Have you heard the Gospel?

[Hopeful 2]

What is the New Covenant?

The NC is the one that replaced the OC.
It is the promise from God of eternal life, if we love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength...and love our neighbors as our selves.
Here are a few scrip's concerning the above...

1. Hebrews 10:29
   Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
2. Hebrews 12:24
   And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
3. Hebrews 13:20
   Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant,

 

[live2blieve]

Yes, but the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is just one aspect of the NC, not the NC. The NC is that by grace there is forgiveness in Christ apart from the Law and we can be reconciled to God.

Luk 22:19 And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
Luk 22:20 And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. (ESV)

The Holy Spirit is God's gift to us, for a number of reasons, such as to help us live as we should and seal as "the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it" (Eph. 1:13-14).

Here are the discriptions of the New Covenant:

Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:

But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. (Jeremiah 31:31-34).

For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.

Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them. (Ezekiel 36:24-27).

It can be seen that the New Covenant is the Holy Spirit, the Law of God and a new heart within a person.

 

[live2blieve]

One at a time.
There was no Holy Spirit present where The Christ is already present in person and forgiving sins.
It seems you are still confused on the matter of Jesus's forgiveness of sin.
Only Jesus forgives sin .
Forgiving sin is not in the Holy Spirit's job description .


Mar 2:10
But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins....

I agree that only Yahshua can forgive sins. And he declared this in couple cases during his ministry. However, the sins including sin of Adam were not yet atoned for. Please read the description of the New Covenant in the previous post: only after the Holy Spirit is placed within a person, which happened on the Day of Pentecost, his/her sins were forgiven. Why? Because they were atoned for by Yahshua's sacrifice, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins (Hebrews 9:22).

 

[live2blieve]

The NC is the one that replaced the OC.
It is the promise from God of eternal life, if we love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength...and love our neighbors as our selves.
Here are a few scrip's concerning the above...

1. Hebrews 10:29
   Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
2. Hebrews 12:24
   And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
3. Hebrews 13:20
   Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant,

I agree. Please read above (post #122) the descriptions of the New Covenant.

 

[Tenchi]

The "contradiction" is solved when you realize that John is writing about two different kinds of people in 1 John 1.
Those who walk in God (the light). (1 John 1:5)
And those who walk in sin (darkness). (Pro 4:19)
John uses an A-B, A-B, A-B, style of writing to juxtapose one group against the other.
(Paul uses the same system in Rom 8, where he juxtaposes those who walk in the flesh against those who walk in the Spirit.)
Not all of 1 John 1 applies to those who walk in God, while other parts do not apply to those who walk in sin.
Sinners cannot say they have no sin.
Those who walk in God can say they have no sin, as there is no sin in God !

This is shown to be false simply by noting the pronouns that John uses in 1 John 1:6-10. As has been explained to you before, Hopeful 2, John identifies himself with those to whom he's writing, using "we" and "us" as he addresses the matter of sin in the lives of born-again believers. In doing so, John denies the idea you've put forward above, Hopeful 2.

Whether its verse six:

1 John 1:6
6 If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.

or verse seven:

1 John 1:7
7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.

the pronouns John uses identify him with both the person who walks in darkness and the one who walks in the light. So, then, what John is doing in 1 John 1:6-10 is speaking of a single person - the Christian - who can live in two different, contradictory ways: in the light or in the darkness.

What John wrote comports perfectly with the many other passages of God's word that demonstrate saints sin. See 1 Corinthians 3, 5, 6, 11, or Galatians 3:3, or Revelation 2-3, or Hebrews 10:26-31, and so on. You can even read John's words in the very next chapter of his first letter to see that he was making this point:

1 John 2:1
1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.
2 He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.

Who is the "anyone" who sins? In context, it is "My little children." And who are they? John clarifies their identity by using "we" in reference to them. We have an Advocate," he wrote. By "we" John meant himself and his "little children" readers. These are they who, when they sin, have an Advocate in heaven with God, Jesus Christ the Righteous. John did not think of himself as an unsaved man, however. And so, when he lumped himself in with his readers by using the pronoun "we," he indicated that he understood his readers to be as he was: saved.

This is all reinforced by John then proceeding to distinguish his readers and himself - "our" in verse 2 - from "the whole world," both of which groups, he wrote, have sins for which Christ was the propitiation. It is, then, a clear contortion of the obvious, natural reading of John's words to assert what you have about them Hopeful 2.

