| idunno |
| Posted 06/17/12 at 11:01 PM | Reply with quote #1 |
|
I'll be starting to teach through the eighth chapter of Romans this Sunday and would appreciate some input on these issues of election, predestination, and foreknowledge. I'm looking ahead to the next chapter but feel these concepts are introduced in the eighth chapter, specifically verse 30 " And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified".
This little verse has been deemed 'the golden chain of salvation'. As I've understood it every 'link' is entirely the work of God. The chain begins in eternity past with Gods foreknowledge, and ends in eternity future with the redeemed being glorified.
My inquiry is simple, how do you understand this verse and that section of Romans 9?
-Ego tibi maximus gratias ago
|
| Loading... | |
| emailestthoume |
| Posted 06/17/12 at 11:41 PM | Reply with quote #2 |
|
| I am probably just going to make this more difficult for you, but you might want to know that a person like N.T. Wright who endorses the "New Perspective on Paul" (though it's actually old) would probably take these things to be referring to people groups as opposed to individuals. For example, Wright would take Paul's point about Jacob and Esau to mean that God chose the people group that follows Christ over the people group that follows the Jewish law codes only (such as no pork etc…). So the point would be that God has called and justified and glorified the people group that follows Christ… however, that leaves open just who they are. That would be a way to perhaps escape the calvinist predestination implications of the passage.
For Wright the purpose of a lot of Romans is to make clear that you do not have to become Jewish (by following the Jewish ceremonial law) to become a Christian… while someone like Luther thought it was about not trying to earn your salvation because salvation was a free gift.
To be honest, I don't know who is right. I think they both make good points…maybe they are both right.
Also, I think predestination is not just a "great if its true" doctrine. It can cause problems if it is false… as people can use it as an excuse to themselves to sin (even great sins… if you are predestined, you will go to heaven anyway) when Paul would probably threaten such people to hell, as I think even traditionalists like John Piper admit. |
| Loading... | |
| idunno |
| Posted 06/18/12 at 12:37 AM | Reply with quote #3 |
|
Thanks for the input email,
I'm not necessarily trying to escape Calvinistic implications. After all if they've got a point, they've got a point. Getting the big picture before focussing on the details is a really good way to approach a book. In that regard I think Luther and Wright are saying very similar things. Paul's primary point in Romans 9 seems to be that salvation is give irrespective of anything we do. The one was loved while the other was hated prior to their being born. |
| Loading... | |
| emailestthoume |
| Posted 06/18/12 at 12:41 AM | Reply with quote #4 |
|
Quote: Paul's primary point in Romans 9 seems to be that salvation is give irrespective of anything we do. The one was loved while the other was hated prior to their being born.
Though, I think this would be something Wright would disagree with. I think he would say that the point is that following the Jewish ceremonial law wont get you to heaven… and that Paul never intended to say that going to heaven is not Wright, I think would think it matters a lot what you do in regard to whether or not you go to heaven. Many people would also disagree that you cannot lose your salvation.
Perhaps it will be clearer if I point out that for Wright, most anytime Paul says "works" he only means "works of the Jewish ceremonial law." So when Paul says that you are not justified by your works he means, "you are not justified by getting circumcised…" Wright would say, I think, that Paul never meant to say that you are not justified by general works of morality like giving to the poor. In that sense of "works," Wright would affirm that we are justified by works. |
| Loading... | |
| vmancha |
| Posted 06/18/12 at 12:57 AM | Reply with quote #5 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by idunno
I'll be starting to teach through the eighth chapter of Romans this Sunday and would appreciate some input on these issues of election, predestination, and foreknowledge. I'm looking ahead to the next chapter but feel these concepts are introduced in the eighth chapter, specifically verse 30 " And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified".
This little verse has been deemed 'the golden chain of salvation'. As I've understood it every 'link' is entirely the work of God. The chain begins in eternity past with Gods foreknowledge, and ends in eternity future with the redeemed being glorified.
My inquiry is simple, how do you understand this verse and that section of Romans 9?
