What does this mean? 1.John 4:2

no time to explainright now but "in the flesh" means Jesus came with our human nature and with that overcame all sin that He might give us His perfect obedience and render us capable of overcoming sin ourselves though we have sinful flesh as well.

Rom:1:3: Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh

Rom:8:3: For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh


read and understand what in the flesh means....

Romans 8:
1: There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
2: For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
3: For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
4: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
5: For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
6: For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
7: Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8: So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
9: But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.


opposite of Roman Catholicism but most Protestants dont realize this. Catholic teaching on the nature of Christ and the Virgin Mary is "different" they think Jesus was able to overcome but that we cannot... thats why all the sacraments, really... you are touched by a sacrament and suddenly become "holy" because of it, rather than actually having a transformed life, ridding of sin.

The "man of sin" son of perdition... man of lawlessness (not keeping the Law of God)

2 Thess. 2:
3: Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4: Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

[carrying on in the tradition of Lucifer when he wanted to be in God's place]

It doesnt just mean what people try to claim it means, namely to just believe that Jesus came here in human form, the devils already believe that, remember? and tremble

the difference between the devil and you is supposed to be that you are no longer at enmity against God, His enemy, but now that you obey His Law

this is the spirit of Anti-Christ... the man of sin... substituting himself in the place of Christ, thats what Anti-Christ means. deceptively pretending to be the real Christ. too bad so many Christians fall for it with their "only believe" doctrine, same as that of the Nicolaitanes... but Jesus hated their DEEDS and He called them LIARS [Revelation 2:2]. The Nicolaitanes were disciples of Nicolas, the Gnostics. Gnosticism came into the early Church that is why John always fought against it saying:


1Jn:2:4: He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

the LIAR once again, he who claims to love God but doesnt keep His Law:

1Jn:4:20: If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

Gnosticism teaches that our deeds or behavior doesnt matter, gee where have I heard that before? in Christian pulpits.

These "Christians" do not realize they are following in the footsteps of the Gnostics and the Spiritualism/New Age Movement

1Timothy 4:1: 'Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils' Spiritualist teachers set aside the Law of God. They teach that the sinful, erring nature of man is the only standard of character, and that 'They affect great pity for minds so narrow, weak, and superstitious as to acknowledge the claims of God and obey the requirements of His law.' -Great Controversy pg. 560 And now, let's see what top New Age Personality, David Spangler has to say about the Law of God:

'The evolution of the race is for man to learn not how to obey the law but how to be the law. There is a vast, vast difference. If you are the law it means that you are at one with the whole. For divine law simply exists. When a person understands this, then he begins to have that attunement, when he is the law, he is not going to act in any way that will disturb or distort the true balance of the true wholeness... The New Age is an age where there is needed that group of people who through attunement can be self-governing, act as the law, as the divine, as the right, as the love.'-David Spangler, 'Relationship and Identity', pg. 89,91,93​

As you can see, New Agers see 'keeping-the Law' as doing everything that they can to 'keep in tune with the Great Universal All', and not in keeping God's Ten Commandment Law. They also believe that they themselves are 'The Law'. David Spangler, New Ager, makes it even clearer in this next statement about how he really feels about God's Law:

'We can take all the Scriptures and all the teachings, and all the tablets and all the Laws, and all the marshmallows and have a jolly good bonfire and marshmallow roast, because that's all they are worth. Once you are the law, once you are the truth, you do not need it externally represented for you.' -David Spangler, 'Emergence: Rebirth of the Sacred', Findhorn Publications, pg. 144


Yet again, gee, where have I heard THAT before? taught from Christian pulpits, thats where.

Isaiah 30:
[FALSE PROPHETS, same as they always were]

8: Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever:
9: That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the LORD:
10: Which say to the seers, See not; and to the prophets, Prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits:
11: Get you out of the way, turn aside out of the path, cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before us.


Deuteronomy 13:1-8
1: If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,
2: And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;
3: Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
4:Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him.
5: And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.
8: Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him


Isa:8:20: To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.


Claudia





​

 

1 John 4 - is not meant to wipe out all other tests of a prophet - including the one in Isaiah 8 that states that their teaching must be in harmony with all of scripture.

It is simply another test - to the ones explicitly listed in scripture prior to the writing of 1John 4.

This is another case where the false teaching that "in scripture whatever is not repeated is assumed deleted" is shown to be pure error.

 

Two quick things, specifically.

Apparently John's epistles were written, to 'expose' the false teaching(s) of Gnosticism, among other aims. In short, in Gnosticism, salvation is based on a superior knowledge, in this 'system'. One of its tenets is that the 'physical' was sub-servient, and lesser to the 'spiritual'. Hence, the 'emmanation' of God gave the 'appearance' of being 'real' in the person of Jesus Christ. As an 'asthetic' idea, however, this could not have been entirely true, since God could not be 'limited' to any physical body, hence this claim was not accurate.

