Zone1 Bible verses that seem to contradict other Bible verses: 1 John 1:8 and 1 John 3:9

[SweetSue92]

Are 1 John 1:8 and 1 John 3:9 contradictory?​

In 1 John 1:8, John says

And in chapter 3, verse 9, he says

The ESV and NIV both use terms like "continues sinning" and "Goes on sinning" in 1 John 3. And to be frank this is what non-Christians often harp on, and they are correct. Being born again is not a license to continue sinning freely, willfully, and just asking for forgiveness if you get around to it. Such behavior would be indicative of someone not really regenerated. Christians will still sin, but will not PRACTICE sinning.

 

[Clyde 154]

Clyde 154 gives no evidence for his claims, then denies all attempts by others to point out that he has the obligation to support his premise. It's called burden of proof.

Pointing this is out is neither deflection nor ad hom.

LMAO YOU CLAIM that its not deflection or ad hominem BS........by presenting more Ad Hominem BS while continuing to walk backwards away from providing any real evidences of your accusations.... DEFLECTING away from your requirement to provide evidence. Only in LEFTOID LAND.

FYI: its not "my premise", I have never claimed to have written one word in the Holy Bible, I simply present the actual content and stay within the contextual integrity of the subject matter, SIN........the book, chapter and verse were presented that dismisses your claim. There are no contradictions between 1 John 1:8 and 1 John 3:8-9

Book, Chapter and Verse were presented that proves there was no contradictions within in the book of the Bible 1 John. You claim its a contradiction because John pointed our in 1 John 1:8 that everyone has sinned as some point in their life because they walked in the darkness void of Christ's light......John states that are lying to themselves and to our Lord if anyone claims they have never sinned. John points out in 1 John 3:8-9 that its impossible for someone to sin........."IF THEY CONTINUE TO WALK IN THE LIGHT.....and WALK NOT IN DARKNESS which is controlled by the devil.

Its simple English. 1 passage (1 John 1:8) points out that everyone freely chooses to sin before they have been transferred from the darkness into the light that is Jesus Christ (John 1 declared that the Word was with God and was God, and the Word became flesh and walked among us.....the Word is Jesus Christ) John says anyone that denies they have sinned in their past is a liar.

Perhaps its the antiquated King's English that you can't understand...........The same verse you claim declares that man can't sin declares nothing remotely close to such an idea. When one literally translates the King James into the English Standard Version (Modern English) this passage becomes easy to comprehend for those not very well learned in Scripture.......the one's that have never studied the Word of God but claim to be experts because they surf the net.

Esv Translation of 1 John 3:8-9, clear unambiguous, "Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil; for the devil has been sinning from the beginning, The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. NO ONE BORN OF GOD MAKES A PRACTICE OF SINNING; FOR GOD'S SEED ABIDES IN HIM; AND HE CANNOT KEEP SINNING, (for slow horse simple english, he she can't sin, why?) BECAUSE THEY ARE BORN OF GOD." Meaning they are walking in the light as directed by the Words of Jesus Christ.

Common Sense dictates..........if you follow the doctrine provided in the Word of God, you will be guided into all righteousness and good works, The Word of God again relays the same message as found in 1 John 3-8-9, it declares such....literally, "All scripture is BREATHED OUT BY GOD AND PROFITABLE FOR TEACHING, FOR REPROOF, FOR CORRECTION AND FOR TRAINING IN RIGHTEOUSNESS, that the MAN OF GOD MAY BE COMPLETE FURNISHED FOR EVERY GOOD WORK -- 2 Tim. 2 Tim. 3:16-17 ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO SIN IF YOU FOLLOW THE WORD OF GOD.

 

[1miseryindex]

The ESV and NIV both use terms like "continues sinning" and "Goes on sinning" in 1 John 3. And to be frank this is what non-Christians often harp on, and they are correct. Being born again is not a license to continue sinning freely, willfully, and just asking for forgiveness if you get around to it. Such behavior would be indicative of someone not really regenerated. Christians will still sin, but will not PRACTICE sinning.

There is a distinction btwn mortal and venial sin

Swearing when you hit your thumb with a hammer is NOT a mortal sin (no matter what you say, even if it's the Lord's name)

having sex with your neighbor's married spouse is

If people can't see that, maybe it's because hatred of Catholicism has blinded them

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Clyde finally infers that his "proof" is scripture. He demands a prima facie opening that he controls. OK.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

 

[Clyde 154]

Clyde 154 gives no evidence for his claims, then denies all attempts by others to point out that he has the obligation to support his premise. It's called burden of proof.