Why, in the face of such plain, obvious facts do you persist in your deep error about them? It can only be, I think, that you are suffering under the self-deception and absence of Truth that God has promised you will in 1 John 1:8:

8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

 

[Hopeful 2]

This is shown to be false simply by noting the pronouns that John uses in 1 John 1:6-10. As has been explained to you before, Hopeful 2, John identifies himself with those to whom he's writing, using "we" and "us" as he addresses the matter of sin in the lives of born-again believers. In doing so, John denies the idea you've put forward above, Hopeful 2.

So, which are you ?
Do you walk in darkness, which Pro 4:19 says is sin ?
Or do you walk in the light, which 1 John 1:5 says is God ?
As you can see, you can't be both, as there is no sin in God.

 

[Tenchi]

So, which are you ?
Do you walk in darkness, which Pro 4:19 says is sin ?
Or do you walk in the light, which 1 John 1:5 says is God ?
As you can see, you can't be both, as there is no sin in God.

Still this useless deflection defense of your error, eh? If you can't see that your response here fails utterly, others certainly can. John has answered your questions above for you very clearly - as I showed - in his words in 1 John 1:6-10. Take off your sinless-perfection "glasses" put on you by evil teachers, and see the Truth. It'll set you free.

 

[Consecrated Life]

I agree that only Yahshua can forgive sins. And he declared this in couple cases during his ministry. However, the sins including sin of Adam were not yet atoned for. Please read the description of the New Covenant in the previous post: only after the Holy Spirit is placed within a person, which happened on the Day of Pentecost, his/her sins were forgiven. Why? Because they were atoned for by Yahshua's sacrifice, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins (Hebrews 9:22).

Your confusion lies in your inability to understand what is possible when God Himself is present:

John 20:28
"And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God."

The previous description you provided suggesting that only the atoning of sin was possible in the physical presence of God is just the opinion of an equally misunderstanding person.

The shedding of Christ's Blood on the cross was for my forgiveness and yours because we were never in the presence of God's manifestation in the flesh.

Do you think a person that went to the temple for a sin offering , and a person that had God Himself look them in the eyes speak to them, and say thy sins are forgiven , both walked away feeling exactly the same ?

 

[Hopeful 2]

Still this useless deflection defense of your error, eh? If you can't see that your response here fails utterly, others certainly can. John has answered your questions above for you very clearly - as I showed - in his words in 1 John 1:6-10. Take off your sinless-perfection "glasses" put on you by evil teachers, and see the Truth. It'll set you free.

Are you walking in sin, or are you walking in God ?
You certainly can't walk in both.
Walk in the light, and all your past sins will have been washed away by the blood of Christ.
Then you can say you too have no sin.

 

[live2blieve]

This is shown to be false simply by noting the pronouns that John uses in 1 John 1:6-10. As has been explained to you before, Hopeful 2, John identifies himself with those to whom he's writing, using "we" and "us" as he addresses the matter of sin in the lives of born-again believers. In doing so, John denies the idea you've put forward above, Hopeful 2.

Whether its verse six:

1 John 1:6
6 If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.

or verse seven:

1 John 1:7
7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.

the pronouns John uses identify him with both the person who walks in darkness and the one who walks in the light. So, then, what John is doing in 1 John 1:6-10 is speaking of a single person - the Christian - who can live in two different, contradictory ways: in the light or in the darkness.

What John wrote comports perfectly with the many other passages of God's word that demonstrate saints sin. See 1 Corinthians 3, 5, 6, 11, or Galatians 3:3, or Revelation 2-3, or Hebrews 10:26-31, and so on. You can even read John's words in the very next chapter of his first letter to see that he was making this point:

1 John 2:1
1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.
2 He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.

Who is the "anyone" who sins? In context, it is "My little children." And who are they? John clarifies their identity by using "we" in reference to them. We have an Advocate," he wrote. By "we" John meant himself and his "little children" readers. These are they who, when they sin, have an Advocate in heaven with God, Jesus Christ the Righteous. John did not think of himself as an unsaved man, however. And so, when he lumped himself in with his readers by using the pronoun "we," he indicated that he understood his readers to be as he was: saved.

This is all reinforced by John then proceeding to distinguish his readers and himself - "our" in verse 2 - from "the whole world," both of which groups, he wrote, have sins for which Christ was the propitiation. It is, then, a clear contortion of the obvious, natural reading of John's words to assert what you have about them Hopeful 2.

