Hi, ephesians,
I’ll begin with the following statement:
[i:9122a513f2]Which brings me to the argument of the importance of 1 John 1:9 to the basic spiritual life. Indeed, Thieme’s exegesis goes a long way toward [b:9122a513f2]development of doctrines that are difficult to derive from simple English readings[/b:9122a513f2]... [/i:9122a513f2]
So you admit that Thieme’s doctrines are dependent on his Greek Game. And a common Christian reading his English Bible cannot find all the doctrines of the Bible. He needs Thieme to re-word what the Bible says, with his own personal “corrected translations.”
[i:9122a513f2]...but 1 John 1:9 must be as simple as a salvation verse to understand, given its dire importance. It was even your own thought that people, away from the aid of lexicons or pastors, must be able to understand the Bible in their own language. Be honest, if [b:9122a513f2]immediately after you were saved[/b:9122a513f2], I had given you 1 John 1:9, and you had to tell me what it meant to you in plain English, [b:9122a513f2]what would you have said[/b:9122a513f2].[/i:9122a513f2]
Well, ephesians, I most likely would have seen “forgiveness of sins” and “cleansing from all unrighteousness” and immediately thought of salvation. Maybe I would’ve understood exactly what John meant by confessing sins, and maybe I wouldn’t have, but in any case a simple comparison of scriptures would clarify it for me. I can’t imagine that I would have jumped to a conclusion that contradicts all the other scriptures I would’ve read that irrefutably declare the forgiveness of all sins and cleansing from all unrighteousness [i:9122a513f2]at salvation[/i:9122a513f2]. I can say for sure that I would not have gone jumping around to all kinds of random verses like Eph 5:18 and attach them to 1 John 1:9. You are of course asking me a hypothetical question, and it is impossible for me (or you) to say for certain how well I would’ve understood this verse. At any rate, I never read the Bible for myself until after I left Thieme’s teaching (because, after all, only Greek scholars can understand the Bible), so we’ll never know for sure, will we?
Let me ask you this: Suppose a 16th-century French Huguenot is reading his Olivetan Bible. He starts at Matthew and reads all the way through 2 Peter. He hasn’t read your favorite verse, 1 John 1:9, yet. Can you show me one scripture that he would’ve read that could be construed in any way, [i:9122a513f2]on its own[/i:9122a513f2], to teach “rebound”? You promised us a study on “rebound” in the New Testament supported by other scriptures than 1 John 1:9, and now you’re suddenly bailing out of the debate. What happened?
[i:9122a513f2]What do [b:9122a513f2]95% of the Christians of the world [/b:9122a513f2]believe it means?[/i:9122a513f2]
“95% of the Christians of the world”? Really? How do you know this? Did you take a worldwide survey of Christians? Did you do an in-depth study of church history? That’s an awfully bold claim to make without presenting any evidence for it. Sure, there are many teachers who believe that 1 John 1:9 is an ongoing part of the Christian life, but there are plenty more who don’t. The first ones who come to mind are Cornelius Stam, Miles Stanford, and Bob George. We could get into a contest here, listing the theologians who agree with our respective viewpoints, but what would that prove? You claim the majority interpret 1 John 1:9 as an ongoing practice, and that may even be true, but what would that prove? Also, there may be many churches that interpret 1 John 1:9 as part of the spiritual life, but the ones who teach it as something that must be done minute-by-minute every time we sin (and who attach such extreme consequences to it), as Thieme does, are a tiny minority. Allow me to quote your friend from [
www.geocities.com]:
[i:9122a513f2]There are scads of websites talking about 1 John. But hey: [b:9122a513f2]just try to find even five pastors on the internet, who know that connection to Filling: who recognize that 1Jn1:9 is a courtroom claim which gets you the unfelt ‘Brains’ of the Holy Spirit.[/b:9122a513f2][/i:9122a513f2] [emphasis his]
You wrote:
[i:9122a513f2]This is what I mean by black and white subjectivity. Exactly what is a “change of heart”? [b:9122a513f2]I can have an emotional “change of heart” right now about something, and then turn right around and fall right back into old patterns tomorrow.[/b:9122a513f2] How many people do you think have these “changes of heart” but its just the same old sixes and sevens the minute their mind wanders elsewhere? Human will and power is just too weak to propagate any kind of long-term change of life based on a one-time decision to get emotional about doing better.[/i:9122a513f2]