Pointing this is out is neither deflection nor ad hom.

Again with the Ad Hominem declaring that your Ad Hominem BS is not Ad Hominem BS.

Look it up: Ad Hominem: no facts or reason. Point to one retort where you have provided anything other Ad Hominem Rhetoric. Just ONE FACT or any post based upon reason.

 

[Clyde 154]

Clyde finally infers that his "proof" is scripture. He demands a prima facie opening that he controls. OK.

Prima Facie: Sock Puppet, what makes anyone assume you actually know what Prima Facie evidence consists of........considering that you do not comprehend the concept in other Puppets you pretend to be. What? Did you go on line and attempt to swallow a dictionary?

It must be public education that is to blame for the ignorance being displayed.

Question? Based upon logic and reason in relation to your INFERS joke.


You attack the Word of God and then you declare the defendant (the Word of God) does not have the right to defend itself by using the actual content of the Word of God? You can use the content of the Word of God to (in a prima facie method) but the Word of God can't be used to prove your accusation wrong. Again with the Fascism: look it up. LMAO What prima facie evidence?

I did not present prima facie evidence.........Objective, Reproducible evidences where presented for your consideration........the Book, Chapter and Verse found in the Word of God was presented where you can read the same thing that I read, you simply can't comprehend simple English, The Word of God is not subjective nor prima facie when defending itself ......its objective and easily reproducedible by anyone that can read simple English..........its physical evidence as it reads the same for everyone, there is nothing subjective about using the Word of God to defend the Word of God by presenting the actual content found therein.

Apparently you did not even attempt to read the actual content....based upon the fact you used the Word of God to attack it......but refused to accept the actual content...declaring the objective evidence in front of you as being of a Priam Facie nature. The Book, Chapter and Verse is not evidence that can't be reproduced by anyone that wants to read it. Its objective, the Holy Bible...i.e, the Word of God has existed in a physical format for well over 3500 years in total, when the oral history is considered as a historical record. 2700 years of history in the Bible can be traced back to around 400 BC.........but that does not mean that the Bible did not exist prior to this date. Its a simple concept based upon logic, as explained before.

Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence...it simply means that no evidence has been found, it does not mean it will never be found.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Again with the Ad Hominem declaring that your Ad Hominem BS is not Ad Hominem BS.

Look it up: Ad Hominem: no facts or reason. Point to one retort where you have provided anything other Ad Hominem Rhetoric. Just ONE FACT or any post based upon reason.

Telling the truth is never ad hom. You have no facts or reason given for your allegation. Your prima facie evidence is your opinion, then. Hint, no one cares.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Prima Facie: Sock Puppet, what makes anyone assume you actually know what Prima Facie evidence consists of........considering that you do not comprehend the concept in other Puppets you pretend to be.

Question? Based upon logic and reason in relation to your INFERS joke. You attack the Word of God and then you declare the defendant (the Word of God) does not have the right to defend itself by using the actual content of the Word of God? You can use the content of the Word of God to (in a prima facie method) but the Word of God can't be used to prove your accusation wrong. again with the Fascism: look it up. LMAO

I have been reading scripture for several and several decades. Telling you that you do not defend scripture is truth telling. You don't speak for it, other than in your own opinion, and that means nothing in and of itself except for you. It is not binding as testimony on anyone.

 

[Clyde 154]

I have been reading scripture for several and several decades. Telling you that you do not defend scripture is truth telling. You don't speak for it, other than in your own opinion, and that means nothing in and of itself except for you. It is not binding as testimony on anyone.

Again with the ad hominem bull shit? Of course its evidence when you use the Word of God in an attempt to establish your argument. On your first post, you accused the Word of God of being filled with contradictions.........and you are yet to provide any truthful evidence as found in the actual Word of God that comes close to proving your argument, Thus, You continue to use nothing but ad hominem BS. Its an attempt to deflect away from your own ignorance, anyway you wish to slice that piece of horse meat.

Again.......its simple, prove the Word of God contradicts itself. The evidence found in the Word of God has already debunked your accusation that 1 John contradicts his own record. When read in context John never contradicts himself..........John is speaking of 2 different sources of Sin.......one before salvation and the other after one is transferred into the Kingdom of God.....aka, the church of Christ Jesus.