-Ego tibi maximus gratias ago
this is how a person I listen to explains it read |
| Loading... | |
| idunno |
| Posted 06/18/12 at 01:28 AM | Reply with quote #6 |
|
Vmancha, thanks for the link.
Email, I summarize the first three chapters as Paul saying:
1. You have the law. Whether its written on parchment or on the heart, we all have a revelation of Gods moral standard.
2. You'll be held accountable to the law.
3. You can't keep the law. Again, whether its the Mosaic law or the natural law, we can't keep it.
Paul does go on to point out that its not possession of the scriptures or circumcision of the flesh that saves but faith. Abraham was counted as righteous before doing any works because he believed God. So while I'd agree with Wright that Paul is saying we aren't bound to the Mosaic law, I'd add that we aren't bound to the natural law as well.
Romans 3:21-31 "But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22 This righteousness is given through faith in [h] Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, [i] through the shedding of his blood —to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished —26 he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.
27 Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. Because of what law? The law that requires works? No, because of the law that requires faith. 28 For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law. 29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, 30 since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith. 31 Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law." |
| Loading... | |
| emailestthoume |
| Posted 06/18/12 at 02:34 AM | Reply with quote #7 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by idunno
Email, I summarize the first three chapters as Paul saying:
1. You have the law. Whether its written on parchment or on the heart, we all have a revelation of Gods moral standard.
I had a long conversation with an orthodox Jew on this site and when I first said that we had all failed to fulfill the law, it did not seem to compute with him. This is because Jews believe that only Jews are under "the law." When Paul speaks of the law written on the heart, (Rom. 2:15) I think it could be referring to believing Christians who have the law written on their heart because of the new birth… though perhaps this is wrong... Quote: 2. You'll be held accountable to the law.
I don't know if he says this about gentiles. Quote: 3. You can't keep the law. Again, whether its the Mosaic law or the natural law, we can't keep it.
I don't know that Paul would speak of a natural law that no one can keep. Quote: Paul does go on to point out that its not possession of the scriptures or circumcision of the flesh that saves but faith. Abraham was counted as righteous before doing any works because he believed God. So while I'd agree with Wright that Paul is saying we aren't bound to the Mosaic law, I'd add that we aren't bound to the natural law as well.
I am not sure there is convincing evidence that Paul would say this about the natural law. Quote: Romans 3:21-31 "But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22 This righteousness is given through faith in [h] Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, [i] through the shedding of his blood —to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished —26 he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.
27 Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. Because of what law? The law that requires works? No, because of the law that requires faith. 28 For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law. 29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, 30 since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith. 31 Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law."
Interestingly, and I think he has a point, Wright says that if Paul had meant to speak of a natural law here rather than just the Jewish law, the statement in bold would be a non-sequetor. |
| Loading... | |
| troyjs |
| Posted 06/18/12 at 02:39 AM | Reply with quote #8 |
|
idunno,
In regards to what works Paul is addressing, look back to Chapter 7:
4 So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. 5 For when we were in the realm of the flesh, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. 6 But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code. 7 What shall we say, then? Is the law sinful? Certainly not! Nevertheless, I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”
The Commandment, 'Thou shalt not covet', is not a ceremonial law.
At the end of chapter 7, Paul tells us that there is a dichotomy within himself -- in the flesh he can not stop sinning against the law. In the Spirit, he has a desire to be holy and please God. He then asks, 'Who can save me from this body of death?':
24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? 25 Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.
Paul says that he delights in God's law -- a christian, delighting in God's law but unable to obey it as he should. Unless Paul can be said to delight in the ceremonial laws post-conversion, and unless we understand the end of Romans 7 divorced from it's preceding context, ie., the moral law eg, 'do not covet', then it seems that Christ Jesus also saves us from the sin against the 10 commandments -- not just sins against the ceremonial laws.
Therefore, there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.
What does it mean though, that God 'foreknows anybody?