The “emotional” change of heart that you’re making an issue out of here is really not a change of heart at all. An abusive husband can have a temporary emotional change, feel some remorse for what he’s done, and even show affection to his wife. But if he goes back to beating her a few days later, he never had any change of heart (i.e., repentance) in the first place. It just happened to feel good to be nice for a few days. (I’ve known men like this—if they can even be called men—and it’s sickening to watch.) If he “turns right around and falls right back into old patterns tomorrow,” then obviously his heart never changed to begin with. This kind of man never had any conviction upon his heart of the sinfulness of his actions, and therefore no change of heart and no repentance, even if his emotional state temporarily changed. (It would be absurd, by the way, to say that his discipline would be removed if he just “named” the sin to God, but refused to repent and continued in his wicked behavior.) A true change of heart is the result of a conviction upon the person’s heart that what they’re doing is sinful and must be repented from. Sure, there are those who have an emotion with no inner change of heart, but the Lord knows the heart, and He will continue or withdraw His discipline accordingly.
On the other hand, I’ve also known men who were neck-deep in drinking and violence, but came under conviction from the Lord (whether through divine discipline and reaping what they sowed, or the Word of God, or both), and had a true change of heart, repented, and never returned to their carnal, destructive lifestyle. This is what a change of heart truly is. This is true repentance. And it’s also a very simple principle that is so easy to understand...until you get involved in a convoluted technical system like Thieme’s.
To answer your question, a “change of heart” is simply repentance. Repentance, as you should already know, is simply defined as a [i:9122a513f2]change of heart[/i:9122a513f2]. And repentance is commanded in the Bible repeatedly. Yet you essentially relegate it to a non-issue because it’s too “vague” or “subjective” or “emotional.” (Apparently the inspired Word of God is too vague and subjective to be followed and obeyed.) We see repentance all over the Bible. And over and over again, we see that the removal of discipline is the result of [i:9122a513f2]repentance [/i:9122a513f2](a change of heart), not “rebound.” The following scriptures are just the tip of the iceberg:
[b:9122a513f2][u:9122a513f2]Revelation 2[/u:9122a513f2] [/b:9122a513f2]
[b:9122a513f2]4[/b:9122a513f2] Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.
[b:9122a513f2]5[/b:9122a513f2] Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and [b:9122a513f2]repent[/b:9122a513f2], and [b:9122a513f2]do the first works[/b:9122a513f2]; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou [b:9122a513f2]repent[/b:9122a513f2].
The Lord does not tell the church of Ephesus that they need a “quick naming of sins” to avoid His discipline. They must [i:9122a513f2]repent [/i:9122a513f2]and return to the works they had at first.
[b:9122a513f2]14 [/b:9122a513f2]But I have [b:9122a513f2]a few things against thee[/b:9122a513f2], because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication.
[b:9122a513f2]15 [/b:9122a513f2]So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, which thing I hate.
[b:9122a513f2]16 [/b:9122a513f2][b:9122a513f2]Repent[/b:9122a513f2]; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.
The people of the church of Pergamos were falling into the doctrine of Balaam, fornication, and the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes. Again, the Lord sternly warns them to [i:9122a513f2]repent[/i:9122a513f2], to cease from the things He has against them, before He chastises them.
[b:9122a513f2]20 [/b:9122a513f2]Notwithstanding I have [b:9122a513f2]a few things against thee[/b:9122a513f2], because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.
[b:9122a513f2]21 [/b:9122a513f2]And I gave her space to [b:9122a513f2]repent [/b:9122a513f2]of her fornication; and she [b:9122a513f2]repented [/b:9122a513f2]not.
