Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification

[Andre]

Neither Bob or Andre understand that the justified condition of the child of God there is still the principle of death at work in them - obviously demonstrated in their physical death.

Obviously we all die. But Paul is clear in Romans 8 - the person in Christ has been set free from the very thing that enslaved that man in Romans 7, the law of sin and death. Let's remember what we were talking about. You said that Romans 7 describes the state of the Christian.

I pointed what should be fairly obvious. The person in Romans 8 declares he has been set free from the law of sin and death, while the person in Romans 7 acknowledges that he is subject to the law of sin and death.

So since we probably agree that the person in Romans 8 is a Christian, how can the person in Romans 7 also be a Christian?

You appear to be embracing the position that one can be both subject to, and also set free from, the law of sin and death.

The justified man are "dead" to sin in the sense they are emancipated from its dominion over them. They are not dead experientially to sin as it is very much alive within the saint (Rom. 7:25). They are no longer under the law Like a slave that has been emanci
pated from legal slavery. They are FREE from the law's condemnation and penalty. However, they are not free from the power/influence of indwelling sin. It should be obvious since born again people are not sinless.

I really do not see how this works. No one is suggesting that the Christian never sins. Remember that in Romans 7:25, Paul describes the person who has been delivered from the state of affairs that the earlier parts of the chapter describe. So, the "transition" between the description of the unbelieving Jew under the Law of Moses - which is what chapter 7 is mainly about, does not occur exactly on the Romans 7 to Romans 8 transition.

But I cannot possibly see how you can argue that the person described in the main chunk of Romans 7 is a Christian, if that is indeed what you are doing.

Romans 7 does not deal with the experiences of the believer. It is Paul's reflection on the plight of the Jew under Torah, analyzed from his perspective as a Christian.

Would the Christian say this about his experience as a Christian:

Once I was alive apart from law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died. 10I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death

Of course not. Paul is looking back here to the time when the advent of the Law - the Torah - brought judgement and death. This is true of the Jew under Torah, not the Christian. Note the specific allusion to the delivery of the Torah at Sinai – “when the commandment came”. Clearly, Paul is describing the history of Israel, using himself (a Jew) as a representative.

Would the Christian say this about his experience as a Christian?:

But in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it produced death in me through what was good, so that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful

Sin produces death in the Christian? Sin becomes utterly sinful in the Christian? Of course not.

Please do not misunderstand Romans 7. It is not a transcript of Christian experience, for the alleged "elect" or otherwise. It is what Paul knows to be the case about the plight of the Jew under Torah, as seen from Paul's present state - that of a redeemed saint.

 

[Andre]

Romans 7:18-8:15 deals with indwelling sin and the principle of death still at work within every born again child of God.

I simply do not see how Romans 7:18-7:24 can be descriptive of the experience of any kind of Christian.

"I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out."

The Christian cannot do good things? What happened to "new creation" theology?

"the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing"

The Christian is mired in hopeless slavery to sin? In Romans 8 - where we indeed have a Christian (whereas we do not in 7:18-7:24), we have Paul instructing the believer to walk in the Spirit and put misdeeds to death. How can this be the same person who cannot combat his evil urges?

So how can it also be said of the Christian that they "they keep doing the evil they do not want to do".

I assert that Romans 7 (up to verse 24 anyway) is Paul's analysis of the unbelieving Jew under the Law of Moses. I do not see how it can be a description of the Christian - the statements above show a person hopelessly enslaved to sin.

And that is precisely what the Christian has been delivered from.

 

[Andre]

Gentleman, below is your problem with the scriptures:

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.

That is not an insult but a serious estimation of your spiritual condition in regard to your doctrinal fruits (Mt. 7:16-20).

This only makes you look desperate. I suggest that the exegesis is rather clearly going against you so, like some others, you try to make this a personal issue by making unargued assertions about our spiritual state.

This kind of statement avoids engaging the actual issue and is a tissue-thin attempt to poison the well.

