You should never embed your conclusion in your argument.
I don't believe that I have begged the question. But, if you think that I have—and I am not perfect so that's always possible—then point out where, please, and include a direct quote (with a link) which contains the fallacy. Christians should not accuse one another without evidence, preferably adduced by other witnesses (to ensure the error was not yours) but at least with evidence.
It might also help you to post much clearer if you didn’t consider everyone else at fault but you yourself perfect in your explanations.
That accusation is neither accurate nor fair, and rather unbecoming of a Christian brother. (Of course, I am assuming that you're a Christian, which I think is a safe assumption.)
First of all, I wasn't talking to everyone, nor even multiple people. (And, if we can be honest, your comment was deeply ironic, given that you think "the whole world" means literally every single person and yet, somehow, you can say "everyone" without meaning literally everyone.) I was talking to you, and there is nothing inappropriate or arrogant about identifying your errors, just as you endeavor to point out mine. My doing so provides you an opportunity to say something like, "Fair point. However, what I meant was ..." But whether you take that opportunity or not is another matter.
Secondly, this has nothing to do with perfection. You made an error and I highlighted it. I had said, twice, that it was an example and yet, despite this, you called it a "key" text or passage. Sorry but, no, it was not. I don't think my explanations are perfect but I do expect you to pay careful attention to the words I choose, and not swap them out for words that make for an easier and more convenient reply.
Nevertheless, I am happy to point out for the readers what you did and reassert what I actually said.
There is nothing in [1 John 1:5-10] that supports your definitions of light and [darkness].
Nothing at all? Come on, now. Please try to be a little reasonable.
What does this text say? It says that "God is light, and there is no darkness in him at all" (v. 5). It also says that "God is in the light" (v. 7). Now, let's compare that to what I said, that the light is defined by God who lives in the light and indeed is the light, and that by virtue of defining the light the darkness is defined privatively as the absence of God. Is this not precisely what the text says? (Yes. As a matter of fact, what I said would have been plagiarism if I hadn't cited this passage.)
Now, I also said that righteousness, like light, is defined by God, and that sin, like darkness, is defined privatively in relation to God. Obviously, those two points are not expressed in this particular text here, but then I never claimed they were. Nevertheless, those two points are entirely biblical. We find it expressed in other scriptures, granted, so I would be astounded if any Christian denied it, but the case is easy enough to make.
Yes, it does, [and] at that point each soul has a decision to make.
I am glad we can agree that the holiness of God lays bare our sin, first by the Word of God but ultimately on that final day. I am also grateful for your willingness to concede that point.
That was never the question. The question was, "Is darkness sin?" [It was] not, "Is loving darkness sin?"
Nobody said that darkness is sin, so that was actually never the question.
You said, for example, "They
loved darkness more than light." And I replied to you by asking, "Is that a sin? (Hint: Yes.)"
And Arial said, for example, "It is sin to
love darkness more than light." And you replied, erroneously, "The Bible does not say that" (but it most certainly does).
Please pay careful attention to what myself and others take the time to write out. Again, my question was, "If their wicked deeds, evil thoughts, shameful lusts,
love of darkness, and unbelief are all sin"—and they are—"and if Christ fully paid the penalty for all their sin, [his] atoning sacrifice [removing] their sin guilt and [satisfying] God's just wrath (1 John 2:2)"—which you believe—"then what are they doing in hell?"
"Because they rejected the gift of God, which was eternal life," you said (
here).
What is eternal life? "This is eternal life," Jesus said, "that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you sent" (John 17:3; cf. 1 John 1:1-2; 5:11-12, 20). In other words, rejecting Christ is rejecting eternal life. And rejecting Christ is a sin, for it is a commandment of God "that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ" (1 John 3:23), which corresponds with what we read in John 3:18, "The one who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God." Again, "The one who rejects the Son will not see life, but God's wrath remains on him" (v. 36).
Read that again, very carefully: "God's wrath remains on him." Was Christ the atoning sacrifice for their sins, removing their guilt and satisfying God's just wrath (1 John 2:2)? Clearly not, for his wrath remains on those who reject the Son. No matter which avenue you pursue, you keep colliding with the fact that "the whole world" cannot mean every single person, because the scriptures keep undermining that interpretation. And, just to put a finer point on it, these avenues keep demonstrating the biblical consistency of the view that you oppose. Of course God's wrath remains on those who reject the Son, for Christ laid down his life for the sheep and they are not his sheep.
DialecticSkeptic said:
(1) Define sin, and then (2) define light.
Sin is choosing other than God.
You neglected to cite the scripture texts which state that. Please cite them.
P.S. You answered the first request but not the second. I also asked you to define light, which you neglected to answer. (If you decide to answer, please cite the relevant scripture texts for that, too.)
Note to the readers: I am assuming that my interlocutor intends to provide biblical answers, but that assumption could be wrong.
I do believe it. I just accept the obvious and the biblical that "whole world" does not mean every individual in the world. In fact it hardly ever does inside or outside the Bible. So who is squeezing things into their held presumptions?