Why, in the face of such plain, obvious facts do you persist in your deep error about them? It can only be, I think, that you are suffering under the self-deception and absence of Truth that God has promised you will in 1 John 1:8:

8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

Please consider two important things. First, here John addresses the Gnostics who did not belive in sin. Here is a more detailed explanation.

https://beingunderthenewcovenant.wordpress.com/2011/05/19/understanding-1-john-19/

Second, "WE" is used as a general statement that all people sin. With the exception that those who are born again don't sin anymore (1 John 3:9). Thus, we can say that "people can't fly". However, with the deltaplane people can. Let me give another example. During the war in some country, the president may announce in his speach, "We all will defend our country and fight to the last bullet". It is a general statement which does not mean that the president personally will fire a single shot.

 

[live2blieve]

Your confusion lies in your inability to understand what is possible when God Himself is present:

John 20:28
"And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God."

The previous description you provided suggesting that only the atoning of sin was possible in the physical presence of God is just the opinion of an equally misunderstanding person.

The shedding of Christ's Blood on the cross was for my forgiveness and yours because we were never in the presence of God's manifestation in the flesh.

Do you think a person that went to the temple for a sin offering , and a person that had God Himself look them in the eyes speak to them, and say thy sins are forgiven , both walked away feeling exactly the same ?

The fact that the Savior was forgiving some people of sins during his ministry does not mean that he and everybody else were living in the time of the New Covenant.

 

[Tenchi]

First, here John addresses the Gnostics who did not belive in sin. Here is a more detailed explanation.

This is a popular(?) - or, at least, increasingly common - idea, but John makes no mention of gnostics or Gnosticism in his letter. In fact, he couldn't because what we typically understand as Gnosticism was only in its nascent stage in the apostle John's time. The anti-Gnostic stuff in John's first letter, proposed by some, has to be entirely read into John's words, not extracted from them. And so, I don't give particular attention or weight to this theory about John's remarks.

Second, "WE" is used as a general statement that all people sin. With the exception that those who are born again don't sin anymore (1 John 3:9).

This hardly addresses what I pointed out from the text of John's words. The pronoun "we" can be used in a universal way, yes, but in John's letter, as I showed, he is speaking of a particular "we" - born again believers. Observing the possible universal sense of "we" doesn't undo this fact at all.

 

[Consecrated Life]

The fact that the Savior was forgiving some people of sins during his ministry does not mean that he and everybody else were living in the time of the New Covenant.

The fact the Jesus while looking people in the eye reconfigured the entire path of Spiritual Unity with God by definition means you cannot call it the Old Covenant system.
I don't really believe what He was doing in the very short time He was here can qualify as New Covenant either.
I don't believe that everything He was doing while He walked among us can tied up in a neat and tidy package that perfectly comports to our very limited understanding of the creator of the universe.
It is the height of arrogance & spiritual pride to believe we have that kind of enlightenment into the unspoken works the Almighty .
If not downright sinful.
Call it what you want, I call Jesus instructing the people they can be born again , and that they can obtain eternal life directly outside anything to do with the Temple by coming directly to God, is anything but the Old Covenant.
I know what Eternal Life looks like coming from Him , I'll be content to let you figure out under what title & heading it should be categorically, chronologically listed

John 5:40
And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

 

[live2blieve]

This hardly addresses what I pointed out from the text of John's words. The pronoun "we" can be used in a universal way, yes, but in John's letter, as I showed, he is speaking of a particular "we" - born again believers. Observing the possible universal sense of "we" doesn't undo this fact at all.

This is what you wrote:

"1 John 1:6
6 If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.

or verse seven:

1 John 1:7
7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.

the pronouns John uses identify him with both the person who walks in darkness and the one who walks in the light. So, then, what John is doing in 1 John 1:6-10 is speaking of a single person - the Christian - who can live in two different, contradictory ways: in the light or in the darkness".

The conclusion that "what John is doing in 1 John 1:6-10 is speaking of a single person - the Christian - who can live in two different, contradictory ways: in the light or in the darkness" is not correct. Thus, I can say, "if we drive sober we are fine with the law, but if we drive under the influence of alcohol we can be arrested". Obviously, it is not speaking about a single person who can do both: some of us, fortunately, NEVER drive under the influence. Those who are born again NEVER walk in darkness ( 1 John 3:6-9).

 

[live2blieve]

Call it what you want, I call Jesus instructing the people they can be born again , and that they can obtain eternal life directly outside anything to do with the Temple by coming directly to God, is anything but the Old Covenant.