It is agreed that God knows everybody, and knows what everybody will do. However, there is a Biblical category in which God does not know some persons:
Matt 7:23
And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’
God knows everybody, and knows everything about them -- yet only and all of those that God 'foreknows', are those who are predestined.
It is important to keep in mind that foreknown, predestined, justified, glorified, are all verbs in the Greek, which are exclusively God's actions. This is important lest one import the idea of human action or work into the text. We will have to wait for the context of Romans 9 before we can have the explicit affirmation of God's sovereignty in election. Nevertheless, since the golden chain teaches that those foreknown are also those predestined, and the same are justified, and the same are glorified -- we can understand that God's foreknowledge is peculiar and exclusive for those who God has eternally had a salvific relation toward. In fact, some good exegetical work has been done in understanding the term, 'foreknew', in the same sense that we are chosen/predestined in love; the elect are called the beloved; those Christ welcomes into His presence are those He knows. Ofcourse, what distinguishes those God 'foreknows', and those God does not 'foreknow', is not the idea that God doesn't know certain propositions regarding the latter, but that the former receive the salvific love of the Father. If 'predestined in love', and 'predestined according to foreknowledge' refer to God's relational disposition and will, then the term, 'foreknew', is indicative or perhaps a Biblical term which is only properly understood in the category of 'foreloved', or 'preloved'. Namely, those who God has eternally loved salvifically, are those who are chosen in love, and are those who receive the benefits of His mercy -- predestination, justification, and glorification.
Continuing through Romans 8, we read that nothing can separate us from this love of God. This epistle was written to the church in Rome, and this special love which nothing can separate us from, is God's special love He has bestowed upon His people. God's love for the church of God, is unbreakable meaning that nothing any human could ever do, can separate us from it. This lends greater weight to the idea that this special salvific love for the church, is something not contingent upon what man can do, and is the eternal gracious gift to usward. This special salvific love for His people, is the foundation upon which we receive the benefits such as justification and glorification. Victory is our reward!
How comforting and edifying is it to know that one is foreknown by God -- To be a recipient of God's eternal salvific love, and that nothing could separate us from it -- not even the sins which weighed upon Paul's conscience in the previous chapter?
Romans 8 is Paul's answer to the struggle he was expressing in Romans 7. We sin continually, but there is no condemnation for us who are foreknown by God. For nothing can separate us from His love.
Romans 9 transitions toward the promises toward Abraham. Paul teaches us on what basis someone is a child of promise, and that children of God are 'children of the promise'. THThe first few verses tell us that this promise is in regards to salvation, as do the last few verses of the chapter. verses 8 and onwards teach us that salvation or 'being a child of promise' is not contingent upon what we do, but upon God's election. Paul responds then to the charge that God is unfair for choosing some to be saved, while passing over others.
Romans 9 is difficult for those who believe that 'foreknowledge' is based upon God's knowing what people will do, or choose. This seems to deny the fact though, that Paul's example explicitly denies this claim. It will be said that Paul is only teaching that God's election is temporally prior to good works. However, this ignores the fact that Paul never limits his example to chronological order, but rather to logical order -- election does not depend on works. Election depends on God's mercy. It is clear eisegesis when soemone tries to understand Paul's words to refer only to a chronological order, when Paul never limits his words to chronological fact. Rather, Paul is teaching that the potter is in charge of all the vessels, which is exactly why Paul has to respond to the charge of 'unfairness'.
kind regards
|
| Loading... | |
| idunno |
| Posted 06/18/12 at 03:01 AM | Reply with quote #9 |
|
Troy, this was actually a clever tactic to get you posting again. Mission accomplished 
Seriously though this is good stuff guys, but this requires more attention and a larger screen/keyboard than I have at the moment. I'd love to actually have a discussion on Romans one chapter at a time if you gents are interested and able. I may not have time to respond in depth tomorrow but will the following day. |
| Loading... | |
| troyjs |
| Posted 06/18/12 at 04:30 AM | Reply with quote #10 |
|
Idunno,
My leave of absense was selfish -- I left because because of what I was feeling and thinking in regards to RF with respect to me.