How about actually explaining how a person who has been delivered from the law of sin and death (the person Romans 7:25 and all of Romans) can also be subject to that very same law?

 

[Dr. Walter]

Desparate? What in the world have I to be desparate about? You have not been able to even deal with what I have said in a rational sane manner.

You asked about Romans 7 whether it applies to the saved or lost man.

1. Paul switches to the present tense in Romans 7:14-25

2. There is no "inward man" in the lost man who "delights" in the law of God - v.21 as the lost man is at "enmity" with God and "not subject to the law of God" - Rom. 8:7.

3. The lost man does not serve God after the "law of the mind" (Rom. 7:25) but serves sin with his mind.

4. The very same struggle outlined here is outlined in Galatians 5:16-17 and applied directly to saints.

This only makes you look desperate. I suggest that the exegesis is rather clearly going against you so, like some others, you try to make this a personal issue by making unargued assertions about our spiritual state.

This kind of statement avoids engaging the actual issue and is a tissue-thin attempt to poison the well.

How about actually explaining how a person who has been delivered from the law of sin and death (the person Romans 7:25 and all of Romans) can also be subject to that very same law?

 

[DHK]

Consider Abraham: "He believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." 7Understand, then, that those who believe are children of Abraham. 8The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: "All nations will be blessed through you."[b] 9So those who have faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.

Paul is clearly telling the Jew to not make the mistake that membership in God's true family excludes Gentiles. And the perfect way to make that case is to deny that doing the works of the Law of Moses justify. Why? Because the only ones who can do the Law of Moses are those to whom it was given.

Jews.

Everything you said contradicts the passage which you attempted to expound. Let's consider a few things about this passage.
First note that Abraham himself never considered a Jew. The name came from Judah. In fact he wasn't an Israelite either. That name came from his grandson Jacob, who was named Israel by an angel of God. The promise was given to Abraham, but that promise was passed down to his progeny.

Thus when it says: "Abraham believed God and it was counted unto him for righteousness" it isn't even speaking of the Jews or of Israel. It is a reference to Abraham as an individual. And that individual was justified in the sight of God by faith alone, not by works. Even before he left Ur of Chaldees he believed in God, and that belief was counted for righteous. No works were involved.

What did it say previous to that verse? That was verse 6. Why not quote verse one and the succeeding verses.
Romans 4:1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?
--Here Paul is referring to works--that which is done in the flesh. If those were going to get Abraham anywhere, Abraham was in for a big surprise.

Romans 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
--One cannot be justified by works. You may glory or boast in what you have done, but not before God. Before God your works are as filthy rags (Isa.64:6).

In Rom.2:14,15 we are told all men are given God's moral law. This was the same law that Abraham had. He wasn't a Jew, per se. He had the moral law of God, the same law that other Gentiles had. Moses had not arrived on the scene yet.
He was justified by faith, and not by works; just as any Gentile is today.
The passage is teaching the opposite of what you say it is.
It teaches that all must come to Christ by faith and faith alone. Works will profit nothing.

 

[Andre]

Desparate? What in the world have I to be desparate about? You have not been able to even deal with what I have said in a rational sane manner.

Again, your repeated insults - here suggesting I am not sane or rational - has all the hallmarks of someone who feels exegitically cornered and therefore turns to belittling his opponent.

You asked about Romans 7 whether it applies to the saved or lost man.

I do not believe I "asked" about this - I made the assertion, and supported it with arguments, that the person described in Romans 7 (except, of course, verse 25) cannot be a Christian.

1. Paul switches to the present tense in Romans 7:14-25

Indeed. But this does not support the argument that Paul is describing Christian experience. The transition from past to present is entirely consistent with the thesis I am arguing for. More specifically, the stuff in the past tense constitutes Paul's reflection on Israel's past and the stuff in the present tense constitutes Paul's reflection on the continuing state of unbelieving Israel. So the tense transition does no damage to my assertion that, in Romans 7, Paul is describing the unbelieving Jew living under the Law of Moses.