If I tell a person who is in prison that he can be free and have a new life after he is discharged, it does not mean that this person is already living in the world ("New Covenant") and not in prison ("Old Covenant").

 

[Consecrated Life]

If I tell a person who is in prison that he can be free and have a new life after he is discharged, it does not mean that this person is already living in the world ("New Covenant") and not in prison ("Old Covenant").

What a depressing Jesus this is you know.
Practicing slow feed, refusal to give life while in the presence of imprisoned suffering people.
That is not the Jesus I know .
In comparison Jesus told the prisoners that day that if they would come to Him they were free and the Burden of sin was gone effective immediately.
The day, NOT TOMORROW , NOT NEXT WEEK, NOT NEXT YEAR, that day the Jesus I know spoke the Words
to the people that if they would come to Him they would have "Rest unto your souls" they had it .
This new" rest unto their souls."

Mat 11:28
Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.

 

[Tenchi]

The conclusion that "what John is doing in 1 John 1:6-10 is speaking of a single person - the Christian - who can live in two different, contradictory ways: in the light or in the darkness" is not correct. Thus, I can say, "if we drive sober we are fine with the law, but if we drive under the influence of alcohol we can be arrested". Obviously, it is not speaking about a single person who can do both: some of us, fortunately, NEVER drive under the influence. Those who are born again NEVER walk in darkness ( 1 John 3:6-9).

I don't think you're understanding my point about John lumping himself in with his readers. John is very clear that he is speaking to born-again believers, not only by the repeated use of the "we" pronoun, but also by the following:

1 John 1:1-4
1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life—

Who is the "we" here? The still-lost, spiritually-unregenerate person? Obviously not. "We" in light of what John says in this verse refers to those who had interacted directly with Jesus (the Word of life), hearing, seeing and even touching him.

2 the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us—

Here, John hearkens to the beginning of his Gospel (John 1:1-4), speaking of Christ as "the Life" who was with God at the moment of Creation, made manifest to John and many others. But who is the "you" to whom John refers in this verse? Is it reasonable to think that John was writing to lost people? Or is John addressing the Early Church? Well, there were unsaved people around the Early Church, perhaps even within it, the "false brethren" Paul spoke of, or the "tares" of whom Jesus spoke (2 Corinthians 11:26; Galatians 2:4; Matthew 13:38). It may well be that John has them in view here since he clearly distinguishes the "we" and "us" of those who've interacted with Jesus from the "you" who are those to whom John is relating his first-hand experience of Jesus.

3 that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.

Here, too, John reinforces that he is speaking to a group of people - "you" - that is distinct from the group who have "fellowship with the Father and Jesus Christ" - "we" and "us."

1 John 1:5-7
5 This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

This is the last time John uses "you" in the chapter. From this point on, there are only the pronouns "we" and "us," which marks very plainly that what John writes from this point on applies to himself in the same way it does to his readers. Beyond this verse, John no longer has two different groups - "us" and "you" - in view.

6 If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.

What John doesn't say here is that, if he is walking in darkness, he has lost his salvation, or that his walking in darkness demonstrates he was never saved. No, John only refers to the loss of fellowship with God in the verse above, not relationship. What's the difference? Consider the parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32). All the while the son was in a far country wasting his inheritance in profligate living he was still his father's son, described as such all throughout the parable. The biological/familial relationship between father and son could not be dissolved by distance or bad behavior. But so long as he stayed in the far country, eating pig's food, the son could not enjoy with his father any fellowship, any direct, personal, positive interaction. Only when the son returned home did his father embrace and kiss him, giving him new robes and ring, and throwing a homecoming party (i.e. fellowship).

So, then, fellowship is not synonymous with relationship. This is borne out also in many relationships I have with other people that are devoid of fellowship with them. I have a relationship with my dentist but we are by no means enjoying fellowship with one another. The same goes for my doctor, and the chef at my favorite restaurant, and the cashier at the grocery store at which I regularly shop, and so on. Anyway, fellowship with God, not one's relationship to Him, is what the apostle John says is sacrificed when he, or any other child of God, "walks in darkness." This means, though, that a genuine child of God can (and does, as the record of Scripture plainly illustrates) sin.

7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.

What does John write only a couple of verses later about being cleansed of sin by the blood of Jesus? Under what condition does this cleansing happen? It occurs, he wrote, when one has sinned and confessed that sin to God (vs. 9). In the verse above, then, John is saying that "walking in the light as God is in the light" entails sin and its confession and cleansing! As born-again believers are careful to confess their sin when it occurs and are thus cleansed of it, John explained, they enjoy fellowship with one another and walk in the light, enjoying fellowship with God, also.

