SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Rom 6:1

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 Next Page )
PosterThread
Logic
Member



Joined: 2005/7/17
Posts: 1791


 Re: Rom 6:1

Quote:
imnowhere wrote:
Romans 6:1

What kind of gospel do you have to teach to have this kind of response?

It isn't the teaching that brought about this kind of response, but what they believed before the teaching.

To put Romans 6:1 into context, [b]Romans 5:20[/b] [color=660000]Moreover the law entered, that the offense might abound. [b]But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound[/b]:[/color]

[b]Romans 5:21[/b] [color=660000]So that, just as sin has reigned until death, therefore, in this way might grace reign through righteousness toward eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.[/color]

Paul was taking their thinking to the conclusion which they MIGHT come to after hearing what he just wrote; [color=660000]What shall we say then?[/color] shall we not obey the law because we say that we have faith; [b]because it is not of works of the law but of faith[/b] [color=660000]that grace may abound?[/color]

They have the same theology as some now who say that there is no need to repent, because that would be a "works based salvation"

Paul rejects this theology with the next verse:
[b]Romans 6:2[/b] [color=660000]God forbid! How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer in it?[/color]
Notice the play on words:
[b]Dead[/b] to sin, [b]live[/b] any longer in it.

Being dead to something is to be cut off from it.

"God forbid! How shall we, that are dead (cut off) from sin, live (have a connection with it) any longer in it?"

Paul is showing the nonsense of their conclusion; he is definitely showing that one must repent in order to receive grace for righteousness.

Quote:
Would Finney have received the same response as Paul? Spurgeon?

They might have received the same response from those who say that one must ONLY believe; but still live the way they always have.

Quote:
(We all know it's the wrong assumption and not what Paul taught, but an interesting response to Paul's gospel. Would you get the same objection as Paul did?)

It is wrong to you because that you know that repentance is essential to faith.
However, those the disagree would say that "if one must do something in order to be saved, it is a works based salvation."

They do not take notice that repentance is the "work" of faith which makes the faith living (James Chapter 2)

 2009/12/14 11:24Profile
imnowhere
Member



Joined: 2009/8/1
Posts: 69


 Re:

Quote:
It isn't the teaching that brought about this kind of response, but what they believed before the teaching.




Just wondering how you came to that conclusion? It follows on the heels of the doctrine he just laid down and it is the first objection that Paul deals with following his own teaching. It is obviously the teaching that brought it on as they were very 'law' oriented beforehand and Paul's gospel of grace is so over-the-top grace laden that it incited this opposition from the jews. That's like saying it wasn't Paul's teaching that brought the same type of questions in Rom 9:14,19.


Quote:
They have the same theology as some now who say that there is no need to repent, because that would be a "works based salvation"



Quite the opposite. The jews had dumbed down the law into something that they believed saved them. To say the jews of Paul's day taught there was no need to repent is a new opinion, that's for sure.


Quote:
However, those the disagree would say that "if one must do something in order to be saved, it is a works based salvation."



Depends if the 'doing' is what brings about the salvation or is in response to God's initiative.


Our answer must stay true to all Paul says about grace. If we merit the salvation it's not grace. If we respond to God's work, it's still grace.

If God gets 'all' the glory, we're fine.

 2009/12/14 12:31Profile
elected
Member



Joined: 2004/11/21
Posts: 362
Tulsa OK

 Re:

Anonymous:

Quote:
Justification by grace through faith means that we are undeservingly forgiven by an obedient working faith. We are not justified by dead faith, but by true faith. True faith purifies the heart, sanctifies us, works by love, overcomes the world, and obeys God.



I think the emphasis is in the wrong place. Its true we are justified and sanctified by true faith, but faith is only a means to salvation and our focus and emphasis should be on Jesus and his work on the cross. Jesus Christ is our wisdom, justification, sanctification, redemption.

We are forgiven because Jesus shed His blood on the cross and we receive forgiveness thru faith but its grace that saves us not faith.

What purifies the heart is the cross and the Holy Spirit but its thru faith we receive this purification.

Brother i believe you need the balance of faith and grace and of repentance and holiness. You emphasize too much one-sided truth, the human responsibility and ability to the neglect of devine work of grace.

Keep the balance! :-)

Edited


_________________
Redi

 2009/12/14 13:11Profile
Logic
Member



Joined: 2005/7/17
Posts: 1791


 Re:

Quote:
imnowhere wrote:
Quote:
It isn't the teaching that brought about this kind of response, but what they believed before the teaching.

Just wondering how you came to that conclusion?

