05 Feb 10
Originally posted by Conrau KEarlier I suggested you read Romans 1-10. That you point to this as a "very clear statement against cheap salvation" by Paul leads me to believe that you have not. Unless I'm mistaken (which is possible given Paul's lack of clarity of thought and presentation), those verses are taken from the midst of Paul's version of "The Way We Were". It does not reflect his views on salvation, but rather is an attempt at overview of how things were / are for those who live under the Law rather than grace.
Thanks to Rajk, here is a very clear statement against cheap salvation in Romans 2:
[quote]1
1 Therefore, you are without excuse, every one of you who passes judgment. For by the standard by which you judge another you condemn yourself, since you, the judge, do the very same things.
2
We know that the judgment of God on those who do such thing ...[text shortened]... f of the heart (where the will and passions are located) impels the person into righteousness.
05 Feb 10
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneYou're going to have to explain how a belief that "God raised [Jesus] from the dead" "necessarily entails a moral life." All it requires is that one truly believe that God raised Jesus from the dead.
[b]Yes, ThinkOfOne, I am quite capable of reading. You do not need to capitilise letters. What I dispute is not the words but your interpretation which fails to acknowledge other Pauline teachings (for example, that immorality will incur divine punishment.)
When Paul says that by belief in Jesus Christ (which mind you, he characterises as a belief of t ...[text shortened]... see where they can make that case. I didn't see where Paul states that.
-----------ToOne------------------------------
But how is such a belief arrived at? It can only be arrived at through the work of the Holy Spirit. This must mean that God's hand is on such a person enabling belief.
Jesus talked about the Holy Spirit and alluded to God revealing things to men. For example , when Peter recognised him as the "Son of the Living God" , Jesus said he was blessed because this had been revealed to him by his Father (ie by his Spirit)
So a man who truly believes Jesus was raised from the dead is doing so via the Spirit of God. And if the Spirit of God himself is upon him then it's not a bad entry point to leading a moral life.
It's astonishing that you can be so immersed in one set of Jesus's words but completely miss anything else he says.
06 Feb 10
I must mention that a few months ago down here in the New! Improved!! South Africa, one of the Zulu tribes sacrificed an ox in the belief that they will reap an abundant corn harvest. The poor beast were not mercifully shot or had his throat cut. First his eyes were gouched out, then his penis was cut of, then his ears and ... ah, too dispicable to continue.
The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals filed criminal charges against tke sangoma, witchdoctor or muruti, or what ever the pastor is called, but the learned, liberal and enlightened judge ruled that the cultural rituals and religeous extremes of the various tribes of the Rainbow Nation are to be considered and (yes, it's true) respected. Respected!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
06 Feb 10
1 edit
Originally posted by DaanvIt's unfortunate that governments give religion that kind of preferential treatment. But is it any less despicable than governments having allowed the Catholic church to handle its pedophile priest problems internally?
I must mention that a few months ago down here in the New! Improved!! South Africa, one of the Zulu tribes sacrificed an ox in the belief that they will reap an abundant corn harvest. The poor beast were not mercifully shot or had his throat cut. First his eyes were gouched out, then his penis was cut of, then his ears and ... ah, too dispicable to continue. ...[text shortened]... inbow Nation are to be considered and (yes, it's true) respected. Respected!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
07 Feb 10
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneWhat a freakin' ignorant reply.
It's unfortunate that governments give religion that kind of preferential treatment. But is it any less despicable than governments having allowed the Catholic church to handle its pedophile priest problems internally?
What does pedophilia have to do with animal cruelty?