John is saying just the reverse. Jesus did and has, in fact, come in the flesh! He is and was fully God and fully flesh. He is the God-man. It was not just an 'appearance'; it is a real event. Granted, this is many times greatly oversimplified, but we definitely do not have the time to do any in-depth study of Gnosticism, or any of the myriad of other 'isms', 'asms' and 'spasms' that appeared in the early days of the church. The verse is not saying that an individual 'spirit', i.e. man, is the center focus here, IMO, but rather the 'spiritual' agent behind this idea or ideas. Hope that helps a bit.

As to "Benny Hinn and all the others", for whatever that overly broad characterization is worth, "false doctrine" in one area does not necessarily equal "false doctrine" in all areas. And were one to take the "false prophet" bit to its logical end, anyone could be considered a 'false prophet' by someone in some areas, I guess. I am personally a bit leery of tossing around this 'manhole cover' like it was a piece of wadded up paper. Seems a bit strong, at times, to me anyway.

Finally how does one spot a false prophet? "By their fruits you shall know them!" At least that is how Jesus put it. And BTW, that is the only context in which that verse is ever spoken. (Matt. 7:15-20) Contrary to what is often said, even by well-meaning individuals, not one thing is ever said that this is how we are to 'evaluate' whether or not one is a "true" believer, and in fact one cannot find the words "truly believe" anywhere in Scripture.

Ed

 

As to this last sentence: (And you had been doing so well, too, before this, and I agree with the preceeding.) But as to the last sentence, "Let's see - where did I leave my pigeonhole, this morning??"

Ed

 

I think Ed pretty well hit it on the head. This particular verse must be interpreted in context. The context in which John was writing was to counter gnosticism. Gnostics would not be able acknowledge a Christ who was fully human and at the same time fully divine.

Don't get caught up in the idea that a spoken testimony, a simple answering of the question "Yes," is evidence that someone would actually pass a spiritual test of it. I do believe that salvation is present in people who come to Christ and don't have their doctrinal house in order. Right doctrine doesn't save you. If it did, no one would get into heaven. But John, in this passage, is distinguishing the very identity of Christ, which is key to salvation.

 

xdisciplex,

Heavens to Mergatroid [as Snagglepuss used to say], -some of the questions you come up with! :laugh:


...only teasing you

Claudia

 

back to the context.

If a prophet claims to have a message from God stating that Christ did not come in the flesh - literally and miraculously - they are speaking via an evil spirit or an evil imagination.

That remains true - even if someone choose to believe in the real Christ not knowing some details about the incarnation.

you are switching the context to a new believer believing something - when the context is a prophet claiming an Angel or God told them something.

 

the point is that there are many tests of a prophet given in scripture -- not just 1john 4:2. We can not simply "delete all the others" and take 1john 4:2 as a replacement for all the rest under the guise "Whatever is not repeated gets deleted".

It does not work in 1John 4 -- it does not work in all of scripture.

This is just a good example of that point.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Prophecy has ceased. It isn't needed anyway since we have the finished Word of
God in every household. Those that claim to be prophets are simply wrong. There is nothing left to prophesy. Even the coming ages are fortold.

 

hillclimber, you need to look up the definition of the word "prophet."

Prophecy is not just the foretelling of the future, it is the proclamation of the Word of God.

Thus you would appear to be saying that preachers, evangelists, witnesses and even church itself is unneccesary...

 

Numbers 12 God provides the definition of a prophet saying "IF there is a prophet among I WILL speak to them by way of dream or a vision".

Modern usages have watered this down to "you will have the good inclination to forth-tell some doctrinal point now and then"

 

The gift of prophecy as it was in the old days was stopped. They were specifically chosen by God to proclaim God's word. Today we have the finished Word of God. By your broad definition, we all are prophets. He speaks to us through His Word the Bible today.

All those other functions are perfectly normal functions of a Body Church. All the sign gifts ceased 2000 years ago.

 

An over active imagination at best. Demonic influence at worse. We are not sign people, Israel was. Ask yourself why would God give visions today if we have the completed word? Today we walk by faith, and not by sight. Amen

 

And your evidence for this would be?

 

Please forgive the off topic question, but your statement confuses me. What about Acts 2:17 where we're told daughters will prophesy?

 

Peter was quoting Joel 2:28 and saying that it had come true that day (Pentacost). That doesn't mean tho that it's still true today.

 

GE:
Haven't you read HC's posts? The (completed) Word is evidence.