Because they must have had a preconceived theology in order to come to the conclusion which Paul mentions in Rom 6:1.

Quote:
It follows on the heels of the doctrine he just laid down and it is the first objection that Paul deals with following his own teaching.

Yes, an objection, because they had a preconceived theology that Paul comes against in Rom 6:2 "[color=660000]God forbid!...[/color]"

Quote:
It is obviously the teaching that brought it on as they were very 'law' oriented beforehand and Paul's gospel of grace is so over-the-top grace laden that it incited this opposition from the Jews.

In order for a teaching to have a reaction as they did, they must have had a preconceived theology before hand.



That's like saying it wasn't Paul's teaching that brought the same type of questions in Rom 9:14,19.
No, it's like having a wrong theology when a good teaching is heard.
One will get objections because of a preconceived theology of the listeners.

Quote:
Quote:
They have the same theology as some now who say that there is no need to repent, because that would be a "works based salvation"

Quite the opposite. The Jews had dumbed down the law into something that they believed saved them. To say the Jews of Paul's day taught there was no need to repent is a new opinion, that's for sure.

Did you read my whole post, or just skim over it just to argue against it?

Why do you think that they would say "[color=660000]Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?[/color]"
If they didn't have the idea in their heads what Paul was saying in Rom 4 against works of the law?

What they thought Paul was saying is that "[color=660000]to him that doesn't work, [b]but only believes[/b] on him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.[/color]" (Rom 4:5)

They already know that sin is the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4).
However, when Paul starts to say that one must not do "works of the law, they figured that if you don't keep the law, you will be sinning.

That is why they might say in Romans 6:1 [color=660000]What shall we say then? Shall we continue to transgress the law[/color] (shall we not obey the law because we say that we have faith (Rom 4:4-5). Because it is not of works of the law but of faith?)[color=660000], that grace may abound?[/color]"

Do you see their confusion?

Quote:
Quote:
However, those that disagree would say that "if one must do something in order to be saved, it is a works based salvation."

Depends if the 'doing' is what brings about the salvation or is in response to God's initiative.

Your "doing" is responding to God in obedience.
What is obedience?
[B]REPENTING[/B] Rom 2:4-7, 10
And keeping His commandments John 14:15, John 51:10, Rom 2:13, James 1:22, 1 John 5:2-3

Repenting from what?
Romans 2:13
from not following the [b]MORAL[/b] law which is based in love (Matthew 22:37, John 13:34, 1 Peter 1:22) and from your own conscience (Romans 2:14-15).

Quote:
Our answer must stay true to all Paul says about grace. If we merit the salvation it's not grace. If we respond to God's work, it's still grace.

If God gets 'all' the glory, we're fine.


Duty is not meritable.
Their is no boasting in doing what your supposed to do (Luke 17:910).

Our duty is [color=660000]that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God[/color] (Rom 12:1)

[b]Romans 6:15[/b] [color=660000]What then? Shall we sin, because we are not under the law[/color] (shall we sin by not obeying the law as because we are not justified by the law but by faith)[color=660000], but under grace? God forbid.
[b]:16[/b] Know you not, that to whom you yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants you are to whom you obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?[/color]
[b]Rom 6:18[/b] [color=660000]Being then made free from sin, you became the servants of righteousness.[/color]

What is righteousness?
[color=660000]he that does righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.[/color] (1 John 3:7)
[color=660000]In all manner of conduct, be holy as He who has called you is holy[/color] (1 Peter 1:15)

All in all, we must do something in order for our salvation to be valid; but not to earn anything, but only because we love God.

When we do that which is our duty, it glorifies God.

 2009/12/14 15:52Profile
imnowhere
Member



Joined: 2009/8/1
Posts: 69


 Re:

Quote:
Did you read my whole post, or just skim over it just to argue against it?




Yes. I did read it all.







 2009/12/14 17:07Profile









 Re: Rom 6:1

Brother nowhere,

Sorry it's taken all day to get back here. I'd like to agree with elected's comment about the one-sidedness of your theology. Because you keep pounding away as if you're the only person who sees God's part in our salvation, it's very difficult to say anything [i]you[/i] find acceptable about man's part. You seem to assume that everytime man's part is mentioned, automatically the writer is [u]now[/u] discounting God's part. This is frustrating, to say the least. We love Him BECAUSE He loved us first. Can we agree on this as the platform from which the rest of man's relationship with God springs?

Quote:
Except for one thing... Man's free will disappeared after he sinned and fell into slavery to sin. Paul would not have quoted Rom 3:10-18 for Adam before the fall, but does for 'all' those afterwards. To say that we compare in freedom exactly to pre-fall Adam is very much to miss one of the most oft expressed doctrines in the bible.