It ain't about governments and it ain't about religion. It's about power. Power and money. And corrupt individuals.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
07 Feb 10
2 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneNo; this only indicates your total misapprehension of Pauline doctrine. Paul continues to promote the law (here he means the moral law which includes prohibitions against against stealing and adultery -- not the Mosaic law because he criticises food laws and the practice of circumcision). While he sees faith as salvific, this is not to the exclusion of the moral law. In the passage I gave, Paul is not making a distinction between 'the way things were' and now -- he explicitly address his readers of now:
Earlier I suggested you read Romans 1-10. That you point to this as a "very clear statement against cheap salvation" by Paul leads me to believe that you have not. Unless I'm mistaken (which is possible given Paul's lack of clarity of thought and presentation), those verses are taken from the midst of Paul's version of "The Way We Were". It does not refle ...[text shortened]... at overview of how things were / are for those who live under the Law rather than grace.
And do you think this, O man, that judge them who do such things and do the same, that you shall escape the judgment of God?(Romans 2:3)
As this indicates, Paul clearly believes that sin will incur divine wrath. This is not a statement of things in the past but what is true for all people, because he explicitly addresses his readers. The law remains operative. Paul's argument is that faith offers an escape from the trappings of sin but it does not exclude the proper place of the law:
For it is one God that justifies circumcision by faith and uncircumcision through faith. Do we then destroy the law through faith? God forbid! But we establish the law. (Romans 3:30-31)
This is a clear illustration of what I have said. Paul clearly believes in the salvific power of faith; he does not however believe in cheap salvation. The law still applies. Prohibitions against stealing and adultery remain in the ambit of Christian life. Faith does not excuse a person from wrong-doing. A life of faith liberates the person from sin and a believer has no place for sin:
What shall we say, then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? 2 God forbid! For we that are dead to sin, how shall we live any longer therein? 3 Know you not that all we who are baptized in Christ Jesus are baptized in his death? 4 For we are buried together with him by baptism into death: that, as Christ is risen from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also may walk in newness of life. 5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection. 6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin may be destroyed, to the end that we may serve sin no longer. 7 For he that is dead is justified from sin. 8 Now, if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall live also together with Christ. 9 Knowing that Christ, rising again from the dead, dies now no more. Death shall no more have dominion over him. 10 For in that he died to sin, he died once: but in that he lives, he lives unto God. 11 So do you also reckon that you are dead to sin, but alive unto God, in Christ Jesus our Lord. 12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, so as to obey the lusts thereof. 13 Neither yield your members as instruments of iniquity unto sin: but present yourselves to God, as those that are alive from the dead; and your members as instruments of justice unto God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for you are not under the law, but under grace. (Romans 6:1-14)
As Paul clearly indicates, faith (intimately tied to grace) unites a person to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ and allows him to receive the saving power of Christ's sacrifice personally. Consequently the person is liberated from sin. This however is not a license to commit sin; sin is something to be avoided even more. Salvation is hardly cheap. Anyone who reads Romans critically and entirely will see that sin is a relentless preoccupation for Paul. As he later writes:
But I am carnal, sold under sin. 15 For that which I work, I understand not. For I do not that good which I will: but the evil which I hate, that I do. 16 If then I do that which I will not, I consent to the law, that it is good. 17 Now then it is no more I that do it: but sin that dwells in me. 18 For I know that there dwells not in me, that is to say, in my flesh, that which is good. For to will is present with me: but to accomplish that which is good, I find not. 19 For the good which I will, I do not: but the evil which I will not, that I do. 20 Now if I do that which I will not, it is no more I that do it: but sin that dwells in me. 21 I find then a law, that when I have a will to do good, evil is present with me. 22 For I am delighted with the law of God, according to the inward man: 23 But I see another law in my members, fighting against the law of my mind and captivating me in the law of sin that is in my members. 24 Unhappy man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death? (Romans 7:14-24)
Paul never justifies sin. He describes it as a constant in his life which he must always avoid. So faith does not excuse sin (Paul has faith and so fights sin); it offers a liberation from it. No where does Paul ever argue that faith can pardon the sinner. Faith saves but faith is always an invitation to repentance and a moral life -- not an easy detour around morality. Again, I urge you to read Romans 10 in context.
08 Feb 10
6 edits
Originally posted by Conrau KSeriously, read or reread Romans 1-8. You can't put Romans 10 into context until you have some feel for 1-8.