However, I should have remembered that I am not ere for myself alone, but for the edification of other believers. To know that God has used me to help some, is greater blessing than an entertaining and thought-provoking discussion.
kind regards
|
| Loading... | |
| emailestthoume |
| Posted 06/20/12 at 01:50 AM | Reply with quote #11 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by troyjs
idunno,
In regards to what works Paul is addressing, look back to Chapter 7:
4 So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. 5 For when we were in the realm of the flesh, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. 6 But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code. 7 What shall we say, then? Is the law sinful? Certainly not! Nevertheless, I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”
The Commandment, 'Thou shalt not covet', is not a ceremonial law.
At the end of chapter 7, Paul tells us that there is a dichotomy within himself -- in the flesh he can not stop sinning against the law. In the Spirit, he has a desire to be holy and please God. He then asks, 'Who can save me from this body of death?':
24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? 25 Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.
Paul says that he delights in God's law -- a christian, delighting in God's law but unable to obey it as he should. Unless Paul can be said to delight in the ceremonial laws post-conversion, and unless we understand the end of Romans 7 divorced from it's preceding context, ie., the moral law eg, 'do not covet', then it seems that Christ Jesus also saves us from the sin against the 10 commandments -- not just sins against the ceremonial laws.
Therefore, there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.
I think this might be where Wright's contention fails, but I am not sure a similar one will. A New Perspective on Paul scholar who was a professor of mine said that to a first century Jew there was no "ceremonial law & moral law" there was just "the law." The Law was given on Mount Siani explicitly to Jews only. To them and their descendants. Paul may not have thought in terms of a "universal moral law," and even if there was such a thing, it would not have been called "the law," as "the law" was a term reserved for the commands given to Moses. And these were commands given only to Israelites.
Quote:
What does it mean though, that God 'foreknows anybody?
It is agreed that God knows everybody, and knows what everybody will do. However, there is a Biblical category in which God does not know some persons:
Matt 7:23
And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’
God knows everybody, and knows everything about them -- yet only and all of those that God 'foreknows', are those who are predestined.
It is important to keep in mind that foreknown, predestined, justified, glorified, are all verbs in the Greek, which are exclusively God's actions. This is important lest one import the idea of human action or work into the text. We will have to wait for the context of Romans 9 before we can have the explicit affirmation of God's sovereignty in election. Nevertheless, since the golden chain teaches that those foreknown are also those predestined, and the same are justified, and the same are glorified -- we can understand that God's foreknowledge is peculiar and exclusive for those who God has eternally had a salvific relation toward.
I think getting into Paul's intent here might help clear up the case. It seems to me that his goal was to make clear that people are saved in Christ apart from the Law… that they don't need to convert to judaism to become Christian. For Jews this is anathema. I recall a Jewish person here I talked to that got very upset that someone would tell him that he didn't need to keep the Law… it seems to fly in the face of the explicit commands of the OT. In order to keep people from freaking out about their souls state while not following the law, Paul perhaps told them that Christ-followers as a people, were predestined, called, and saved.
It is also important to not put the whole weight of a doctrine on a verse or too… and to look at the verse in itself without realizing the non-philisophically precise way people generally speak. For example, take Paul's statement, "no one is righteous, no, not one." Taken in this way, Paul would be making clear that Jesus could not be righteous.
Quote: Continuing through Romans 8, we read that nothing can separate us from this love of God. This epistle was written to the church in Rome, and this special love which nothing can separate us from, is God's special love He has bestowed upon His people. God's love for the church of God, is unbreakable meaning that nothing any human could ever do, can separate us from it. This lends greater weight to the idea that this special salvific love for the church, is something not contingent upon what man can do, and is the eternal gracious gift to usward. This special salvific love for His people, is the foundation upon which we receive the benefits such as justification and glorification. Victory is our reward!
It seems to me that you are taking this out of context and putting upon the verse far more weight than it can bear if you are saying that this means that a person cannot lose their salvation.