I didn't say it was 'exactly'. Because you seem to believe man has no freewill at all, and that there is [u]no[/u] process before the crisis of new birth, you are stuck with a very rigid, blacker than black - whiter than white interpretation of everything.

Despite Rom 3:10 - 18, there is plenty in the Old Testament to suggest that God fully expected Israel to depart from their idolatry. If they had been [u]totally[/u] unable to, the Jews would have been wiped out by God long before Christ could have come.

But frequently God points out to the Jews, that it was not that He would not receive them, but that they [b]would[/b] not return to Him. Embedded in the word 'would' is the word 'wish'. They wished to not return to Him. Why would He have continued to invite them, if He knew they were unable to repent?

Then, there are all those who were waiting for Messiah when He did come, showing again that Jews were capable of seeking God and finding Him.

And, there were people like Legion, who may not have been Jewish (though he may have been descended from one of the lost tribes), who despite being so demon possessed, at the sight of Jesus 'ran and worshipped Him' (Mark 5:6).

Quote:
I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me.'

But these verses don't apply to the Jews. In fact, it seems to me that a good deal of belief is a misunderstanding.
Quote:
I just believe Paul and Christ when they say none will come unless the Father draws them.

So do I. Now, perhaps you can explain why you think this must mean that He only draws some people? Why can it [u]not[/u] mean that He draws everyone? (I'm serious. Please explain. And please don't tell me it's because most people don't get saved. That answer is flawed.)
Quote:
No, I took it right out of Is 53.

If you have, then you I hope you will not mind my saying that you [i]sound[/i] a bit cocky about Christ's death, considering the content of Isa 53.

From your earlier post
Quote:
A simple look at the structure of the verse shows that it is the giving of the church to Christ that is the effective part, not vise versa (similar to John 10:26, many would say some are not of God's sheep because they don't believe, but Jesus says they don't believe because they are not of His sheep).

Have you looked at John 6:45 in context, and wondered what 'all' might mean?

Regarding the having of saving faith, you need to understand Rom 10:17 properly, you to see what Jesus means when He talks about His sheep hearing His voice.

There is more to hearing than having sound waves beat on an eardrum. 'Hear', is more like what Jesus used to say here: Luke 9:44. Okay. Let me put it this way. I believe when Jesus calls the people who 'hear' His voice 'sheep', it is in the same manner as Paul describes here: [i]1 Cor 1:28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, [yea], [b]and things which are not[/b], to bring to nought things that are: [/i].

This is the explanation from the verses you quoted from Isa, which refer to the Gentiles finding Him without having sought Him - which is about Him finding them, when John 10 is included. On the face of this last sentence, I seem to be agreeing with [i]everything[/i] you've stated; but really, I don't - not if you're discounting the response of some men (to believe), to the obedience of others (to preach). See also 1 Cor 1:21.
Quote:
The verse couldn't be any plainer.

That's the problem with your interpretation. It has no spiritual content. It is an entirely 'natural' interpretation you're giving it. You may be in good company. But you may be incorrect. All of you.
Quote:
At the cross he said, 'it's finished', not 'it's started'.

Please tell me if this is one of the tenets of traditional Calvinism? Is it really what Calvin thought Jesus meant? (Because I doubt it.)

I have never heard 'It is finished' applied to 'salvation', in this way. And, your previous statement about us having been justified at the time of Christ's death (in the sense that we were saved then), comes too close to [u]universalism[/u] for comfort.

Now, I am not saying Christ's death had nothing to do with our salvation, but, when He cried 'It is finished', He was (obviously) [b]alive[/b].

So, what was it that was finished, seeing His death is essential to our salvation?

I hope you're man enough to chew this question thoroughly, and if God shows you something you didn't see before, you'll be glad for Him to tweak your theology into better shape.
Quote:
God declares he 'will' do these things in our hearts because on our own, we won't.

Not because we won't, but because we [u]can't[/u]. There's an enormous difference - and I hope you'll think about it. For instance, look at the difference between Isa 59:20, and Rom 11:26. Paul makes a significant change when he is quoting the OT there, which completely justifies 'can't', rather than 'won't'. People in the NT like Peter, Andrew and John, who were already training their spiritual eyes for the coming of the Messiah, as well as many others who were, prove that they were willing. Yes, they didn't understand some things that Jesus told them, but it wasn't for want of trying or desiring, it was because they needed the revelation from God to 'see' - whether it was when Christ expounded the scriptures to them after His resurrection, or, when they were filled with the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. Their spiritual blindness was not due to an [i]unwillingness[/i] to see.
Quote:
That is why it is called 'free grace', why it says we are 'freely justified' and why it is called an 'election of grace'.

