SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Romans 8:1

Print Thread (PDF)

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



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
Apart from that, all are still under the Old Covenant, with all the curses, judgments, etc.


I was never under the Old Covenant. That was a covenant between God and the people of Israel at Sinai.



Quote:
re the meaning of “die” Philologos responded:
Quote:
neither can it mean 'future' as the penalty was to be enacted 'in the day' of the disobedience.

I don’t get it. It can’t mean spiritual death – because we are all born separate from Christ. (dead in our sins) And if it can’t mean final judgment… then ……………. ?



That's the whole point. The 'condemnation' ie the execution of the sentence against Adam took place 'in the day' that he disobeyed God. But Rom 5;16-19 says that this 'came upon all men'. So Adam's condemnation ie spiritual death came upon the whole race, instantly, at the time of Adam's disobedience.

I am not sure that the 'future' punishment awaiting the unreconciled can be called 'condemnation' at this stage. The language of John 3 is not 'condemnation' ie the execution of the sentence but 'judgement' ie the process of assessment.

Quote:
I don’t know what “hereditary” sin is. Is there such a thing????????? Or have we inherited a predisposition to sin (sinner)– being that we were in darkness.

I don't usually use the phrase 'hereditary sin' because of the implication is contains regarding the mode of transmission ie how did it get to me? I don't believe it got to me through my father but through Adam which is why I usually call it 'congenital sin' which means I was born with it but not that I inherited it from my father.

Quote:
Judgments can fall on masses of people, but divine condemnation is directed to specific people for their own personal sins


You are making a distinction here between 'judgment' and 'condemnation' but I don't think this is a biblical distinction. AS I explained earlier in this thread 'judgment' comes before 'condemnation' in the forensic metaphor.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2006/6/14 16:33Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

oops, it posted twice. I have deleted the copy.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2006/6/14 16:34Profile
InTheLight
Member



Joined: 2003/7/31
Posts: 2730
Phoenix, Arizona USA

 Re:

Quote:
This 'condemnation' is not condemnation but 'judgement'. the KJV does not distinguish between these two different concepts. We are not 'condemned already' as the KJV asserts but we are 'judged already'.



Perhaps I don't understand your distinction here. It seems to me that their use of 'condemnation' best conveys the meaning in John 3. The unbeliever is condemned already, there is nothing that spares the condemned man except for the delay, and that delay is the undeserved mercy of God. The phrase "dead man walking" applies well here and God's kindness is meant to draw him to repentence and admit his crimes and call out for forgiveness.


_________________
Ron Halverson

 2006/6/14 18:41Profile
CJaKfOrEsT
Member



Joined: 2004/3/31
Posts: 901
Melbourne, Australia

 Re:

Quote:

philologos wrote:
How about using the other terminology of 'the death'. The sentence was actually built into the prohibition. In the day you eat... dying thou shalt die.


I didn't consider that part of the equation, but it does slot in quite nicely. I remember Watchman Nee refering to "death" as "weakness", where physical death is its ultimate expession (think about it, those wo don't beathe are "weaker" than a new born baby). If this is the case, the when death is personified in the words "th death" this could be an all invasive prevailing weakness which would be the "shackle" that hinders the slave from getting away, which becomes the "holding cell" to confine the disobedient (ie, hell).
Quote:

I have to steer carefully around Reidhead as I am pretty sure he did not believe in original sin. Any confirmations/denials, folks?



I have found Reihead's doctrine to be almost as elusive as the German mystics. In [url=http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/singefile.php?lid=40]The Right use of the Law[/url], he warns against treating sin as a "congential disorder" because sinners have an excuse to sin, because they have no choice. However in [url=http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?lid=282]Ten Shekels and a Shirt[/url] and also in [url=http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?lid=3091]The Baptism of the Holy Spirit[/url] he tells the story of the man who needed to be locked in the boot of his Caddilac (and who isn't that man;-)). He also speaks of God's drawing preceding our obedience in [url=http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?lid=1974]The Hidden Things of God - Part 2[/url] (it is in the part that's hard to hear, so you'll have to listen carefulll. I couldn't work out what he was saying until I'd heard it about 5 or 6 times). And in [url=http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?lid=38]Dangers of Third Generation Religion[/url] he mentions that the reason why the Israelites turned to idols can be traced back to the elders neglecting bring them back to the monuments at the Jordan, which he types as of crucified life and baptism.