2. There is no "inward man" in the lost man who "delights" in the law of God - v.21 as the lost man is at "enmity" with God and "not subject to the law of God" - Rom. 8:7.

I do not understand what your argument is here.

3. The lost man does not serve God after the "law of the mind" (Rom. 7:25) but serves sin with his mind.

Let me clarify something I said in earlier posts. Romans 7:25b is a description of the Jew under Torah - I did not say this, but you correctly discerned that I embrace this position.

I suggest that Paul is indeed talking about a lost Jew, such as he was, who embraces the Law of Moses (remember that in Phillipians 3, Paul claims that he was a Torah-observant Jew) and yet finds that he cannot resist evil in his fallen pre-Christian state. So it is indeed Biblical to say that an unbelieving Jew can be zealous for the Law of Moses.

4. The very same struggle outlined here is outlined in Galatians 5:16-17 and applied directly to saints.

You did not include verse 18, which shows that, contrary to what you assert, verse 17 is really about the lost person. So what Paul says in Galatians 5 harmonizes with the assertion that Romans 7 describes the lost Jew:

So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. 17For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. 18But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law.

In verse 18, Paul is quite clear - the Christain is indeed led by Spirit of life, and has left slavery to the sinful nature (i.e. verse 17) behind.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Galatians 5:18 does not contradict Galatians 5:16-17 but presents the same duality that is presented in Romans 7:25 within the child of God. The same subject in verses 16-17 is the same subject addressed in verse 18 - the child of God as Paul is not writing to lost people.

The present tense refers to the one who identifies himself as "I" in Romans 7:14-25. The "I" is the one writing this - Paul and he is speaking of himself in the present tense state not the past tense as in Romans 7:1-13.

No lost person has an "inward man" who delights in the law of God but the lost man is totally "the old man" who is not "subject to the law of God and neither indeed can be" - Rom. 8:7 Hence. Romans 7:21 refers to the saved man.

Romans 7:25 identifies where the victory is in the first phrase but identifies the present condition of Paul in regard to himself. The lost man does not have indwelling sin merely in his members but in his whole being. The mind of a lost person does not serve God.

The saved man still has INDWELLING SIN and the man being described in Romans 7:14-25 is dealing with INDWELLING SIN. The lost man cannot isolate sin to one aspect of him as this man and claim it is "no more I" that do it as does this man in Romans 7:17:

Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

However, the born again man can claim indwelling sin exists still within him as the cause of sin.

The law is spiritual but the born again child of God is not yet completely spiritual in regard to His whole person. If he were, there would be no internal warefare within him. The "carnal" or fleshly aspect of him is still "under sin" and death proves it. - Rom. 7:14.

Galatians 5:16-17 as well as verse 18 is true of the believer as verses 16-17 are addressed to the BELIEVER as much as verse 18 is.

Again, your repeated insults - here suggesting I am not sane or rational - has all the hallmarks of someone who feels exegitically cornered and therefore turns to belittling his opponent.


I do not believe I "asked" about this - I made the assertion, and supported it with arguments, that the person described in Romans 7 (except, of course, verse 25) cannot be a Christian.


Indeed. But this does not support the argument that Paul is describing Christian experience. The transition from past to present is entirely consistent with the thesis I am arguing for. More specifically, the stuff in the past tense constitutes Paul's reflection on Israel's past and the stuff in the present tense constitutes Paul's reflection on the continuing state of unbelieving Israel. So the tense transition does no damage to my assertion that, in Romans 7, Paul is describing the unbelieving Jew living under the Law of Moses.


I do not understand what your argument is here.


Let me clarify something I said in earlier posts. Romans 7:25b is a description of the Jew under Torah - I did not say this, but you correctly discerned that I embrace this position.

I suggest that Paul is indeed talking about a lost Jew, such as he was, who embraces the Law of Moses (remember that in Phillipians 3, Paul claims that he was a Torah-observant Jew) and yet finds that he cannot resist evil in his fallen pre-Christian state. So it is indeed Biblical to say that an unbelieving Jew can be zealous for the Law of Moses.