[b:9122a513f2]22 [/b:9122a513f2]Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they [b:9122a513f2]repent [/b:9122a513f2]of their deeds.
The false prophetess Jezebel was leading the people of the church of Thyatira into fornication and idolatry. The Lord gave her time to [i:9122a513f2]repent[/i:9122a513f2], not to “rebound.” How silly it would be to think that she could have avoided His discipline if she just quickly “named and cited” her sin!
[b:9122a513f2][u:9122a513f2]Revelation 3[/u:9122a513f2][/b:9122a513f2]
[b:9122a513f2]1b [/b:9122a513f2]I know [b:9122a513f2]thy works[/b:9122a513f2], that thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead.
[b:9122a513f2]2 [/b:9122a513f2]Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain that are ready to die: for [b:9122a513f2]I have not found thy works perfect before God[/b:9122a513f2].
[b:9122a513f2]3 [/b:9122a513f2]Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and [b:9122a513f2]repent[/b:9122a513f2]. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.
The people of the church of Sardis are commanded to [i:9122a513f2]repent [/i:9122a513f2]and return to the works they once had. No “quick naming of sins” and no “restoration to fellowship” mentioned here.
[b:9122a513f2]15 [/b:9122a513f2]I know [b:9122a513f2]thy works[/b:9122a513f2], that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
[b:9122a513f2]16 [/b:9122a513f2]So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of my mouth. ...
[b:9122a513f2]19 [/b:9122a513f2]As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be [b:9122a513f2]zealous [/b:9122a513f2]therefore, and [b:9122a513f2]repent[/b:9122a513f2].
The notorious lukewarm church of Laodicea is commanded to be “[i:9122a513f2]zealous[/i:9122a513f2]” and “[i:9122a513f2]repent[/i:9122a513f2].” They are told to return to the zeal and the works they once had for the Lord. A “quick naming of sins” with no change of heart will not prevent the Lord from spewing them out of His mouth.
[b:9122a513f2][u:9122a513f2]1 Corinthians 3[/b:9122a513f2] (the true description of spirituality and carnality)[/u:9122a513f2]
[b:9122a513f2]1 [/b:9122a513f2]And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
[b:9122a513f2]2 [/b:9122a513f2]I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.
[b:9122a513f2]3 [/b:9122a513f2]For [b:9122a513f2][u:9122a513f2]ye are yet carnal[/u:9122a513f2]: for whereas [u:9122a513f2]there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions[/u:9122a513f2], are ye not carnal[/b:9122a513f2], and walk as men?
[b:9122a513f2]4 [/b:9122a513f2]For while [u:9122a513f2]one saith, I am of Paul[/u:9122a513f2]; and [u:9122a513f2]another, I am of Apollos[/u:9122a513f2]; [u:9122a513f2]are ye not carnal[/u:9122a513f2]?
The reason the Corinthians are carnal is that there’s envying, strife, and divisions (as well as many other sinful behaviors) among them; it’s not because they didn’t “rebound.” As long as they persist in these behaviors, they are “yet carnal.” They would remain carnal until they had a [i:9122a513f2]change of heart[/i:9122a513f2] and [i:9122a513f2]repented[/i:9122a513f2], and ceased their envy and strife. What a wonderfully simplistic principle this is, and so easy to see for any common Christian reading his English Bible. There is nothing vague or subjective about this, epehesians.
[u:9122a513f2][b:9122a513f2]Ephesians 4[/b:9122a513f2] (the true context of grieving the Spirit)[/u:9122a513f2]
[b:9122a513f2]28 [/b:9122a513f2]Let him that stole [b:9122a513f2]steal no more[/b:9122a513f2]: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth.
[b:9122a513f2]29 [/b:9122a513f2]Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.
[b:9122a513f2]30 [/b:9122a513f2]And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.
[b:9122a513f2]31 [/b:9122a513f2]Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, [b:9122a513f2]be put away from you[/b:9122a513f2], with all malice:
[b:9122a513f2]32 [/b:9122a513f2]And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you.