For example,
For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. 2They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. 3They all ate the same spiritual food 4and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ. 5Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered over the desert. 6Now these things occurred as examples to keep us from setting our hearts on evil things as they did. 7Do not be idolaters, as some of them were; as it is written: “The people sat down to eat and drink and got up to indulge in pagan revelry.” 8We should not commit sexual immorality, as some of them did—and in one day twenty-three thousand of them died. 9We should not test the Lord, as some of them did—and were killed by snakes. 10And do not grumble, as some of them did—and were killed by the destroying angel. 11These things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the fulfillment of the ages has come. (1 Cor. 10:1-11) Also, see Hebrews 6 "It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, 6if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace." Even John Piper, the predestination warrior himself will admit that God warns believers that they will go to hell if they keep sinning… he just says that thy wont actually ever keep sinning… this seems incredibly ad-hoc to me.
Quote: How comforting and edifying is it to know that one is foreknown by God -- To be a recipient of God's eternal salvific love, and that nothing could separate us from it -- not even the sins which weighed upon Paul's conscience in the previous chapter?
If you take it to mean that if we commit something like pedophelia or murder, or adulator or rape, that it cannot separate us from salvation I would say, how dangerous is such a doctrine and contrary to Paul who made salvation contingent upon final perseverance as Jonathan Edwards recognized. Someone in my church has recently been charged with the first of these, and I fear that him believing he is eternally predestined to heaven could have been something he used as an excuse to justify his behavior.
Quote:
Romans 8 is Paul's answer to the struggle he was expressing in Romans 7. We sin continually, but there is no condemnation for us who are foreknown by God. For nothing can separate us from His love.
Romans 9 transitions toward the promises toward Abraham. Paul teaches us on what basis someone is a child of promise, and that children of God are 'children of the promise'. THThe first few verses tell us that this promise is in regards to salvation, as do the last few verses of the chapter. verses 8 and onwards teach us that salvation or 'being a child of promise' is not contingent upon what we do, but upon God's election. Paul responds then to the charge that God is unfair for choosing some to be saved, while passing over others.
What I think you are missing is that Paul is not addressing our struggle of doubting our salvation as Christians, but a first century Jew or gentile's struggle with believing that they can be saved without following Jewish laws.
|
| Loading... | |
| troyjs |
| Posted 06/20/12 at 04:12 AM | Reply with quote #12 |
|
emailestthoume,
Thank you for your reply.
In regards to the ceremonial/moral distinction, I agree that a hard demarcation would be anachronistic and eisegetical, as such a distinction would not exist in the mind of a 1st century Jew.
Rather, the 'law' which Paul is speaking of, is infact greater than the extent of the precepts given to Israel. It is knowledge of wrong-doing which is condemning, which is provided by the Law, and which is experienced by the conscience of the gentile.
Your next contention though, is something I strongly disagree with. Paul did not teach that the Law need not be obeyed. Rather, Paul taught that Christ obeyed the Law for us.
Paul's intention in Romans 8, is to give an answer to Romans 7 in specific, and for the previous chapters. Remember that in Romans 7, Paul is struggling with the natural man -- the dichotomy between living in the flesh, and living by the Spirit. In chapter 8, Paul elaborates upon Christ's work which saves us inspite of our failures -- inspite of the fact that we continually sin. The one who struggles, is one for whom there is now no condemnation. Infact, Paul in chapter 7, is providing himself as the example of one who is living by the Spirit. The one who lives by the Spirit, is the one who his now not condemned:
(7:25) Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.(8:1) Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life [a]in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.
The person who serves the law of God whith his mind, but still serves the law of sin in his flesh, is the person who has no condemnation.
In regards to the golden-chain, let us not read anything from it what it does not speak. What it does say, is:
God does several things, ie., they are active verbs in the greek:
foreknows; predestines; calls; justifies; glorifies.
The prioricity is that of God and His purpose:
28 And we know that [k]God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. 29 For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; 30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.
Focusing on verse 28, we learn that God calls, according to His purpose.
Thereafter, we have the particular actions of God previously mentioned. Paul then makes these acts of God, the basis for why we will not be separated from the love of God.