So while it is true that the sinner sins because he loves his sin, our sin can also be understood as obedience to our master and the offspring of our "sin nature" husband (of which is the only justifiable excuse for "abortion" - in a spiritual sence). For more on these thought see Norman Grubb's [url=http://www.normangrubb.com/Paul's Key to the Liberated Life.htm]Paul's Key To A Liberated Life[/url]. In other words, he [b]are[/b] born slaves to the same master that Adam sold himself to, but "our sin" is to choose to become a "bondslaves" at the age of accountability, because we cannot bring ourselves to separate ourselves from our affection toward the byproduct of our union with our "sin husband", when it's time for us to go free.


_________________
Aaron Ireland

 2006/6/14 19:55Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

InTheLight's

Quote:
Perhaps I don't understand your distinction here. It seems to me that their use of 'condemnation' best conveys the meaning in John 3. The unbeliever is condemned already, there is nothing that spares the condemned man except for the delay, and that delay is the undeserved mercy of God.


This part of the discussion is really at the level of exegesis, finding out what the text actually says. I mentioned earlier that the word translated 'condemnation' in John 3 is really not a good choice. It all stems from my all-time-hero William Tyndale who adopted a method of translation where he did not use the same English word for a particular Greek word. This is called 'studied variety' and the classic example is
Quote:
1John 2:24 Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father.

The words 'abide' 'remain' and 'continue' are all translations of the Greek word 'menO'. Sometimes Tyndale's translation philosophy works in the opposite direction in that he translates 8 different Greek words for 'judgement' by the same English word and does not distinguish between the levels and nuances of the words.

An example:
Quote:
“When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man [u]condemned[/u] thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I [u]condemn[/u] thee: go, and sin no more.”
(John 8:10-11 KJVS)

The point here is that the word 'condemn' is the Greek word 'katakrinO' meaning to 'sentence'. It is one stage further on than 'judging'. If fact her accusers had already 'judged' her as an adulterer. The question wasn't the 'judgment' but the 'sentence'. They wanted to hear Christ's sentence upon her sin. He knew that she was guilty but refused to pass sentence. This distinction becomes equally important in the Roman letter.

However, the KJV John 3 passage has the English word 'condemnation' several times:
Quote:
“For God sent not his Son into the world to [u]condemn[/u] the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not [u]condemned[/u]: but he that believeth not is [u]condemned[/u] already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the [u]condemnation[/u], that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.”
(John 3:17-21 KJVS)

The main word used throughout here is not 'katakrinO-condemn' but 'krinO-judge'. The ASV translates much more exactly here and gives us
Quote:
“For God sent not the Son into the world to [u]judge[/u] the world; but that the world should be saved through him. He that believeth on him is not [u]judged[/u]: he that believeth not hath been [u]judged[/u] already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the [u]judgment[/u], that the light is come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their works were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, lest his works should be reproved. But he that doeth the truth cometh to the light, that his works may be made manifest, that they have been wrought in God.”
(John 3:17-21 ASV)

The man who has 'not believed' (not 'not heard') is already under God's judgment; he is 'guilty' of 'not belieiving'. In the UK we have a thing called 'suspended sentences' where a guilty man is 'sentenced' to eg 5 years imprisonment but the sentence is 'suspended'. That means the sentence is not to be executed if the guilty man behaves himself, but if he commits a further crime the 'suspended sentence' becomes active and the 'sentence' will now be executed and the guilty man imprisoned.

I am trying to identify the distinction between a 'condemnation' which is still future to an individual and a condemnation that has 'already' come upon all men. Rom 5. So I am asking (and answering) the question 'what was Adam's sentence that has passed to all men?' And my answer is that it is spiritual death, or The Death and Paul designates it in Romans 5.

I am trying to distinguish between Adam's Sin and mine and to see what sentence [u]each[/u] has/will receive(d).