No; this only indicates your total misapprehension of Pauline doctrine. Paul continues to promote the law (here he means the moral law which includes prohibitions against against stealing and adultery -- not the Mosaic law because he criticises food laws and the practice of circumcision). While he sees faith as salvific, this is not to the exclusion of the life -- not an easy detour around morality. Again, I urge you to read Romans 10 in context.
For instance, the end of Romans 1 seems addressed toward "man without regard toward righteousness", the beginning of Romans 2 seems addressed toward "man with regard toward righteousness that is hypocritical" (this is said in "accusatory voice" which is what seems to be throwing you). From there he moves on to Jews and later all of mankind with a couple of digressions worked in.
Finally in Romans 3 he says:
Romans 3
19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; 20 because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin21 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; 25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. 26 for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
27 Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. 28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.
Read the last line in particular, "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law."
I suspect you may have skimmed Romans 1-8 looking for verses that may support your position, but have yet to have really READ it.
He speaks against sin, but makes the case that Christians are justified by faith as a gift and living under grace rather than the law.
This is reiterated in Romans 8:
1 Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
08 Feb 10
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneNo; I acknowledge those quotes. Paul makes it very clear: salvation lies in faith and not in works. A good moral life is not what God desires but rather a life filled with faith and grace. Nonetheless, as I have conclusively proved, Paul believes that the law is to be upheld and that any believer who makes himself a slave to sin again will lose salvation. Fairly easy to comprehend unless you have an ideological bent against Pauline theology.
Seriously, read or reread Romans 1-8. You can't put Romans 10 into context until you have some feel for 1-8.
For instance, the end of Romans 1 seems addressed toward "man without regard toward righteousness", the beginning of Romans 2 seems addressed toward "man with regard toward righteousness that is hypocritical" (this is said in "accusatory voice" ...[text shortened]... f the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.
08 Feb 10
2 edits
Originally posted by Conrau Klol. "...conclusively proved...".
No; I acknowledge those quotes. Paul makes it very clear: salvation lies in faith and not in works. A good moral life is not what God desires but rather a life filled with faith and grace. Nonetheless, [b]as I have conclusively proved, Paul believes that the law is to be upheld and that any believer who makes himself a slave to sin again will ...[text shortened]... ion. Fairly easy to comprehend unless you have an ideological bent against Pauline theology.[/b]
Just read Romans 1-8 again. You just keep taking verses out of context: the passage from Colossians, the passage from Romans 12, the passage from Romans 2. None of these said what you purported. You see what you want to see.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
08 Feb 10
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI have read them; I have acknowledged them; I have incorporated them into my exegesis. And I conclude -- they do not and cannot support your exegesis. Paul says that faith saves while works do not; faith brings eternal life while the law brings death. But as Paul repeatedly says, that does not do away with the law. In Romans 3 he says he upholds the law and in Romans 6-7, he argues that a person of faith has even greater need for moral vigilance so that he does not become a slave to sin once more. He hardly supports the idea of cheap salvation as he laments his constant struggle to keep his moral character. There is nothing 'cheap' about it.
lol. "...conclusively proved...".
Just read Romans 1-8 again. You just keep taking verses out of context.
08 Feb 10
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneRead the last line in particular, "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law."
Seriously, read or reread Romans 1-8. You can't put Romans 10 into context until you have some feel for 1-8.
For instance, the end of Romans 1 seems addressed toward "man without regard toward righteousness", the beginning of Romans 2 seems addressed toward "man with regard toward righteousness that is hypocritical" (this is said in "accusatory voice" ...[text shortened]... f the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.
I suspect you may have skimmed Romans 1-8 looking for verses that may support your position, but have yet to have really READ it.
He speaks against sin, but makes the case that Christians are justified by faith as a gift and living under grace rather than the law.
-----------ToOne----------------------------------
Erhem.......I don't see how thew thief on the cross could have been justified by "works of the law" , so he must have been justified by something else. Yes?