8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

Seeming to anticipate that some might misconstrue his words and suggest from them that the Christian person is sinlessly-perfect, John flatly stated here that those who make such an assertion are both deceived and empty of truth. It is crystal clear that by "we" and "us" John meant born-again people since his pronouns included himself, a born-again apostle of Jesus Christ and prominent leader of the Early Church. And John didn't write "had no sin" in verse 8 but used the present-tense verb "have no sin" and "decieve" rather than "deceived," implying that he could not say in the moment in which he was writing the verse that he had so sin (and neither could anyone else).

9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10 If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

John continues to indicate in these verses that sin is a present and ongoing state of affairs ("confess" rather than "have confessed," "forgive" rather than "has forgiven," etc.) for himself and thus, other believers, so that confession of, and cleansing from, sin is a necessary part of "walking in the light."

Thus, I can say, "if we drive sober we are fine with the law, but if we drive under the influence of alcohol we can be arrested". Obviously, it is not speaking about a single person who can do both: some of us, fortunately, NEVER drive under the influence. Those who are born again NEVER walk in darkness ( 1 John 3:6-9).

??? But there are individuals who drive sober at various times and drive drunk at others. This is common knowledge, in fact. And because there are so many who do, in a wide set of regions across the world, drunk driving is illegal.

The apostle John is not speaking, though, in an indiscriminate way to every human being. He is addressing, in 1 John 1:6-10, particularly those who are like himself: born again children of God. To them, John wrote that they can have fellowship with God and with each other as they "walk in the light" which they do, in part, by confessing their sin as it crops up in their lives. This is the obvious and natural sense of John's words, as I've explained above. And this straightforward reading of his words comports, as I've pointed out before, exactly with the many places in the NT where saved people are described as having sinned: 1 Corinthians 3, 5, 6, 11, Galatians 2:11-14; 3:3, Revelation 2-3, Romans 6:1-3, Ephesians 5:1-13, etc.

 

[live2blieve]

What a depressing Jesus this is you know.
Practicing slow feed, refusal to give life while in the presence of imprisoned suffering people.
That is not the Jesus I know .
In comparison Jesus told the prisoners that day that if they would come to Him they were free and the Burden of sin was gone effective immediately.
The day, NOT TOMORROW , NOT NEXT WEEK, NOT NEXT YEAR, that day the Jesus I know spoke the Words
to the people that if they would come to Him they would have "Rest unto your souls" they had it .
This new" rest unto their souls."

Mat 11:28
Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.

Did Peter come to Yahshua? Yes. Did he receive rest for his soul? Temporarily, while he was with the Savior, but when he was separated from him, after being with him for 3.5 years, he denied him three times. The rest Yahshua is talking about is eternal. The Spirit of the Savior had to be WITHIN them to give them eternal life and rest, as he told them:

And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.

Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also. (John 14:16-19).

Note, the disciples did not have life in them yet. They were still in their sins as the blood of the Savior was not shed yet, as he told them:

This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. (Matthew 26:28).

 

[Consecrated Life]

Did Peter come to Yahshua? Yes. Did he receive rest for his soul? Temporarily,......

What depressing cruel Jesus this is you imagine , who would give "temporary" rest unto the soul just to be able to snatch it away .
Mat 11:28
Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.

 

[live2blieve]

I don't think you're understanding my point about John lumping himself in with his readers. John is very clear that he is speaking to born-again believers, not only by the repeated use of the "we" pronoun, but also by the following:

1 John 1:1-4
1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life—

Who is the "we" here? The still-lost, spiritually-unregenerate person? Obviously not. "We" in light of what John says in this verse refers to those who had interacted directly with Jesus (the Word of life), hearing, seeing and even touching him.

2 the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us—

Here, John hearkens to the beginning of his Gospel (John 1:1-4), speaking of Christ as "the Life" who was with God at the moment of Creation, made manifest to John and many others. But who is the "you" to whom John refers in this verse? Is it reasonable to think that John was writing to lost people? Or is John addressing the Early Church? Well, there were unsaved people around the Early Church, perhaps even within it, the "false brethren" Paul spoke of, or the "tares" of whom Jesus spoke (2 Corinthians 11:26; Galatians 2:4; Matthew 13:38). It may well be that John has them in view here since he clearly distinguishes the "we" and "us" of those who've interacted with Jesus from the "you" who are those to whom John is relating his first-hand experience of Jesus.