Does Paul say, “Let him that stole name and cite it”? Hardly. He commands those who steal to “steal nor more”—i.e., repent, and cease from stealing. You can’t get more basic common sense than this. Does Paul tell those who are bitter and angry, and speak evil, to confess all their sins to get back in fellowship with God? Does he ever even warn them once that they’ve lost their fellowship? No, he tells them that these things should be “put away” from them—i.e., repent, and cease from these sins. Is this really so hard to understand, ephesians? If anyone else reading this post thinks this is too complicated, feel free to speak up.
[u:9122a513f2][b:9122a513f2]1 Corinthians 10[/b:9122a513f2][/u:9122a513f2]
[b:9122a513f2]5 [/b:9122a513f2]But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.
[b:9122a513f2]6 [/b:9122a513f2]Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.
[b:9122a513f2]7 [/b:9122a513f2][b:9122a513f2]Neither be ye idolaters[/b:9122a513f2], as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.
[b:9122a513f2]8 [/b:9122a513f2][b:9122a513f2]Neither let us commit fornication[/b:9122a513f2], as some of them committed, and [b:9122a513f2]fell in one day three and twenty thousand[/b:9122a513f2].
[b:9122a513f2]9 [/b:9122a513f2]Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents.
[b:9122a513f2]10 [/b:9122a513f2][b:9122a513f2]Neither murmur ye[/b:9122a513f2], as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer.
[b:9122a513f2]11 [/b:9122a513f2]Now all these things happened unto them for [b:9122a513f2]examples[/b:9122a513f2]: and they are written [b:9122a513f2]for [/b:9122a513f2][b:9122a513f2]our admonition[/b:9122a513f2], upon whom the ends of the world are come.
Paul uses the example of the Old Testament Israelites to warn the Corinthians about their carnality. He warns them about destructive sins like idolatry, fornication, and complaining, and reminds them of the severe discipline that came upon their ancestors for these very sins. But does he mentions so much as a single word about naming and citing these sins to get back in fellowship? As usual, No. He does, however, admonish them to cease from idolatry, fornication, murmuring, etc. There are so many scriptures on this, that I could end up writing a book on this point alone. Throughout the entire Old Testament, the Israelites were only delivered from their discipline after they turned and [i:9122a513f2]repented [/i:9122a513f2]from their idolatry and rebellion. There is no way I can even begin to get into this here. Read through the historical books and prophets of the Old Testament, and you will see it numerous times.
This is how God has always dealt with His children throughout the Bible, as a Father who cares too much to allow His children to stray too far with chastising them to bring them back to His will. And David was no exception. And, as always, we cannot see the hearts of men, but God can. If David had merely had some superficial emotional experience with no true change of heart and repentance, then his discipline would not have been removed.
Your notion that a “quick naming of sins” removes God’s discipline, makes Him a foolish, incompetent Father. The Lord’s discipline is intended to deliver us from our own backsliding, sinful, self-destructive behavior. It is meant to bring us to [i:9122a513f2]repentance[/i:9122a513f2], so that we will not ruin our lives. If He withdrew His discipline whenever we rattled off our little list of sins to Him, His discipline would not even serve its purpose.
This is one of the most simple, basic, obvious principles in the Bible, that has been generally accepted among Christians throughout history, whether it be the Waldensians and Vaudois of ancient France and Italy; the Lollards, Hussites, and United Brethren of the 14th and 15th centuries; the “Reformed” churches, Anabaptists, and other groups during the time of the Protestant Reformation; or the period of great evangelism and freedom for God’s people in the 18th and 19th centuries. You can search high and low throughout church history for Christians who had this silly idea that you can escape God’s discipline with a “quick naming of sins,” and, to my knowledge, you will never find any. Do you still wish to make an issue over how many are on your side and how many are on mine?