You accuse Conrau of taking verses out of context whilst you yourself do not look at the context of the ENTIRE gospel.
11 Feb 10
Originally posted by Conrau KFrom this, I'm not sure what your current position is. It seems like maybe you've back off of some previous claims. To which of the following do you still adhere?:
I have read them; I have acknowledged them; I have incorporated them into my exegesis. And I conclude -- they do not and cannot support your exegesis. Paul says that faith saves while works do not; faith brings eternal life while the law brings death. But as Paul repeatedly says, that does not do away with the law. In Romans 3 he says he upholds the law and ...[text shortened]... laments his constant struggle to keep his moral character. There is nothing 'cheap' about it.
Of Col 3:5-6:
"I have shown that Paul sees the possibility of a believer losing salvation by immorality."
"Paul clearly says that salvation is lost by immorality."
Of Romans 12: 9-17
"he urges believers to keep to the moral life or else suffer damnation"
Of Romans 2:1-16
"here is a very clear statement against cheap salvation in Romans 2"
"Paul teaches that God will reward those according to their good work. "
"This is a clear repudiation of cheap salvation and an affirmation of Jesus Christ' call to repentance."
Of the following:
"the absolute minimum requirement for "eternal life" / "heaven" / "salvation" as taught by Jesus: One must become righteous, i.e., one must become one with God, one must follow the will of God, one cannot continue to commit sin, etc."
"And Paul affirms all these points."
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
13 Feb 10
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI don't see any reason to change what I have said. Paul clearly sees faith as essential for salvation (Jesus says a lot about faith too); he does not however believe it sufficient and clearly believes that it can be lost by immorality. Faith is not an exemption from the moral law or a get-out-of-jail card.
From this, I'm not sure what your current position is. It seems like maybe you've back off of some previous claims. To which of the following do you still adhere?:
Of Col 3:5-6:
[b]"I have shown that Paul sees the possibility of a believer losing salvation by immorality."
"Paul clearly says that salvation is lost by immorality."
Of Romans 12: ...[text shortened]... inue to commit sin, etc."
"And Paul affirms all these points."[/b]
13 Feb 10
Originally posted by Conrau KC'mon CK, you made claims that are just not true.
I don't see any reason to change what I have said. Paul clearly sees faith as essential for salvation (Jesus says a lot about faith too); he does not however believe it sufficient and clearly believes that it can be lost by immorality. Faith is not an exemption from the moral law or a get-out-of-jail card.
You made the following claims of Col 3:5-6:
"I have shown that Paul sees the possibility of a believer losing salvation by immorality."
"Paul clearly says that salvation is lost by immorality."
However Paul not only does not say that "salvation is lost by immorality", he doesn't mention "salvation" at all.
Similarly you made the following claim of Romans 12: 9-17:
"he urges believers to keep to the moral life or else suffer damnation"
However Paul not only does not say that they will "suffer damnation", he doesn't mention "damnation" at all.
Despite these facts, you "don't see any reason to change what [you] have said".
It's beyond me how you stick to your position despite the facts.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
14 Feb 10
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneHowever Paul not only does not say that "salvation is lost by immorality", he doesn't mention "salvation" at all.
C'mon CK, you made claims that are just not true.
You made the following claims of Col 3:5-6:
"I have shown that Paul sees the possibility of a believer losing salvation by immorality."
"Paul clearly says that salvation is lost by immorality."
However Paul not only does not say that "salvation is lost by immorality", he doesn't mention "salvation" ...[text shortened]... said".
It's beyond me how you stick to your position despite the facts.
That is not true. I have given a plethora of quotes. Consider more:
Romans 2:6, 13, Who will render to each one according to his deeds. ... For not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified.
2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.
Review the other posts I have written. St Paul clearly does indicate that salvation is lost by immorality. He says that a believer who sins makes himself a slave to sin again -- that he loses the promise given in faith. He constantly writes about the dangers of immorality. The moral law is clearly not some optional add-on.