In the end of the chapter, Paul beautifully expresses the impotence of any created thing to separate us from God's love:
37 But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. 38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
----------------------------------------------------------------
It is true that the explicit statement of God's priority to our faith in Christ, comes in the next chapter:
(9:11)for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would [h]stand, not [i]because of works but [j]because of Him who calls,
Compare with:
(8:28) And we know that [k]God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.
However, It is just as true that the argument made by Paul in chapter 8, beginning in chapter 7, is that Gods act of salvation is co-existent with the sin of those He saves, and the impossibility of anything to 'unsave' those God has determined from eternity to save -- and all according to His purpose.
The place where the prescient view tries to get a foot-hold, is in regards to 'foreknowledge'. However, the term is a strong verb, which is indicative of an active work on God's part. There is just as much reason to think that the term, 'foreknowledge' supports the prescient view, as the term, 'predestination' or 'called'. All these are acts which God does, which then form the basis upon why no created thing can separate us from God.
In regards to sin, it is also true that the man of God is being sanctified, and is being led by the Spirit of God. Your examples seem to make a distinction between 'some really bad sins', and those which are not indicative of having lost one's salvation. David committed murder and adultery, but he is an example for us.
Infact, it seems you make a distinction between sins within the decalogue. You mention murder and adultery, but do not mention coveting or lying. Paul struggled with sin in chapter 7, yet rejoiced and proclaimed to be more than a conqueror through Him, and rejoiced that nothing created could separate him from the love of God. For this I am glad, as Christ said that if we even look at a woman with lust, we have committed adultery. The man of God will be conformed to the image of His likeness, but that will be different for all of us, and none of us can claim to be in a more acceptable state before God, by referring to what we do or don't do.
In regards to your final paragraph -- the context is not confined to the Jewish laws alone, but is in regards to all law. This is why Paul in the preceding chapters, mentioned the Gentiles having a conscience bearing witness of their sin, which condemns them, and also where Paul in the very next chapter, speaks about the Gentiles as being children of the promise:
Romans 2:
15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,
Romans 9:
23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.
What we can hang on Romans 8, is that God does several things, which makes it impossible for any created thing to separate us from the love of God. Further, we can more fully understand God's act of 'foreknowing', as something He does for those whom He then calls, justifies, and glorifies. The text logically says that those God foreknows, are those who will be glorified. Because of this, we can understand God's action of 'foreknowing', as a part of God's order of salvation, which is a particular act of love He has for His people, and is why no created thing shall separate us from Him.
kind regards
ThoroughlyFurnished.blogspot.com
|
| Loading... | |
| idunno |
| Posted 06/20/12 at 05:29 AM | Reply with quote #13 |
|
| It's a quarter passed two in the morning and I'm still working, most likely I'll be at it all night. I just wanted to drop in and say that I very much appreciate your input gentlemen. Jeff, I actually posted an argument showing humanities accountability to the natural law , perhaps you could give it a look. |
| Loading... | |
| emailestthoume |
| Posted 06/27/12 at 03:51 AM | Reply with quote #14 |
|
Hello troyjs,
I appreciate your time, however, I think you look at Romans more like a later commentator than a first century reader. I hope you do take me seriously here, I used to debate with my professors while backing the Calvinist side for a long time.
The issue of whether or not one needed to keep the law in order to be saved (whether Jew or Gentile) was of utmost importance. We see in Galatians this issue taken with extreme seriousness by Paul, who, at least in part has the "ceremonial" Jewish law (the term is used here for simplicity) in mind as he mentions it in connection with being circumcised.
So, I think the mind of a first century reader, given the context, would be… how can Paul say this law which the bible seems to say must be kept forever for one to partake in the promises of God, must not be kept?
