Ed, thanks for the references. I’ll check them out.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

I’ll try to see if I can track down perhaps a commentary or two that expresses well what I think the passage is saying.

Well, all I’ll say is that one passage isn’t the whole doctrine.

Do you have your work in Jas 4 posted online anywhere?

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

I’ve already gone into it in detail, so no need to worry about that. That’s why I brought up the passage in the first place.

Well, to be complete, humility and submission are not all that are enjoined in the passage. The argument goes on to about v. 12. But it is an interesting passage overall. Note that those who are warned of friendship with the world are those who are praying and asking amiss, that they might consume it on their lusts.

So what I am saying, is if someone were to live James 4.6-12, they wouldn’t sin. That would involve pretty well a totally sold out life.

Anyway, there is more going on in the passage than just the reference to worldliness. I don’t have time to go into it in detail right now, so I’ll leave it at that.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

Hi Ed

First, I didn’t deal with the point about humility and submission because I didn’t think it was relevant either way. If we acted with humility and submission, we wouldn’t sin, period. So I didn’t think it advanced your view of worldliness particularly.

I agree that there is a difference between the disciples fleeing and the Pharisees antagonism. I am not sure that you want to say that the Pharisees led the way to kill our Lord, the Priests seemed to be at the front of that line, and they were Sadducees. Many Pharisees joined in, of course, but the opposition wasn’t exclusively Pharisees, and it wasn’t until the chief priests got involved that the deed was done.

Well, I won’t quibble about the purpose of James and John. I think we have to take them at their word and wouldn’t put their purpose in exactly the language you have here, but I don’t think it is worth making a big deal about.

On the objective genitive, I think it plays into the Lord’s parable about God and Mammon also. I do believe genuine believers can get themselves trapped into pretty serious sin. That’s why the warnings are there. Also, sometimes the Scripture writers speak hyperbolically, I would have to think on it a bit to be dogmatic about 1 Jn 2, but one does have to keep that possibility in mind when interpreting Scripture.

Last, on Mahaney’s book, if you read it you will find that, in spite of my criticisms, his view of the world and worldliness is basically the same as mine. The core chapters deal with these topics: ch. 2 Movies and Internet, ch. 3 Music, ch. 4 Materialism, and ch. 5 Clothing. Where I criticize the book is especially ch. 1, where I think Mahaney blows it on 1 Jn 2.16 and thus confuses the reader and also on the selective and limited applications taken in opposition to worldliness. I think they don’t go far enough or don’t apply their own principles broadly enough in the discussion. You could title the book: Worldliness: Kind of Resisting the Seduction of the Fallen World, Sometimes When it Suits Us. But basically, their definition of world and worldliness is the same as mine, despite my complaints.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

There’s a difference between his disciples fleeing and the Pharisees leading the way to kill him. One fits the idea of “hate” much more than the other.

With respect to James and John, I must reemphasize that they are writing to professing believers–they are not explicitly writing to believers. After all, 1 John is written in large part to help people determine whether or not they truly are believers (unless you interpret the book as describing a Wesleyan type of perfectionism that some believers can attain while others are still just normal Christians). Both writers give the benefit of the doubt and assume that the profession is genuine, but there is the chance it’s not (e.g. James 2:14-26).

Even if it is an objective genitive, I don’t think believers can be faithfully described as people who do not have a love for the Father. Will there be times in which they do not love Him as they should? Certainly, but that’s different than saying it’s not there. This point is further strengthened by the contrast at the end of the section:

“the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever.”

I haven’t read Mahaney’s book, so I can’t say whether or not he gets worldliness right, but I can say that you seem to be putting way too much of an emphasis on particular activities/sins that conservative Christians have considered taboo as constituting worldliness, while excluding other sins/people from that category that the Bible would include (e.g., misers, Pharisees).

Thanks for the interaction