It's called 'grace' because nothing we can do would make us deserving of His redemptive acts.

And it's free, because we don't pay anything to receive it. Instead, we lay down our pride, we give up our rebellion, and our status as little gods, and become like little children - who don't have to 'work' for anything their Father provides.

 2009/12/14 21:46
imnowhere
Member



Joined: 2009/8/1
Posts: 69


 Re:

Quote:
Sorry it's taken all day to get back here. I'd like to agree with elected's comment about the one-sidedness of your theology.



I think he was speaking about your side of theology. I could be wrong, but you might want to re read.


Quote:
Because you seem to believe man has no freewill at all, and that there is no process before the crisis of new birth



I've never said or implied that. No free will at all? Man has a will, it's just not entirely 'free' like God's is. We are slaves to sin or slaves to righteousness. Not 'free'. But man does need to excercise his will, for without faith and repentance he cannot enter into salvation. He needs God's grace to do so, not on his own.



Quote:
So do I. Now, perhaps you can explain why you think this must mean that He only draws some people? Why can it not mean that He draws everyone? (I'm serious. Please explain. And please don't tell me it's because most people don't get saved. That answer is flawed.)



Please don't ask a question and then tell me how I can and can't answer it. You're the moderate one remember?
Rom 8:30 says all that are predestined to salvation are called. All that are called are justified. All that are justified are glorified.
I'm sure you're familiar with the distinction in scripture between the internal/effectual call and the external/general call of God. Rom 8:30 says all that God calls will be glorified. In this light, to deny the doctrines of grace I'd have to be a universalist to stay true to the text without ignoring or twisting it.


Quote:
Have you looked at John 6:45 in context, and wondered what 'all' might mean?



Well, from the verse it seems that 'all' those taught of God are those that do come to Him. The all cannot therefore refer to everyone who has ever lived.


Quote:
That's the problem with your interpretation. It has no spiritual content.



Sorry for that. Why are you asking my opinion then? I thought I was the 'black and white' guy? ;-)


Quote:
I have never heard 'It is finished' applied to 'salvation', in this way. And, your previous statement about us having been justified at the time of Christ's death (in the sense that we were saved then), comes too close to universalism for comfort.




Too close only if you believe in universal atonement, which almost all of the great theologians of the church age have denied. But it's not about comfort, if it was, I'd believe what you do, honestly. Particular redemption is a hard doctrine, yet biblical. You're right, it's not comfortable. Comfortable would be a theology where man was actually sovereign and had totall free will and was in control of his own salvation and God was waiting to see who might join Him.
Wait, in light of Rom 3 that would be terrifying.



Quote:
So, what was it that was finished, seeing His death is essential to our salvation?



Do you think the 'spiritual' interpretation would be that he had his own death in mind when he said this as it was moments away? It's hard to make a statement for mankind regarding the greatest work ever done once you've died. Jesus probably understood this and uttered what he did before he died because it would be more helpful to us.


Quote:
I have never heard 'It is finished' applied to 'salvation', in this way.



If it's not about the atonement for our salvation, what could he be speaking about? This gets more interesting as we go!


Quote:
I hope you're man enough to chew this question thoroughly



That's awesome, brother. My theology must be bad enough for you to imply that not only have I not even considered these things, but I'm somehow a bit of a coward as well.

My friend, free-will theology is far easier to accept than the doctrines of grace. That is why George Whitefield said we all start out Arminian.


Your posts show that you care deeply about how salvation comes to be. I've shared my views as best I can. I'm sure we'll both continue to grow as God speaks to our hearts and minds.

God bless.

 2009/12/15 11:32Profile
Christinyou
Member



Joined: 2005/11/2
Posts: 3710
Ca.

 Re:

These words written by other men, in whom I am in total agreement with. It is not all will be saved, it is all will know that salvation is available and none are able to agree with Christ's Gospel unless the Father draws them into the Truth by the Holy Spirit, that they might receive, not get by their own wills.

""Christ declares that the doctrine of the Gospel, though it is preached to all without exception, cannot be embraced by all, but that a new understanding and a new perception are requisite; and, therefore, that faith does not depend on the will of men, but that it is God who gives it.

