Obviously someone
once wrote that but just as obvious is the fact that it is NOT a full quote from the Bible. vis
1 John 1:5 God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.
6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
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 that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
The careful reader will notice that what the Bible says in its context differs significantly from what the OP stated. (BTW are we not required as a part of the tos to state a position, and back it by Scripture?) The adding to Scripture something that is NOT included in the original piece confirms an old apologetic axiom: Any Scripture removed from its context is a pretext 100% of the time.
Since I do not know the intent of the pastor, I cannot comment on that, nor can I make a statement about his theology beyond me believing that he is some sort of Arminian. However, I can, and will comment on the fact that the entire OP is based on a logical fallacy called "begging the question". And once a logical fallacy is noted, it automatically labels the questions generated in the OP to be of no effect. Bogus, Moot are also good and accurate terms.
To generate the logical fallacy called "begging the question" it is necessary to begin with a faulty premise, and in this case, that there is a limitation on the power of the blood of Christ. It is efficacious on some sins, but not all.
That is not a part of the entire Scripture, so it is irrelevant. Nor is there any modification (adjective) or lessening the noun "all". No one is doubting the fact that we sin daily, nor is anyone doubting that we can remember them all, so it is impossible to confess them all. Therefore instead of being a help to the struggling Christian, the poster is attempting to lay a false sense of guilt and condemnation whenever that question is asked. Again, I assume that the pastor is well-intentioned.
That is why I said what I said in the previous reply. Gee, since you can't remember your sins, do you not think that the rest of us are just as forgetful as you?
Indeed, you nailed the crux of the matter! Although the approach you describe does sound to be "pious" it is actually a direct attack on the scope and reach of the Atonement of Jesus Christ, if you think about it for a bit.
Sorry, friend, but there is no verse in the entire original 66 books that says that sort of thing
for your better understanding, I cut-and-paste these:
ATONEMENT The means of reconciliation between God and people. Emerges in the Old Testament as part of the sacrificial system; reframed exclusively around the person and work of Jesus Christ in the New Testament.
<SNIP>
The New Testament authors interpreted Christ’s death as the once-and-for-all atonement event, fulfilling and surpassing all other means humans had previously relied on to atone for sin. Payments of money to the temple, incense, and all other forms of securing reconciliation with God are eclipsed by the cross. Even the sacrifices and atoning rituals of the first covenant are reinterpreted as having been effective only in light of Christ (Heb 9).
<SNIP>
Ransom. Likely the oldest metaphor for atonement in the Christian tradition, “ransom” is the term provided by Christ in the Gospels to interpret his impending death: “the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mar 10:45 ESV). In the Graeco-Roman world “ransom” (λύτρον, lytron) referred to the price paid for the release of a slave or captive. Such an image is not far from Paul’s reminder to the Corinthian believers that they had been “bought with a price” (1 Cor 6:20; 7:23 ESV). In the New Testament framing, humanity is the captive that has been ransomed from the powers of sin and death through the atoning work of Christ. The ransom motif also resonated in a Jewish context, connected with God’s ransoming of Israel from slavery (Exod 6:6, 13). In line with this, 1 Peter 1:18–19 says: “you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your fathers … with the precious blood of Christ” (ESV).
Sacrifice. “Sacrifice” is by far the most common image for atonement in the Old Testament, and it is also the most common way the New Testament speaks of Christ’s death. The author of Hebrews envisioned Christ as both sacrifice and high priest (Heb 10:11–14). Sacrifice is also Paul’s preferred language; his writings establish the substitutionary nature of Christ’s death for sinners, in line with the sacrificial system of the Old Testament (Green & Baker, Recovering, 63–67). Christ identified with people in their fallen state (Rom 8:3) and was made sin (2 Cor 5:21), sharing in our death so that we might share in his resurrection (Phil 3:10–11). In John’s Gospel, Jesus is similarly hailed as “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29).
Reconciliation. Closely related to the image of sacrifice is that of reconciliation. In much the same way that Jesus restored sinners and outcasts to right relationship in the context of first-century Judaism, the death of Christ reconciles the world with God (Eph 2:16; Col 1:20). God is the initiator of the reconciliatory work of Christ, restoring right relationship between a rebellious people and Himself and setting a precedent for the church’s ongoing ministry of reconciliation (2 Cor 5:18–19).
Brockway, D. (2012, 2013, 2014). Atonement. In J. D. Barry, L. Wentz, D. Mangum, C. Sinclair-Wolcott, R. Klippenstein, D. Bomar, … D. R. Brown (Eds.), The Lexham Bible Dictionary. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
What I would like for you to do is to cut-and-paste the paragraphs above, and look at the Scripture references that are listed. Ask yourself if these represent what the Bible in its context says? Or on the other hand, as you are looking the Scriptures up, ask Holy Spirit to confirm or not conform to what your pastor said. If it is the case that you think your pastor may not correct, then present what I posted and your observations to an Elder in your church. Then let it rest. That is now out of your hands, and you are not attacking the pastor.
Then based upon the way that God may lead you, you deal with Him. Do not discuss your findings with anyone else in the church, excepting the elders and/or the Pastor should they ask you.
Hope this helps ya!