3 that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.

Here, too, John reinforces that he is speaking to a group of people - "you" - that is distinct from the group who have "fellowship with the Father and Jesus Christ" - "we" and "us."

1 John 1:5-7
5 This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

This is the last time John uses "you" in the chapter. From this point on, there are only the pronouns "we" and "us," which marks very plainly that what John writes from this point on applies to himself in the same way it does to his readers. Beyond this verse, John no longer has two different groups - "us" and "you" - in view.

6 If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.

What John doesn't say here is that, if he is walking in darkness, he has lost his salvation, or that his walking in darkness demonstrates he was never saved. No, John only refers to the loss of fellowship with God in the verse above, not relationship. What's the difference? Consider the parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32). All the while the son was in a far country wasting his inheritance in profligate living he was still his father's son, described as such all throughout the parable. The biological/familial relationship between father and son could not be dissolved by distance or bad behavior. But so long as he stayed in the far country, eating pig's food, the son could not enjoy with his father any fellowship, any direct, personal, positive interaction. Only when the son returned home did his father embrace and kiss him, giving him new robes and ring, and throwing a homecoming party (i.e. fellowship).

So, then, fellowship is not synonymous with relationship. This is borne out also in many relationships I have with other people that are devoid of fellowship with them. I have a relationship with my dentist but we are by no means enjoying fellowship with one another. The same goes for my doctor, and the chef at my favorite restaurant, and the cashier at the grocery store at which I regularly shop, and so on. Anyway, fellowship with God, not one's relationship to Him, is what the apostle John says is sacrificed when he, or any other child of God, "walks in darkness." This means, though, that a genuine child of God can (and does, as the record of Scripture plainly illustrates) sin.

7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.

What does John write only a couple of verses later about being cleansed of sin by the blood of Jesus? Under what condition does this cleansing happen? It occurs, he wrote, when one has sinned and confessed that sin to God (vs. 9). In the verse above, then, John is saying that "walking in the light as God is in the light" entails sin and its confession and cleansing! As born-again believers are careful to confess their sin when it occurs and are thus cleansed of it, John explained, they enjoy fellowship with one another and walk in the light, enjoying fellowship with God, also.

8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

Seeming to anticipate that some might misconstrue his words and suggest from them that the Christian person is sinlessly-perfect, John flatly stated here that those who make such an assertion are both deceived and empty of truth. It is crystal clear that by "we" and "us" John meant born-again people since his pronouns included himself, a born-again apostle of Jesus Christ and prominent leader of the Early Church. And John didn't write "had no sin" in verse 8 but used the present-tense verb "have no sin" and "decieve" rather than "deceived," implying that he could not say in the moment in which he was writing the verse that he had so sin (and neither could anyone else).

9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10 If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

John continues to indicate in these verses that sin is a present and ongoing state of affairs ("confess" rather than "have confessed," "forgive" rather than "has forgiven," etc.) for himself and thus, other believers, so that confession of, and cleansing from, sin is a necessary part of "walking in the light."



??? But there are individuals who drive sober at various times and drive drunk at others. This is common knowledge, in fact. And because there are so many who do, in a wide set of regions across the world, drunk driving is illegal.

The apostle John is not speaking, though, in an indiscriminate way to every human being. He is addressing, in 1 John 1:6-10, particularly those who are like himself: born again children of God. To them, John wrote that they can have fellowship with God and with each other as they "walk in the light" which they do, in part, by confessing their sin as it crops up in their lives. This is the obvious and natural sense of John's words, as I've explained above. And this straightforward reading of his words comports, as I've pointed out before, exactly with the many places in the NT where saved people are described as having sinned: 1 Corinthians 3, 5, 6, 11, Galatians 2:11-14; 3:3, Revelation 2-3, Romans 6:1-3, Ephesians 5:1-13, etc.

I understand your point. Please understand mine as well. Your interpretation of "we" is possible but it is not the only one. Again, it is better to give an example. I am writing a letter on behalf of the police officers to young people. "We write to you so that you drive wisely. If we drive sober we are fine with the law. If we drive under the influence, we can cause accidents and death". "We" in the first sentence refer to the police officers. "We' in two last sentences refers to people in general. As a rule, police officers don't drink and drive.

Please consider 1 John 3:6: ...whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. If "we" in 1 John 1 are ALWAYS those who are born again, who "have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled", and also who sin (1John 1:8), than it is in direct contradiction to 1 John 3:6,9.

Please meditate on this with an open mind.