Does that help you to see what I am trying to say? :-)


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2006/6/15 6:04Profile
Graftedbranc
Member



Joined: 2005/11/8
Posts: 619


 Re:

Quote:
No matter what the intellect may say, the human heart can never accept the idea that we are to be held responsible for breaking a law that we cannot keep.



Tozer is very dissapointing in this regard. "The heart is decietful above all things and desporatly wicked, who can know it?".

The human heart is fallen, twisted, and centered upon itself.

His argument goes flat against the plain revelation of scripture and Paul's clear arguments in both the book of Galatians, and Roman's 7.

If God gave Isreal a law that could be kept, there would have been no need for the priesthood, the sacrafices, the atonment, etc. which were a picture of the comming Christ.

Tozer, like many takes his understanding of the fall from Genesis 3 and sees only a moral failure. Whereas the context of the fall is the choosing of the Tree of the knowelge of Good and Evil over the Tree of Life.

God never intended man to express his own rightousness, but rather, created him in His image as a vessel to contain God, God intended man to eat of the Tree of Life and thereby recieve the Life of God to be His expression on the earth.

The effect of eating the tree of the knowlege of Good and evil was that man became as God knowing good and evil. He became a self centered, self sufficient, independant being separated from the Life of God.

And it is the effect of this tree which gives man the mistaken idea that he has within him the capacity to do good and to keep God's law. This is the principle of the pharasees.

THe Law according to Paul was given to make sin sinful, to expose man's condition, and to be a child conducter to lead him to Christ.

Paul said, "That I may be found in HIm not having a rightousness of my own, derived from law, but that which comes through faith in Christ. The rightousness which comes from God on the basis of faith.

God did not create man with the ability to keep the law apart from Christ. He did not create man with an inate rightousness. But rather created man as a vessel to recieve Him as Life, to manifest His Divine attributes in his human virtues. Even if man had not sinned, yet he did not have his own inate rightousness. He did not posses the knowlege of good till he ate of the tree of the knowlege of good and evil.

There was not the tree of good and the tree of evil, but rather the tree of Life and the Tree of the knowelge of both good and evil. Good and evil were both on the same tree. The other Tree represents Life, the Life of God.

God created man to recieve Him as Life and to manifest His rightousness, His holiness, His divine attributes.

God created man in His image as a glove is created in the image of a hand to contain the hand and to express the hand. God created man with a spirit to know Him, to recieve Him and to be His dwelling place.

God created man to be His expression in the earth living in dependance upon God as Life, in communion with God.

IN the fall man's being was corrupted by the poisen of the Serpent. And man became a slave of sin dwelling in his flesh. No amount of law can deliver the man from slavery to corruption.

The law expresses God's rightousness and man does not have it in himself to comply with God's rightousness. Christ met the demands of the law on our behalf, died in our stead, redeemed us from the curse of the law, died to it's juristiction and in resurrection unites us with Himself and dwells within us as the Great Law Keeper.

"you have died to the law through the body of Christ that you might be joined to Another, even to Him who was raised from the dead that you might bear fruit to God".

The Christian as Romans 7 and 8 show us does not have even in himself the capacity to keep God's law, but rather though he would do good, there is a greater law in his flesh, the law of sin and death which takes him captive.

God's way is the way of the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus. That is, a greater law which is the resurrection Life of Christ.

The just requirement of the law is fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit.

Only God is holy. Only God is rightouse. Only Christ is holy. Only Christ is rightouse. And He is, of God, made unto us rightousness, sanctification, and redemption.

The problem Tozer sees as a result of preaching man's inability to keep the law, which leaves the man in despair, is resolved in Romans 8 not with proclaiming man's natural ability, but by the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus.

The problem is that man stops with Roman's 7 and never move on to Roman's 8. Paul's despair of his inability to keep the law is not resolved by trying harder, but by Christ and by the law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus.

Tozer falls short in this.

Graftedbranch

 2006/6/16 7:51Profile
Graftedbranc
Member



Joined: 2005/11/8
Posts: 619


 Re:

Quote:
If I have Adam's 'guilt', of what am I guilty? The legal language in this country is 'guilty as charged' and this is from the Roman concept of law. Of what does God charge me in Adam's disobedience? Guilt is blame-worthiness; of what does God hold me responsible in Adam's guilt?



