fear in Him is to acknowledge our sin, confess it and lean into His grace and sin less. Less and less everyday. Not because we are trying to achieve salvation but because He is conforming us into His sinless Son.
A father does not take the child he loves outside and stone him to death because he jumped on the table for 3rd time in a day. He disciplines him because he loves him. He loves him because the table is made of glass. And if he breaks through it, his child will injure himself.
Through this loving act of discipline we to can learn not stop jumping on the glass tables of life. Even when we are old and gray, we will be tempted and we will sin in many ways in the heart and mind. But God is faithful to forgive and able to finish what He started.
White does not mean that Christ has not already paid for every sin. What he means by "add to that" is that you would add to your sins that have already been committed that Christ has born on the cross.
There’s so much biblical gymnastics going on here this guy should join an Olympic team.
No, the mental gymnastics required to take out His sovereignty after reading through John 6, Ephesians 1, all of Romans, Genesis 20, and the hundreds of other areas that point to His utter control in election, salvation, and sanctification are what is truly astonishing.
@@douglasmcnay644Matthew 23:37 is a quick refutation to your false belief. God willed the reconciliation of the Jews, the Jews willed to reject Christ. And their temple was destroyed.
How could God have said it any clearer? Calvinism can venture into absurdity.
The ironic hypocrisy and eissagesis going on in the video is stunning.
Learn the language.
@@billyr9162 stop lying
9:13 Just as it is written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
A sentence in The Bible like that's got to drive you nuts. Everything is so plain and easy but all when you see that word hated. It can't mean hated. The plain reading of the text theory goes right out the window.
@@billyr9162 not sure what your deal is. You've come across very foolishly. You've demonstrated a knack for lying and an inability to understand simple scripture. As I said earlier, your to childish to discuss anything with. Why keep yapping at me? I'm more convinced your just a giant troll with every comment you make because It seems impossible that someone could be this moronic and still know how to operate a computer.
You can take your goofy chest pounding to someone else. I'm sure they will be impressed. Good bye
@@coryalbright9798
Lol. That's about the 10 time you said good bye.
2 Timothy 1:9
[9]Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,
So a 20 minute video about why the verse doesn't mean what it says. Calvinism and the Bible disagree quite often
Do you mind if we pick up here? The other comment chain has around 300 comments and its hard to read and respond to comments. If you have like kik anything for instant messaging, I dont mind doing that either.
@@danielomitted1867 ya thats fine.
Your comment about man being morally neutral is irrelevant. Arminians accept the calvinist premise and build a doctrine out of that presupposition. Both are wrong. Total depravity is not biblical. It's not about a man being morally neutral, it's about a sinner responding to God word. That doesn't require a super power. It can be as simple as being convicted by God's word, seeing His love through His word and then acknowledging what a wretched hopeless sinner you apart from Christ. This is not saving yourself. This is not man taking some meritorious action on behalf of his salvation. God desires everyone to be saved but He doesn't try saving anyone but the believer. This is what scripture says. You don't need to add kinds at the end of all. You don't need to pretend that every appeal to believe in the Bible is merely just a call to awaken the elect. There's a reason no known Christian held your view until Augustin in the 5th century.
You take John 6 as saying "no one can believe and be saved unless the father who sent me draws him and the one drawn will certainly come and believe and will raise him up on the last day" you'd think if thats what God meant he could say it. It says can come. Not will come. Not comes. Those drawn now can come. And this is prior to the crucifixion and resurrection. The Lord Jesus tells us in this same book that if He's lifted Up He will draw all men to himself. Not all kinds, not all types. The problem is that can't mean what it says to a calvinist. There's several verses in scripture that the calvinist has decided can't mean what it says prior to even reading them. This is a man exalting theology. There's not one passage in scripture that says only the elect who were determined to be saved before creation can actually be saved. So where does this doctrine come from? Not the Bible.
I'd really like to know what's wrong with a man whos convicted under God's word and then responds in belief to God drawing him through scripture? What is unbiblical about that?
I'd like you to answer that but I will guess your going to say because he's dead in sin. If he's dead the way you take it then he can't walk let alone respond. All are dead in sin prior to belief. If dead in sin meant forever unable to have faith then why doesn't the Bible just say that?
@@coryalbright9798 its not a Calvinistic premise. These people arouse as a rebuttal to Calvinistic doctrine. Its a biblical premise. "Responding to Gods word" okay perfect, is man neutral towards God? To where in it of himself he can choose either to accept or reject his offer without needing to be moved by the grace of God? Youve already said no. So why then are you talking about Jesus drawing all men? Youve already rejected that statement. Man doesnt need to be drawn he goes on his own will. What do you think that means exactly? Lets try to keep this conversation narrow and focused if you want to talk about the elect of God after we discuss your anthropology Im good with that. Btw I seriously doubt you have any clue what church fathers taught and believed and thats not meant as an insult.
@@danielomitted1867 the church fathers spoke of the freedom of the will. Loraine Boettner (a calvinist) says that this doctrine was first introduced by the spirit filled theologian from the west (Augustin) this isn't really a debate except among the most ideological possessed calvinists.
You attach your presuppositions to my stance and argue from there. I never said man has the ability to do anything without God. This is only an issue if you believe in irresistible grace. So in other words your stance seems to be that unless man is irresistibly graced or shown some preveniant grace at some point then he can't believe unless he's doing it all alone. God's word is the grace. Scripture is not just to awaken the elect. We are called through scripture, we are told about our status with God outside of Christ in scripture. God's word is a means of graciously drawing us. Believing what scripture says is not some super power done without God...its His living word that brings about our response. I believe you've accepted the james white/John McArthur teaching on what the non calvinist believes.
@@coryalbright9798 I havent said anything irresistible grace or preveniant grace. If Gods word is the grace then why Jesus saying anything about drawing men? Why do they need to be drawn? Because according to Jesus they cant come unless they are. Saying hes drawing all men doesnt address this.