Originally posted by SmoothCowboyIt doesn't seem to me that, in Romans 8, Paul is describing a "victory from sin" or an "overcoming of sin" - at least not in the true meaning of the words. What Paul seems to be describing is a release from responsibility for ones own sin. In other words, one can continue to commit acts of sin, but won't be condemned for them. In my mind, "overcoming of sin" entail the cessation of committing acts of sin. I believe Jesus taught that this is required for "eternal life"/"entrance to heaven"/"salvation".
Romans 7 covers a very important lesson about sin. It finds strength in our flesh. It is exposed by for what it is by the law. And through our flesh we cannot overcome sin. Rom 7:5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. Rom7 tells what happens when you try t ...[text shortened]... ich worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
Originally posted by SmoothCowboyIn Matthew 7:23-27, I don't think that Jesus is speaking of what happens in this world. I believe Jesus is saying that by hearing and doing the words of Jesus, one builds on a solid foundation for eternal life.
Matthew 7:23-27
(23) And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
(24) Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
(25) And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; ...[text shortened]... al, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
I have an idea of where you might be going with the rest of the verses, but am unsure. Can you explicitly state your point?
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneWould you say that ignoring the poor and destitute, the fatherless, the widows is a sinful act?
.. In my mind, "overcoming of sin" entail the cessation of committing acts of sin. I believe Jesus taught that this is required for "eternal life"/"entrance to heaven"/"salvation".
1 edit
Originally posted by Rajk999Seems to me that "sin" is going against the essence of God which includes not following the commandments of God and therefore Jesus.
Would you say that ignoring the poor and destitute, the fatherless, the widows is a sinful act?
I'm thinking what you're asking is covered by the second commandment of Jesus.
"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments." Mark 12:30-31
Originally posted by vistesdYes, you are right, I am sorry. Adam and Eve did have 'free will' if that is what you want to call it. They were free to do what ever they pleased except eat the fruit of the tree of good and evil, However, the Lord told them that in that day they shall die.
[b]Free will is not taught in the Bible, it is something that man has came up with. I was taught that we have free will, however, when I read the Bible I find nothing to support such claim.
However, if the original humans did not have (some sort of) free will, then they could not have chosen anything other than to eat of the fruit of the forbidden tre ...[text shortened]... be (inescapably) condemned to eternal torment.
I find it really hard to worship such a God...[/b]
Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Gen 3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
However, we see that they did not die physically.
Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
Gen 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
So what did the Lord mean when he said they would die the day they eat of the tree? He was meaning spiritually. They died spiritually, therefore, they lost their 'free will' so to speak. That is why we do not have free will, we are dead in sin. Spiritually dead and can not have a will to follow God.
1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
Unless the Lord quickens us to spiritual life we can not truly seek after the Lord. Our will is only free to seek and follow Him after we are quickened to spiritual life. We can not make ourselves spiritually alive with anything we do.
Eph 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
Eph 2:2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
Eph 2:3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
Eph 2:4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved😉
Eph 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
Eph 2:7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Do you remember when Christ raised Lazarus form the dead? Lazarus did nothing to make himself alive, Christ did all the work. Christ was showing us that we can do nothing to be born again, it is all Christ that does it. Can we choose to be born into this world? Or can an orphaned baby choose who would adopt him/her? Does a vine choose what tree it should grow from? Can clay tell the potter what to make of it? The Bible refers to us as 'Children', 'Vines', and 'Clay'. None of those things can 'choose' their parents, the tree to which it will grow on, nor what the potter will make of it.
So you see, we can not have free will. You say you find it hard to worship such a God, I say it is the greatest pleasure to worship a God that would not leave me in a state of being dead.
Originally posted by pritybettaAdam and Eve did die physcially, just not immediately. Man became mortal. As far as I can tell God meant physically.
...So what did the Lord mean when he said they would die the day they eat of the tree? He was meaning spiritually. ...
How do you know God meant that they died spiritually. Do you Biblical support for that?
In 1 Cor 2:14 the word natural really means 'sensual', and cannot apply to all of mankind. That verse is saying that people who focus on the satisfaction of the senses cannot also be spiritual.
1 edit
Originally posted by Rajk999Can you tell me where it is said that man was immortal to begin with? Why would there be a tree of life? Could it be because they were not immortal but rather mortal?
Adam and Eve did die physcially, just not immediately. Man became mortal. As far as I can tell God meant physically.
How do you know God meant that they died spiritually. Do you Biblical support for that?
