A Protestant's perspective on why we won't find common ground with LDS

[Hoops22]

Hey Hoops it was also partly cloudy and a high of 72 that day. Does that matter and make what Peter or Jesus said any less?

Peter? It was a quote from John and I didn't assert it, it was "Former LDS" that did. If you disagree with his theology take it up with him. I quite frankly think it rediculous to think that once you confess Jesus you are incapable of sinning.

Is that a yes or no?

[ACW]

Here it is

"1 John 3:9 uses present tense Greek, hence many translations say, "practice sin" or "continue to sin."

Precept Austin (which is Evangelical) actually uses 1 John 3:9 to explain present tense Greek:

For example note 1Jo 3:9: "No one who is born of God practices (present tense) sin (noun), because His seed abides in him and he cannot SIN (verb), because he is born of God."

Look at the verb "SIN". At first glance the verse seems to imply that one who is "born of God" can never commit a sin and yet all genuine believers know that this is not a reality (cf 1 John 1:eight) . When you understand that the verb SIN is in the present tense, it becomes clear that John is saying that one who is born of God cannot habitually commit sins as a way of life. The verb "practices" is also present tense and thus conveys the same thought. All believers commit sins but not habitually or as their lifestyle. Application: if one's lifestyle is that of continual sinning in the face of no desire for holiness, these individuals need to examine whether they are genuinely new creatures in Christ (2Cor 5:17) born from above (2Co 13:5). And so one can see that in 1Jo 3:9 (as in most of 1John 3) the accurate interpretation of this passage is certainly aided by a proper understanding of verb tense.

Depending on the context, the following adverbs may be useful to "amplify" the meaning of a verb in the present tense:

"Continuously, constantly, habitually".

Present Tense with the indicative mood represents contemporaneous action, as opposed to action in the past or future. In moods other than in the indicative mood, it refers only to continuous or repeated action. "

Courtesy of Reklaw.

Thanks. That makes more sense and goes along with the explanation given in the Doctrinal New Testament Commentary by B.R. McConkie.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Is that a yes or no?

Can you restate the question? Since it was John who was speaking the verses I quoted, I didn't quite understand what your point was.

[Joseph Antley]

Sixteen pages later, have we found common ground yet?