Pilgrim,

Thank you for your response. I agree with you that 1 John 1:9 is addressing the sanctification of believers and not their justification, and that there is an important distinction between the "objective" work or fact of Christ's atonement, and the "subjective" experience, appropriation, and application of it by believers.

However, sanctification itself is not merely a subjective process or phenomenon, but rather an objective aspect of our salvation that is to be "worked out with fear and trembling" (Ephesians 2:10; Phillippians 2:12-3), although we are assured that God will ultimately bring it to completion on "the day of Christ Jesus" (Romans 8:29; Philippians 1:6). The passage in question does not say: "if we confess our sins we can/should feel assurance
that God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." That would reconcile more easily with the rest of my theology, but it just doesn't appear to me to be what the text itself is saying.

Because the Scriptures are the Word of God and cannot be broken (John 10:35), the text CANNOT be saying that we must confess all of our sins for all of our sins to be forgiven, or even that if any sin goes unconfessed it will not be forgiven; but it nevertheless does seem to be saying that something "objective" is done or occurs in relation to God's forgiveness when we confess our sins. The author of the article I posted suggests that although our forgiveness was obtained, secured, or purchased once and for all by Christ on Calvary, it is not until we confess our sins that God's forgiveness is applied to us by the Holy Spirit, and Christ intercedes for us at that time, pleading our case before the Father as our advocate, and this is not done "before we sin."

Quote
Jesus obtained forgiveness for us on the cross, but we were not forgiven of all our sins at that time. Rather, the application of forgiveness comes to us in our own lives as the Holy Spirit applies forgiveness to us and as Christ intercedes for us - and they do not do these things before we sin.
Rather, it is an ontgoing application. As we continue to sin, the Holy Spirit continues to apply forgiveness to us. This is what makes Christ's current intercession so important. If his work on the cross had finished his intercession for us, then all that would remain for him to do would be to wait for his return.

Quote
In short, when believers confess their sin, Jesus pleads their case before the Father and the believers are subsequently forgiven and cleansed.

As far as I can tell the author does not explicitly state that only those sins that are confessed will be forgiven, nor does this appear to be a necessary implication of what he does say, although such a conclusion may seem unaviodable. Surely no sane Reformed person would ever say such a thing (IMHO); but what about the distintion he makes between Christ's once-for-all work of "obtaining" forgiveness on the cross and His ongoing work of "applying" this forgiveness, which is related to, though perhaps not totally dependent upon, our confession and repentance?
Is this a valid or warranted distinction? Is this part of what is usually understood by Christ's "priestly" work? If not, then what exactly is the nature of His priestly work or ministry of "intercession"? (Romans 8:34; Hebrews 7:25; 1 John 2:1). Tom Oden, citing sources such as Gregory Nazianzen, Eusebius, Johannes Wollebius, Richard Baxter, John Pearson, and the Book of Concord says that Christ's cross is his "finished priestly work," while his "heavenly intercession" is his "present priestly work; he also makes reference to his "blessing"as the ultimate consummation of his "future priestly work" (The Word of Life, p. 305). What do you make of this? Is it biblical? orthodox? reformed? heretical?<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/shrug.gif" alt="" />

[Linked Image]