In 1 Cor 2:14 the word natural really means 'sensual', and cannot apply to all of mankind. That verse is saying that people who focus on the satisfaction of the senses cannot also be spiritual.
I believe they were mortal which would explain the tree of life. Therefore, Adam and Eve had to have died spiritually that day.
And as for 1 Cor 2:14, you have to read it in it's context. The word 'natural' can mean 'sensual' also, however, if it is used in the context of the chapter you see it's meaning is applied to mankind. The nature of a human being sees the things Spirit of God as foolishness.
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
Originally posted by pritybetta[/ignore]
So you see, we can not have free will. You say you find it hard to worship such a God, I say it is the greatest pleasure to worship a God that would not leave me in a state of being dead.
This is not correct. There are many passages in both OT and NT that indicate not only the presence of free will, but the ramifications (the logic; cause and effect) of those choices made through free will.
[ignore]
Originally posted by pritybettaYou need to learn to use a concordance.
Can you tell me where it is said that man was immortal to begin with? Why would there be a tree of life? Could it be because they were not immortal but rather mortal?
I believe they were mortal which would explain the tree of life. Therefore, Adam and Eve had to have died spiritually that day.
And as for 1 Cor 2:14, you have to read it in it's con ...[text shortened]... lied to mankind. The nature of a human being sees the things Spirit of God as foolishness.
Im tired of trying to educate you.
Check the Greek words for 'surely die' in Genesis with a case that we know applies to 'spiritually dead' and see if the words used are the same. Eg. when Christ said "let the dead bury their dead' .. we know he meant spiritually dead.
2 edits
Originally posted by pritybettaThanks for the response. Just a couple of notes:
Yes, you are right, I am sorry. Adam and Eve did have 'free will' if that is what you want to call it. They were free to do what ever they pleased except eat the fruit of the tree of good and evil, However, the Lord told them that in that day they shall die.
Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest greatest pleasure to worship a God that would not leave me in a state of being dead.
(1) The reason I put the parenthetical phrase “of some kind” with reference to “free will” is that there is more than one understanding of what that entails (I perhaps should have put "free will" in quotes in that post). As you point out with some of your examples, it surely does not entail such things as if/when/to whom to be born; it does not entail the ability to jump off a tall building without falling, etc., etc. It would entail the ability to choose from among available options under the conditions of our existence.
(2) The God I would not want to worship was the God—I really should say the God-concept or the particular notion of God—that “intended, from the beginning, to create beings that would be (inescapably) condemned to eternal torment.” I should have been more clear about that. I was not, and am not, implying that that is your idea of God.
Originally posted by Rajk999I don't think there are any Greek words in Genesis.
You need to learn to use a concordance.
Im tired of trying to educate you.
Check the Greek words for 'surely die' in Genesis with a case that we know applies to 'spiritually dead' and see if the words used are the same. Eg. when Christ said "let the dead bury their dead' .. we know he meant spiritually dead.
Originally posted by PinkFloydThe original is, of course in Hebrew. However, some people lean heavily on the Greek Septuagint (LXX), a Jewish translation from the Hebrew [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint]. St. Paul, for example, sometimes used the LXX, sometimes translated directly from the Hebrew, sometimes relied on the Aramaic Targum—depending on which particular phrasing best served the point he wanted to make. The Eastern Orthodox churches rely almost entirely on the LXX.
I don't think there are any Greek words in Genesis.
The translators of English versions draw upon both the Hebrew and the LXX; I don’t know which ones weight one or the other more heavily. Sometimes, the LXX is used to decide cases where the ancient Hebrew is unclear. (Often, there are footnotes indicating that the meaning of a particular Hebrew word or phrase is uncertain, or can have multiple meanings; Jewish exegesis traditionally finds a lot of richness in mutiple possibilites—and Hebrew puns and idioms can get lost in translation.)
Originally posted by vistesdIs there some sort of accounting of St Paul's usage? That is, every time he refers to, quotes,
St. Paul, for example, sometimes used the LXX, sometimes translated directly from the Hebrew, sometimes relied on the Aramaic Targum—depending on which particular phrasing best served the point he wanted to make.
or paraphrases Hebrew Scripture, how can we tell which source he used?
Nemesio
1 edit
Originally posted by NemesioMy Harper Collins Study Bible, NRSV, cites in footnotes when Paul draws directly from the LXX or the Targum--at least sometimes. I'll look to see if I have marked a couple of examples.
Is there some sort of accounting of St Paul's usage? That is, every time he refers to, quotes,
or paraphrases Hebrew Scripture, how can we tell which source he used?
Nemesio