Unless the Father draw him. To come to Christ being here used metaphorically for believing, the Evangelist, in order to carry out the metaphor in the apposite clause, says that those persons are drawn whose understandings God enlightens, and whose hearts he bends and forms to the obedience of Christ. The statement amounts to this, that we ought not to wonder if many refuse to embrace the Gospel; because no man will ever of himself be able to come to Christ, but God must first approach him by his Spirit; and hence it follows that all are not drawn,but that God bestows this grace on those whom he has elected. True, indeed, as to the kind of drawing, it is not violent, so as to compel men by external force; but still it is a powerful impulse of the Holy Spirit, which makes men willing who formerly were unwilling and reluctant. It is a false and profane assertion, therefore, that none are drawn but those who are willing to be drawn, 1 as if man made himself obedient to God by his own efforts; for the willingness with which men follow God is what they already have from himself, who has formed their hearts to obey him.""


""John 6:44
Ver. 44. That by drawing here is not to be understood any coaction, or force upon the will, is a thing on all hands out of question; but whether by it be only to be understood a rational drawing by arguments, (used in the ministry of the gospel), or a further powerful influence upon the soul, inclining it to be willing and obedient, that is the question. The patrons of a power in man's will to do what is spiritually good and necessary in order to eternal life and salvation, understand it of the former only (of which the compelling, mentioned Lu 14:23, is to be understood, for the ministers of the gospel have no other power to compel); but in regard the drawing here mentioned is the act not of the servants, but of the Master; not of the ministers, but of the Father; it is more reasonably concluded that it here signifies a Divine power put forth upon the soul of man, by which it is made obedient to the heavenly call, and willing to close with the offer of Christ in the gospel; for though no such thing can necessarily be concluded from the word draw, yet it is easily concluded from the nature of the motion, in coming to Christ, which is the soul's motion to a sublime, spiritual object, to which no soul hath any power of itself; such is the darkness of the human mind, the obstinacy of the will, the depravation of the affections, unless it be illuminated and drawn by the Spirit of God. No soul is able of itself to discern spiritual things, so as to see that goodness and excellency that is in them, much less to move towards the participation of them.""

These are just two, there are many, many more.

I could copy and paste until Christ comes and no one would understand or believe until the Father Draws them with the Holy Spirit conviction and prompting us to believe. The main Word that must be revealed to those that believe is not of man but of God and Christ and the Holy Spirit of Whom the Whole Word of God is ONE.

John 1:1-4 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

You must be born again? Who does the birthing?
Who gives the soul of man the Light to understand and be drawn? Jesus said, "No man can come to me unless the Father draws him".

Pretty simple, it is all of God and None of man that salvation comes to those that are Christs'.

Then the responsibility comes to man, by the Teacher, The Holy Spirit, That we all come to love The Father as the Son does, now we can repent and believe, by the Spirit and Mind of Christ in us, and the Holy Spirit also teaching us how to renew our minds to the Mind of Christ and be conformed to His Image that we Love as He Loves us.

In The Love of the Father and the Love of the Christ in us: Phillip


_________________
Phillip

 2009/12/15 21:25Profile









 Re:


This whole thing can be summed in these verses.

Romans 9:15 I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

Romans 9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.


 2009/12/15 21:58
Logic
Member



Joined: 2005/7/17
Posts: 1791


 Re:

Quote:
DeepThinker wrote:

This whole thing can be summed in these verses.

Romans 9:15 I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

[b]15:[/b]compassionate to and to whom HE will show mercy on.

God knows the heart of man. HE knows if & when they will yield to Him or not.

God will be gracious to & show mercy on those HE knows will yield. For this is the character of God.
________________________________

God is not stating that He is arbitrary, for that is against His character.

It is not saying that He can do anything with out reason, just because He is God, for God's character has a boundary of purpose.

God has His own reasons for mercy which are based upon standards outside of Himself which has been before creation and are according to His character; He is...
selfless, Just, righteous, loving, compationate, peaceable, gentle, and easily entreated, full of mercy, without partiality...ect...

Quote:
Romans 9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

[b]16:[/b] This verse is pointing out that man's favorite is not always God's favorite.

Abraham [b]willed[/b] or desired that it the promise might be given to Ishmael.

Isaac also [b]willed[/b] or desired that the promise might be given to Esau.

This verse is in context with Exodus 33:18-20 & Abraham willing that the promise would come through Ishmael as the context proves Genesis 17:18
Moreover, in Genesis 27 Isaac is willing for Esau to have the blessing and Esau "[b]running[/b]" to hunt and make Isaac's favorite meal for the blessing.

God also chooses the one which is not wanted or favored by man.
Jacob wanted Rachel because he favored her more than Leah. But God shown HIS favor on Leah by her child bringing the SEED through Judah.

 2009/12/15 23:21Profile





©2002-2024 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Revival to this Generation.
Privacy Policy