My suggestion if you are seriously considering Christianity as a faith? Read, Study the Word of God........become a man that is not ashamed by rightly dividing the Word of Truth (2 Tim. 2:15). Take no one's opinion of what is contained in the actual Word of God....do as suggested by the Apostles of Christ, "Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the Word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily TO SEE IF THESE THINGS WERE SO.........." -- Acts 17:11

These TV evangelists are nothing but con artists......making profit of those who can least afford to give to their millionaire lifestyles, "God loves you, BUT SEND YOUR MONEY TO MY ADDRESS......" You will NEVER see anyone that is affiliated with the Church that Jesus purchased with His sacrificial blood (Matthew 16)..........on TV or RADIO, or any mass communication network........begging for money. The churches first duty is to those in your own local congregation, where they can see who actually needs help with any hardship situation.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Again with the ad hominem bull shit? Of course its evidence when you use the Word of God in an attempt to establish your argument. On your first post, you accused the Word of God of being filled with contradictions.........and you are yet to provide any truthful evidence as found in the actual Word of God that comes close to proving your argument, Thus, You continue to use nothing but ad hominem BS. Its an attempt to deflect away from your own ignorance, anyway you wish to slice that piece of horse meat.

Again.......its simple, prove the Word of God contradicts itself. The evidence found in the Word of God has already debunked your accusation that 1 John contradicts his own record. When read in context John never contradicts himself..........John is speaking of 2 different sources of Sin.......one before salvation and the other after one is transferred into the Kingdom of God.....aka, the church of Christ Jesus.

My suggestion if you are seriously considering Christianity as a faith? Read, Study the Word of God........become a man that is not ashamed by rightly dividing the Word of Truth (2 Tim. 2:15). Take no one's opinion of what is contained in the actual Word of God....do as suggested by the Apostles of Christ, "Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the Word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily TO SEE IF THESE THINGS WERE SO.........." -- Acts 17:11

Disagreeing with you is ad hom in your mind?

Clyde, I think honestly you are too full of yourself and not confident in scripture working on readers.

 

[kjw47]

Are 1 John 1:8 and 1 John 3:9 contradictory?​

In 1 John 1:8, John says

And in chapter 3, verse 9, he says

I believe 1 John 3:9- is saying--One born of God doesn't willfully sin-- is the meaning behind those words. At Heb 10:26--Its willful sin that is condemned.

 

[Cougarbear]

Are 1 John 1:8 and 1 John 3:9 contradictory?​

In 1 John 1:8, John says

And in chapter 3, verse 9, he says

Born of God in this context is Baptism. As long as a person repents after baptism and stays on the straight and narrow path to God, the sins are washed away as if the person never sinned or sinless.

 

[Clyde 154]

Disagreeing with you is ad hom in your mind?

Clyde, I think honestly you are too full of yourself and not confident in scripture working on readers.

I am full of myself...........and YOURSELF is all that you present with no evidence? Everything that I present is based upon the actual content of the Word of God, the reason that I present book, chapter and verse. I profess to writing nothing in the Holy Scriptures, the scriptures do not require interpretation, in fact personal interpretation of the prophecies found in scriptures is forbidden by the doctrine contained in the Word of God. (1 Peter 1:20)

Of course when you are dealing with individuals that are so "smart"..........they make smart people look like retards, the scriptures call those people who refuse to learn from the actual content of the Holy Scriptures "FOOLS". Example: "How long, you simple ones, will you love simplicity? For scorners delight in their scorning, AND FOOLS HATE KNOWLEDGE." Prov. 1:22


Of course you have the right to disagree, but you don't have the right to claim your own facts without supporting evidence..........disagree all you want, but..........the practice of Ad Hominem rhetoric is simply making a claim without offering any supporting facts in evidence. When I present the book, chapter and verse in providing proof that "JOHN" is not contradicting himself in the least and you present NO EVIDENCE other than taking out your ass, that is AD HOMINEM: Websters: Making an appeal based upon emotion void of providing any facts or reason.

You have provided -0- evidence in support of your accusation, you are just parroting personal opinion. Its a most difficult thing to discuss the Word of God, when you don't use the Word of God in your discussion. You claim to be a Christian, but you reject the content of the Word of God as being useless? Just where do you assume the foundation for the faith of Christianity came from if not from the Word of God? Without the Bible.........you would have no type of foundation to Christianity. "Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God. In fact the Holy Bible is called the SWORD OF THE HOLY SPIRIT for a reason, the Word is used to debunk false doctrine and antichrist doctrines (Eph. 6:17)

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

I see. You don't know what "ad hom" means.

This will learn you.

The term ad hominem is a Latin phrase that means “to the person” or “appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect” 12. It is used to describe an argument or an attack that uses the opponent’s interests or character as a basis, instead of addressing the facts or claims made by the latter 3. For example, if someone argues that smoking is harmful to health, and another person responds by saying that the first person is a smoker and therefore cannot be trusted, that would be an ad hominem attack 1.

 

[Clyde 154]

I see. You don't know what "ad hom" means.

This will learn you.

The term ad hominem is a Latin phrase that means “to the person” or “appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect” 12. It is used to describe an argument or an attack that uses the opponent’s interests or character as a basis, instead of addressing the facts or claims made by the latter 3. For example, if someone argues that smoking is harmful to health, and another person responds by saying that the first person is a smoker and therefore cannot be trusted, that would be an ad hominem attack 1.

Ain't the net a wonderful thing............I love it when a fool pretends to be intelligent. This basically is the same definition the I presented. The fool would not understand that of course. Only the fool attempts to demonstrate just how smart they are. Intelligent people do no have to pat themselves on the back. Your "ID" exposes your real intelligence.

FYI: You are still presenting Ad Hominem Bullshit, you are yet to present any facts in evidence when you claim to be a Christian but declare the Word of God contradicts itself.

What? Are we supposed to defecate in one hand and hope in the other to see which hands gets filled first.......in expectation of you presenting any objective evidence to support your foolish claims?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

No, Clyde, it is not the same at all.

You attack others personally, then misdefine what 'ad hom' is so that you are not accused of gaslighting.

Yes, you are a fool.

Yes, you are a gaslighter.

 

[Clyde 154]

No, Clyde, it is not the same at all.

You attack others personally, then misdefine what 'ad hom' is so that you are not accused of gaslighting.

Yes, you are a fool.

Yes, you are a gaslighter.

Yeah........you just used an Ad Hominem rebuttal of your own Ad Hominem post. Its clear I have never presented book, chapter and verse in defense of the Holy Scriptures.........I have never provided the factual definition of Ad Hominem.......

Gaslighting? What? Are doubting your own sanity?

LMAO Clearly an ad hominem post is one that provides no objective, reproducible, facts in evidence based upon reason and logic. Its simple..........the archives of this thread are easily reproduced by a simple mouse click, read the posts along this thread see who is presenting evidence and who is talking out their ass without providing anything of substance to defend their accusations.

Your argument is the accusation that the Holy Scriptures are filled with contradictions...........yet you are yet to present one fact to prove your Ad Hominem attack. Look carefully......this is an example of providing evidence other than someone talking out their ass.

This is evidence: Read Be enlightened: Ad Hominem is a rhetorical strategy (excessive use of verbal communication...i.e, talking out your ass) where someone attacks (you attacked the Word of God as being untrue) the person making an argument rather than addressing the substance of the argument itself. You have continually attacked by talking out your ass.........while providing no Substance to your argument that the Word of God is filled with contradictions. DEFLECTION: look it up

Ad hominem - Wikipedia bahasa Indonesia, ensiklopedia bebas

id.wikipedia.org

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Yes, you attack me almost every post. You ad hom like crazy, and cry when you get your rhetorical butt kicked up your colon through your stomach into your mouth so that you can hear it getting bea.

 

[Clyde 154]

Yes, you attack me almost every post. You ad hom like crazy, and cry when you get your rhetorical butt kicked up your colon through your stomach into your mouth so that you can hear it get

Yes, you attack me almost every post. You ad hom like crazy, and cry when you get your rhetorical butt kicked up your colon through your stomach into your mouth so that you can hear it getting bea.

Indeed............I attack all liars, along with the attack I present objective, testable, reproducible evidences. There is nothing Ad Hominem in relation to attacking liars. Its perfectly appropriate to attack a liar via presenting factual evidence to debunk their AD HOMINEM RHETORIC. There is nothing wrong with attacking those who are insulting the Word of God........Jesus used a whip on the money changers in the Temple. Jesus could not tolerate liars. (John 2:15)

I Ad Hominem? Now you are posting ad hominem as a VERB. Ad Hominem is an adverb.......based upon the non-use of facts.