So when Paul says something like,
"For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."
he is trying to convince people that there salvation is secure, despite the fact that they are not keeping the law, and despite persecution etc… and not necessarily despite the fact that they may commit apostasy or murder etc…
I feel you look at the passage like this, and say,
1. Paul says no created thing can separate me from eternal heaven after I die,
2. I am a created thing
3. Therefore I cannot separate myself from eternal heaven after I die
However, I think you are looking at Paul's words here abstractly, and as a philosopher, and not a human who understands the subtleties in all of our conversation.
I feel if we always looked at scripture in the way the above passage is treated, and the bible would be left in shreds.
For example, take this scenario,
1. Jesus said that everyone who lies is of the Devil
2. Rahab the harlot lied
3. Therefore Rahab the harlot is of the devil
However, Rahab is praised in the bible for sending the spies away.
Likewise if I worked at a gym and I told you that if you pay your fee, your gym membership is safe… no one can separate you from your gym membership… would it follow that you cannot be kicked out of the gym if you threw a weight at some guys abdomen? No. When I said that no one could separate you from your gym membership, I meant that it cannot be invalidated provided you do not commit some unforgivable gym-sin.
I need to sleep, but I shall add more in the next few days. It would probably be best if you waited to respond till then.
God bless
|
| Loading... | |
| idunno |
| Posted 06/29/12 at 05:01 AM | Reply with quote #15 |
|
Jeff I know you asked Troy to wiat till you added to this, but I have time to post right now so allow me to add my two cents.
I think I agree with Troy's take on the end of of chapter eight, here's why.
Quote: There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.
First the chapter starts with a "therefore", So as Jay Vernon McGee says, "You should ask what the therefore, is there for". It's a conclusion drawn from the last chapter and Paul gave a summary of ch 7 in verse 21, " Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin. He's a man whose desire is torn in two. Part of him (the old man) serves the law of sin, the other part (the new man) serves the law of God. Then comes chapter eight, and with it no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus! In spite of all the wretchedness that is Paul there is no condemnation for him on account of what Christ has done. He filled that chapter with all the sin that is us and it's done away with in the first verse of eight. Mercy and Grace.
I think the purpose of the next few verses is to make sure that they understand that it is those who "have their minds set on the things of the Spirit" that are not subject to condemnation. In other words, "those who serve the law of God with their mind", as he described himself at the end of 7.
Quote: 2 For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death.3 For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5 For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. 6 For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. 7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. 8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. 10 But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. 11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.
I think in light of the fact that he just explained this ongoing struggle with the "flesh" in the last chapter, we should empasize having ones mind "set" and not turn into legalists.
Quote: 12 So then, brothers, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh.13 For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 14 For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sonsof God.
Again, importance is placed on the pattern of your life.
Quote: 15 For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!” 16 The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, thenheirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him.
Now I think it's appropriate to ask what exactly they would fear. I think this fear is rooted in that mess back in chapter 7, the universal and continual struggle with sin. One can fall into a rut because of this struggle and this would surely cause some to fear the possibility of hell.
But so long as your have your mind "set" on the things of the Spirit and not "set" on the flesh you've nothing to fear (see 13 and 14), though there is some suffering involved.
Quote: 18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us.
Now I don't think Paul has randomly turned his attention to suffering in general, I think the suffering is that struggle with sin.
Quote: 19 For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. 23 And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.
there's a desire for something that's not ours to have yet; freedom from sin.
Quote: 26 Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words.27 And he who searches hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.
Not only do we have the promised deliverance from sin to hold on to, we have the Spirit interceding for us.
Quote: 28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. 29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.
So we know that all things work together for good. In context I think he's telling them even their struggle with sin is working towards a better end.
In regards to the golden chain, Troy has pointed out that they are all actions carried out by God. I'd add that he might have included the golden chain to encourage those who were being discouraged by this struggle that we all deal with from time to time.
Quote: 31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32 He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? 33 Who shall bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. 34 Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised— who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us. 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword?
So, as I see it, the point is that though the struggle with sin is great it cannot separate us from the love of God.
Quote: 36 As it is written,
“For your sake we are being killed all the day long;
we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.”
37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38 For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Amen. 
If you think I've misinterpreted something feel free to point it out.
|
| Loading... | |