If you really want to make an issue out of what the majority of Christians believe, I can tell you for sure that the vast majority of Christians do [i:9122a513f2]not [/i:9122a513f2]believe that the Lord’s discipline can be avoided by just “naming and citing” the sin, and that they [i:9122a513f2]do [/i:9122a513f2]believe that the discipline will continue without repentance and a change of heart. It is simple common sense and simply accepting the straightforward declarations of Scripture in plain English. By the way, how do you reconcile your argument here with Thieme’s repeated statements that the majority is “always wrong” and “under discipline”? The webpages from your post say the same thing [emphasis mine]:
[i:9122a513f2]Most Christians [b:9122a513f2]don’t even know about 1Jn1:9[/b:9122a513f2], so are not in God’s System. [b:9122a513f2]Their lives are wasted.[/b:9122a513f2][/i:9122a513f2]
(http://www.geocities.com/brainout1/RGBrief.htm#Point7)
[i:9122a513f2]Most Christians [b:9122a513f2]don’t even know about 1Jn1:9[/b:9122a513f2]. So [b:9122a513f2]their spiritual lives are comatose[/b:9122a513f2].[/i:9122a513f2]
(http://www.geocities.com/brainout1/TrueSpirituality.htm)
These statements are partially true. Most Christians know nothing of Thieme’s extreme view on 1 John 1:9. Even Christians who interpret 1 John 1:9 as part of the Christian life do not believe in this constant, minute-to-minute practice of confessing as many sins as we possibly can to stay “in fellowship.” They confess sins perhaps once a day, once a week, or even less frequently. Think about it, ephesians—if a Christian confesses his sins on Sunday morning and manages to stay “in fellowship” for a few hours before he sins again, what happens to him for the rest of the week? He spends almost all his time on this earth “out of fellowship,” “without the power of the Spirit,” and “outside the predesigned plan of God.” And yet you wrote, [i:9122a513f2]“That’s why millions of Christians have been able to have at least a basic and [b:9122a513f2]meaningful spiritual life [/b:9122a513f2]over the last 2,000 years. Because, they read, and believed that Christ died for their sins, and then they read, and believed, that they could confess their sins as needed to God and be forgiven.” [/i:9122a513f2]Come on, ephesians...how can you call this kind of existence a “meaningful” spiritual life? According to your doctrine, these people are only spending a tiny fraction of their lives in God’s will...and yet somehow they have a “meaningful” spiritual life? According to you, they have abandoned their spiritual life, including their prayer life, for most of their lives...and yet they’re not under discipline? Again, Thieme did teach that the [u:9122a513f2]vast majority[/u:9122a513f2] of Christians are [u:9122a513f2]“losers” under discipline[/u:9122a513f2], as do the webpages you cited. “Their lives are wasted,” and “their spiritual lives are comatose.” Are you disagreeing with your own sources?
[i:9122a513f2]You don’t have to understand or even believe that 1 John 1:9 produces fellowship or the Filling of the Spirit, as long as you perform the act. It is completely possible to have an active and meaningful spiritual life, as long as you name your sins to God, [b:9122a513f2]even if you are understanding nothing about the results of the act[/b:9122a513f2].[/i:9122a513f2]
So we can end up “accidentally” rebounding without even knowing what’s going on? Why doesn’t the Bible just simply tell us even once what the “results of the act” actually are? Why is the perfect, holy Word of God so woefully vague on this most vital of doctrines? Why couldn’t one of the apostles have told us just once that an instant filling of the Spirit and an instant restoration to fellowship are the results of confessing our sins? Why is it necessary to grab verses from all over the New Testament with no demonstrable relevance, in order to put this doctrine together? Your doctrine leans way too heavily on one verse, ephesians. Your method (and Thieme’s) is to start with 1 John 1:9 and try to somehow impose 1 John 1:9 on other scriptures, without demonstrating any relevance whatsoever.
You claim that “rebound”—the doctrine that we must confess our sins to be filled with the Spirit—is the “foundation” of the entire spiritual life, yet there isn’t one verse in the entire Bible that simply states this. How do you explain this? If our fellowship with God is really such a fragile thing, instantly broken by every single sin we commit, then why isn’t there a single scripture in the entire Bible that warns us about this, and tells us we need to do something to get it back?