You did not include verse 18, which shows that, contrary to what you assert, verse 17 is really about the lost person. So what Paul says in Galatians 5 harmonizes with the assertion that Romans 7 describes the lost Jew:

So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. 17For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. 18But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law.

In verse 18, Paul is quite clear - the Christain is indeed led by Spirit of life, and has left slavery to the sinful nature (i.e. verse 17) behind.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Gentleman,

The point of Romans 7:6-12 is that there is no salvation in law keeping as the law (ten commandments) only condemns and kills but offers no aide to save the lost Jewish law keeper.

The point of Romans 7:14-25 is that the law written upon the "inward man" still has no power to overcome the power of indwelling sin in the saved man.

The solution to both Romans 7:6-12 as a lost man is the same solution to Romans 7:14-25 to the saved man. You need Christ to give you eternal life and satisfy the law's full demands (Romans 7:1-5) and you need Christ to give you victory over indwelling sin as a child of God (Rom. 7:25a). Or as Paul tells the Colossians "As you received the Lord Jesus Christ SO walk ye in him."

If you try to tackle indwelling sin by the powr of your own free will you will suffer total and constant defeat every single time. However, when you trust in the Spirit of Christ for victory over indwelling sin you will put to death the "body of death" wherein the power of indwelling sin exists (Rom. 8:10-15).

 

[BobRyan]

Gentleman,

The point of Romans 7:6-12 is that there is no salvation in law keeping as the law (ten commandments) only condemns and kills but offers no aide to save the lost Jewish law keeper.

The point of Romans 7:14-25 is that the law written upon the "inward man" still has no power to overcome the power of indwelling sin in the saved man.

The solution to both Romans 7:6-12 as a lost man is the same solution to Romans 7:14-25 to the saved man. You need Christ to give you eternal life and satisfy the law's full demands (Romans 7:1-5) and you need Christ to give you victory over indwelling sin as a child of God (Rom. 7:25a). Or as Paul tells the Colossians "As you received the Lord Jesus Christ SO walk ye in him."

.

1. I am amazed that you are so willing to admit to the Perseverance of the Saints - the walk of faith of the saints in that response.

2. The "As you have received Christ Jesus" becomes a matter of the WILL - for it is a choice of the sinner to accept Christ and die to self that opens the door for what follows. "IF anyone hears My voice AND OPENS the door I WILL come in " Rev 3. It is resorting to that same model all through life that results in victory over sin that we see in Romans 6 and in Romans 8.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Dr. Walter]

1. I am amazed that you are so willing to admit to the Perseverance of the Saints - the walk of faith of the saints in that response.

2. The "As you have received Christ Jesus" becomes a matter of the WILL - for it is a choice of the sinner to accept Christ and die to self that opens the door for what follows. "IF anyone hears My voice AND OPENS the door I WILL come in " Rev 3. It is resorting to that same model all through life that results in victory over sin that we see in Romans 6 and in Romans 8.

in Christ,

Bob

I am not denying the Biblical doctrine of perseverance of the saints which is but the flip side of preservation of the saints. I am denying your doctrine of POTENTIAL perseverance of the saints. Philippians 2:13 and Ezekiel 36:27 both say that God's will is the CAUSE behind us willing to persevere in doing His will. However, you reverse and make it say the very opposite. In so doing you render the statement "worketh in us both to WILL and to DO" invalid because according to you it should be interpreted to read "God worketh in us BY OUR PERMISSION to help US WILL and do His good pleasure." You do the same to Ezekiel 36:27 where it reads "cause you" but you interpret it to mean "help you."

This is how you defend your position. You reverse the stated cause and effects. You redefine the Biblical definitions to fit your fancy. You ignore what the Scriptures say and what context they are found in. Hence, we go round and round over the same texts you depend upon but pervert.

 

[DHK]

Since this thread has exceeded its 30 page limit it must be closed.
Please feel free to start another if you so desire.