Hebrews 7:9,10: "And, so to speak, through Abraham, Levi also, he who recieves tithes, has been made to pay tithes, For he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him."

Just as it is written in Hebrews that Levi, who was in the loins of Abraham gave tithes to Mechilzedec showing the superiority of his Priesthood, so also the whole human race was in the loins of Adam.

Adam was as the theologins say, 'the federal head of the race." Both federally and organically we were all "In Adam" when he sinned and therefore sinned in him. Everything we are is derived from Adam. There is nothing in us naturally which is not out from Adam. Evey gene, every part of our DNA is from Adam. Adam comprehends all of us, every human being. Even Eve was taken and built from Adam's substance. And though this preceeded Adam's sin, Eve participated in that sin.

In other words the whole race existed in Adam. When Adam sinned, we all sinned in him. If Adam had physically died before he and Eve gave birth, we too would have physically died in him.

Suppose a man and a woman were banished by law to some deserted Island. And suppose they had children there. Would not the children share in their banishemnt? Suppose they died before having children being executed. Would not their future children also persih with them?

And Paul argues in Romans 5 that through one man's disobedience resulted in condemnation to all men for that all sinned.

And the facts are these. Adam died spiritually, became a slave of corruption and sin in his flesh, was barred from the Tree of Life and cast out of the Garden.

And we also partake of this sentance. We are all born dead in trespesses and sins and separated from the life of God as Ephesians tells us. If it were not so, then we must each be presented with the same choice as children, we must also commit the same act, we must also all repeat Adam's transgression being in Adam's inocent and sinless state to be found in the fallen condition of Adam and be under the curse. If it were not so, then babies could not die because they would not be subject to death.

Death reigned from Adam till Moses even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam's transgression. Even Babies die and death is penal.

And just as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. By the obedience of Christ we are made rightouse and we have justification unto Life.

Just as in natural birth we partake of Adam's sin and Adam's condemnation, so also in Christ we partake of His rightousness and His Eternal life.

Graftedbranch

 2006/6/16 8:16Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

Quote:
If it were not so, then babies could not die because they would not be subject to death.

Death reigned from Adam till Moses even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam's transgression. Even Babies die and death is penal.


Animals also die but not because they were in Adam.
Quote:
“And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.”
(Gen 1:11-12 KJVS)

This process of reproduction is referred to in John 12:24 as 'death'. Death is not always penal, sometimes, as with the animals it is not penal but consequential.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2006/6/21 10:01Profile
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
Ron's: Animals also die but not because they were in Adam.

This process of reproduction is referred to in John 12:24 as 'death'. Death is not always penal, sometimes, as with the animals it is not penal but consequential.




This does damage to my theory that somehow the sin-nature is still to be dealt with through death.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2006/6/21 11:17Profile
Graftedbranc
Member



Joined: 2005/11/8
Posts: 619


 Re:

Quote:
Animals also die but not because they were in Adam.



Animals die because of the curse upon the whole creation brought about by Adams's sin as the head of the whole race and as the one who had "dominion" over all the beast of the field.

And just so, Romans 8:21,22 "in hope that the creation itself will also be freed from slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the Children of God, For we know that the whole creation groans together and travails in pain together until now...

Brother, we need to derive of theology from the scripture and not impose our own logic and concepts into the bible.

The fact from scripture is that the whole creation is in slavery to corruption as a result of Adam's sin and fall and the curse upon the whole earth as a result. And also as a result of Christ's redemption, the creation itself will be delivered from slavery to corruption through the One who has reconciled "all things' unto Himself in Christ.

The Bible is clear, the doctrine of the fall is clear, the truth of man's condemnation is clear, the truth of the creations penal subjection to corruption is clear and the fact of Christ's redemption is clear.

In the end, the consumation of Christ's redemption we have the New Jeruslalem in the New Earth under the New Heavens in which there is no sin and all negative things are in the lake of fire. In the Eternal Age there is no death, no corruption, but God in Christ is All in all and "behold, all things are new". A New heavens and a New Earth in which there is on corruption, no death, but God is all in all.


Graftedbranch

 2006/6/30 14:12Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy