Author Topic: Romans 7 and 8  (Read 95794 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Joan Rügemer

  • Guest
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #40 on: March 01, 2001, 04:36:00 AM »
Most certainly I know- that you know- that I know- that Apostle Paul's condition was as a spiritual man when he wrote the whole epistle of Romans. That we all agree on. That is not at issue. The verses 14-25 are the context of text now in issue. They are written in the present tense. The semantics tell us that. We know that the controversy can not be solved when I give my view of these verses from your view just to please you. I respect you and your level in santification very much. But I believe you know I am not a shoe-licker. I am responsible to be honest with what I find within my thinking or heart's values at the given moment. I don't play a false piety game to be accepted by the crowd. I share how I believe here to get it corrected if it is wrong.  

I share to give you all a chance to get to know who I am in my thinking. The challenge came to search that list of texts you gave me to find the bible support for teaching what I heard from you about loosing our justification when we as baptised believers give in to doing one sin. And further...only when we confess the sin and ask forgiveness do we get justified again and are then in the position to say at that moment we are saved. I have no right to enter heaven with one sin unforgiven in my soul. Only justified ones are redeemed and only redeemed ones will be in the resurrection of the righteous, so I understand. The indication is that with one sin we have broken the whole law and can not be raised in the ressurection of the righteous dead. I need to understand this very carefully because of not wanting to loose my salvation status.  I am in the process of examining what is in me. This forum helps me weigh up what I believe and why I believe it.

I want to also say that my relationship with Jesus is strained or distant because of my foibles, mistakes, failings or missing the mark of being perfect in loving others. But my name is not wiped out of the book of life because I goof up in human relationships.My overall set of mind is to do the will of God. Being saved means having my name in the Book of Life. It got there as I accepted and confesssed Jesus is my Saviour. My understanding of the atonement came years later but my condition of being forgiven, cleansed, saved was established and my baptism was the testimony of my condition. Now I am among SDA's who do not have in the present tense the right to thankfully proclaim they have been saved. I find that odd. I would never say that the condition of salvation I have today will remain so I can say I will still have the status of my name on the book of life in a week or a month or a year. I am as capable of the next for denying Jesus (God please forbid this) but know that when I morning for morning, day for day, let His Word wash me, regenerate me and I listen to do the bidding for the day that He gives me to do, I am saved.  

JRüg


Joan Rügemer

  • Guest
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #41 on: March 01, 2001, 05:14:00 AM »
Brethern,
You know I am not in my spririt to teach men. I am not allowed that position. I don't even want it. I am embarassed or hesitant to even point to a mistake or error that a man makes. So I will speak generaly and in my heart most certainly gently.

At present I see verses 14-25 as expression of Paul describing himself in the condition that plagues all humans namely the carnal being. We as spiritual believer-saints, alive in Christ, have died to the carnal nature and it's laws. We still live in Satan's kingdom but now have the kingdom of God within us. The enemy is doing all sorts of things through stimulation of our senses to get the carnal nature alive and active. Within the community of the saints each where he lives and moves, we all have seen how the carnal nature has been often revived in many spritual saints to cause wrong decisions leading to sin or mistakes or failings or missing the mark or ...however you might want to put it. The reason for this failing to remain spiritual is, as I see it, do to the struggle as verses 14-25 are stating.

Paul started out by saying 'I am carnal' in verse 14. May I illustrate how I see that ? Joan was born of parents who both were born in Brooklyn. Does that make Joan now an Brooklynese ? No- is the answer. Joan was born in Staten Island N.Y. Does that make Joan a New Yorker ? Yes because she was exposed to the public school system up till the age of 10.But she is also an Staten Islander. Joan lived 10 years in Arizona. Does that make her an Arizonian ? No-though she went through the school system her heart didn't identify with the elements that make for Arizonians. She didn't take on and wasn't raised in the mentality of Arizonians. Joan has an American Passport. Does that make Joan an American ? Yes, because of the enviromental training and because of legal status. Joan lives in Germany for 28 years now. Does that make her a German ? Neither yes or no can fit this answer. I will use the German word of 'Jein'. It is a combination of ja and nein. The combination answer is 'Ja' because Joan thinks more like a German than American, she speaks more German than American daily, she adapts to German custom and laws. 'Nein' because she will always have her typical American traits, always be seen as American by the natives here, always be exposed as non-german because of her light accent and grammer small mistakes that just doesn't go away.

Hypothetically Joan gives up her American citizenship and hands in her passport. She then takes on the German oath of citizenship and becomes an German passport. Does that make her a German ? Jein ! She has legal claim through blood to say she is German because of both of her Grandparents being born and raised in the north of Germany, she then also has legal claims to say she is German because of the Passport. But she doesn't make claim to be German. Why ? Because of the struggle of mind and soul and spirit which hasn't settled down to knowing which identity is completely true. The americanism's will stay in her until she dies. The German part of her mental spiritual state is strong because it is presently very predominant due to enviromental influences.

A great number of Germans harbored resentments and bigotry against the German Jews among which was the thinking they not having the right to call themselves Germans. Which the german Jews did. What was the identity of German Jews 60-80 years ago? They were born in Germany, spoke accent-free german, had german passports, had parents born in Germany who had German passports who came out of two other generations of German born and raised German Jewish forefathers. Did they have the right to call themselves german as those of African negro race from generations being born in American have been given the right to call themselves american ? Or are there Americans of European stock in America who still harbor hidden bigotry that blacks have no right to be labeled 'American'?

What I am aiming at to say in comparision is that the Negroess of black americans will stay with them until they die; that the Jewishness of German Jews will stay with them till death... like the carnal heritage of us humans will be in the substance of who we are until we die. We who have become filled with the Holy Spirit and leading a spiritual life are not anymore in the condition of carnalness. Old things have passed aways and all things have become new. Still the substance of carnality is part of our humanity to live with through the santification period until the coming of our our Lord in glory. We decide daily if we allow the Spirituality given by the presence of the H.Spirit in us, freedom to let the nature and character of Christ motivate us in daily decisions. There are times when the carnal nature breaks out and we make decisions on passion, anger, resentments, and what ever evil that may come out of our hearts. Knowing this I can accept wrongs done me and forgive those spiritual christians because I know where the worm is coming out of, and other spiritual christians can more readily forgive me when I goof off in wrong behavior when they understand that my carnal nature hasn't been eradicated.

JR.


[This message has been edited by Joan Rügemer (edited 03-12-2001).]

[This message has been edited by Joan Rügemer (edited 03-12-2001).]


Joan Rügemer

  • Guest
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #42 on: March 01, 2001, 07:11:00 AM »

I believe these verses 14-25 as outward expression of Paul's state of mind 'subsequent' to his conversion. He used the words 'I am carnal' in the present tense referring to the state of humanity he found within himself he could not excape from on his own power.

After all he was filled with the inspiration of the Spirit of God to write the whole epistle to the Romans in one letter to the church at Rome so his being was already renewed with the power of the Spirit who had already given him the gifts of the Spirit needed to be an Apostle and Evangelist at the time of writing. Really, I have no theological theory to support. I say what I see here in my open bible and how I am impressed with the words as I read them.

The first context of verses Paul exhorted upon in Ro 7:5-13 was indeed about his former unconverted life. The period of time indication changes at verse 14 and onwards. Mind you, I am not clear if the santification comes only by keeping the law or not. I tend to think that we are made sanctified by God and He puts us in a schooling of sanctification where we keep the law by his power in us.

Actually I see verses 14 and onwards in the first person singular of Paul talking about himself but in accord with the experience of regenerated new Christians, like us, who have made a confession of faith in Jesus as Savior. Sinners wouldn't have this struggle because their conscience is seared and they don't care if they sin or not. We Christians have often expressed such feelings of struggle with temptation and disgust with out wanting to serve God in our hearts but the flesh is weak.

Paul was a renewed man. He wrote here telling us how he is exposed to temptations from his strong native appetites and passions. The old habits distressed him which showed kept showing up in him but he certainly wasn't wholly under their influence anymore. The Holy Spirit influence was now in him giving him new insight as to what sin really is. He struggled with the tendency of a natural inclination to indulge in that which is contrary to the law. This is the experience of my christian walk until I learned what the filling of the Spirit meant and began to practice living in the Spirit filled life. I still must be sober and watchful because the prowling Lion is out to gobble me up. And he can because my natural bent is more prevailing to carnal living than spiritual living. The threat of being sold to being a slave to Satan again is a real one. I can so fall that if I don't repent I loose my connection with Jesus for ever. That happens to Christians who dabble in little sins to often which lead to big sins which leds to slavery to sin again.

The more we live out the law of God in our daily lives the more we begin to see how spiritual, just and holy it is. To delight in the law of God, as Paul mentions he did in verse 22, gives evidence that he was converted, regenerated, born again and that the Spirit puts a love for the law of God in his heart. As Pharisee it was a religious act or like a business deal with God as he then forcefully outwardly gave the impression he was fullfilling the law of God. Now he says in these last verses of Ro 7 that he now hates evil. That could only come out of a man who had been convicted of sin by the H.Spirit like Paul had been already.

I never met a unregenerated person who had such a struggle with fleshly wishes and a spiritual life. Only regenerated, renewed Christians have this struggle. Paul had a fleshly problem of serving sin at times even while as an Evangelist called of God. He was authenticly a saved child of God. His serving sin was not voluntary but involuntary. The testimony of the spirit filled life is given in the next chapter. That was also his experience. He was not actively planning to sin as a christian. The wickedness just came out of him out of habit from his old nature. The old man, or old nature, is not eradicated and thus can be ignored or will never causes us problems. Then Satan wouldn't be a threat to us. We would be immune to his cunning. No, it is still on board but can be laid to rest when we live consistantly under the governing influence of the grace of God. When we walk in the Spirit we are capable of yielding spiritual obedience. When for some reason or other we as saints decide to walk in the flesh we are incapable to give God spiritual obedience. Instead we yield our members to the law of the flesh and sin when we go against the law of Love.

Santification in my opinion is a state of schooling where there are struggles of saints with a renewed sanctified soul who haven't attained perfection of habits in serving God in obedience.

The unregenerate doesn't give a poof about wether or not they are dead in tresspasses and sin, so Paul's insights were spoken from one who the Spirit was already working in for recognizing sin in his life. Paul was speaking in this context of verses 14-25 of knowing the will of God but not doing it, him seeing the holiness or good of the law but living in conflict to it's requirements. He is writing in these verses  to a build up of the answer in Ro 8.

The more I think about it, the more I must be honest and confess that I've observed there are lots of us people around who have been illuminated by the H.Spirit to the point of actually experiencing conviction of sins in one's doings. We might even carry around a self-accusing conscience for having done something in service to the devil. Such ones also give honor that the law is right, just and good and delight to know God's ways but can't get that required holiness functioning in their lives. We are being overpowered with the love to favorite sins. I think of practicing SDA homo's, or drunks, or smokers, or those prone to temper tantrums wherein they sin against others.

In 1John 1 we are taught that we, believers of the kingdom, in declaring we have no sin deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. But if we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. There is a struggle between grace and corruption in our members. This school of santification we saints are in, is there to let us stive against these sins and tendencies. God is expecting us to live a sin free overcoming life. Galation 5 teaches that the flesh lustesth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh and these are contrary one to the other so that you cannot do the things that you would.

Paul breathed out the wish to attain a perfection in holiness. He testifies to pressing on to the goal which is his high calling in Christ but he never gave testimony of having attained it. Paul sees into himself, sees his carnal flesh and recognises that there is nothing good there. I can testify to the same. The new nature in him, in us, in me, is the receiver for the possibility of the power of God to work His grace so to live a sin free life. WE are totally dependant on Him for such a process. WE are still in the flesh but can be so led by the power of God to live spiritual lives free from sin.

In Romans 7:23 Paul had the spiritual insight to see the conflict of a believer having two govenments of laws to choose from within his members now that he has the law of the kingdom come into his heart. Yes, I believe Christ had set up His throne in the heart of Paul as he nevertheless spoke of the struggle to resist the pull of the flesh.

~~~
Joan
~~~


Joan Rügemer

  • Guest
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #43 on: March 01, 2001, 07:54:00 AM »

Paul saw that there was still a carnal mind in him which is at enmity to the law of God. But we all know that the love of God was shed abroad in his heart to love the law of God.

Similarly the body of believers in Corinth  were baptized believers who got messages from Paul who had to write to them like for babes in Christ who were still carnal and had not understood what it was to walk in the Spirit so as not to fulfill the carnal lusts. He got on to them for having envy and having strife causing division because of some declaring to be followers of Paul, and others not so keen on Paul becoming followers of Apollos, which is a lot like today those who exclusively are labeling themselves as White followers contra Folkenberg followers, or Venden followers or D.Batchler followers. Paul put the mirror up to them in Corinth and questioned : "are ye not carnal ?  Back biting, slander, vengence or the like are carnal weapons.

We are in a warfare against powers of darkness in the invisible world and only through spiritual weapons can we be victorious in pulling down strong-holds belonging to the Devil and his gang. Galatian 5 spiritual weapons, Ephesian 6 as well mentions spiritual weapons.

~~~
Joan
~~~


Harry Elliott

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 95
    • http://
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #44 on: March 03, 2001, 02:34:00 PM »
We can’t understand Paul’s discussions of the law, if we use a new definition of it. To every Jew--including Paul--"the law" meant "The Torah" scroll, that is the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible.

To them, the decalog was given as an "epitome" (representative sample) of the law, not something separate.  That's would explain why the Bible never mentions the term "ten commandments" after Deuteronomy.  Not a single time. Not once. Never, never, never!

There were 613 commandments in the law.   So how in the world did we ever get into the habit of assuming that references to the law meant the 10 commandments to  the exclusion of the hundreds of other commandments?  

Does anybody have an answer, please?


Richard Myers

  • Servant
  • Posts: 38512
  • A glorious sunset teaches of trust and faith.....
    • The Remnant Online
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #45 on: April 19, 2001, 06:43:00 AM »
Brother Harry, sorry to have missed your post. One of the difficulities with trying to  keep up with many different forums. I thought I had read the last post in this forum.

Yes, I have an answer for you. The law is the law. It incorporates the principles of our being. The ten commandments are the simplification of the law. Just as the eight hang on the two great commandments, the whole body of law hangs upon the "ten". When Jesus says to "keep my commandments" He means all of them that we know AND that we should be eagerly expanding our knowlege of all of His commands. Notice in the great promise to us in Ezekiel 36:26 and 27 that more than the "Ten Commandments" is being expressed: "A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them."

The Jews, as a nation, in their blindness "kept the law", but they did not allow the truth to reach into their hearts so they could keep the whole law. Remember the expansion of the law as illustrated by Jesus when gave His sermon on the mount. Hopes this helps some. Can you agree? I would like to hear what others think also.
Jesus receives His reward when we reflect His character, the fruits of His Spirit......We deny Jesus His reward when we do not.

Harry Elliott

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 95
    • http://
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #46 on: April 19, 2001, 08:28:00 AM »
Hi Richard--

What you say seems reasonable to me...up to a point. That point is this question I tried to express. Upon what basis do we ignore the other three categories of sabbaths, ritual circumcision, etc?

Where does the Bible tell us to obey some of the commandments and disregard the rest?  And which to obey and which to disregard?

--Harry


Richard Myers

  • Servant
  • Posts: 38512
  • A glorious sunset teaches of trust and faith.....
    • The Remnant Online
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #47 on: April 19, 2001, 04:30:00 PM »
Of course, Brother Harry. We must not assume anything. We, as Seventh-day Adventists know and understand that the ceremonial law was to be as a teaching tool until the anti-type or shadow would meet the reality, Jesus Christ.

The ceremonial law is no longer part of the law to be kept, for it has been fulfilled. Can we agree? I would assume that you would like to move into some other areas?  :)

Richard

Jesus receives His reward when we reflect His character, the fruits of His Spirit......We deny Jesus His reward when we do not.

DavidTBattler

  • Guest
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #48 on: April 20, 2001, 07:24:00 AM »
Paul was touching on some difficulties that Christians seem to constantly struggle with.

There is a struggle that wants to try to keep happening with God's law.  In this struggle, the following quote makes a lot of sense to me:

"GCB.1895-03-05.032
     The law claims from man entire obedience through the whole period of his life. Hence it is impossible for him by future obedience to atone for even one sin. And without the grace of Christ to renew the heart, we cannot render obedience to the law of God. Our hearts are by nature evil, and how, then, can they bring forth that which is good? "Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one." Job 14:4.

All that man can do without Christ is polluted with selfishness and sin. Therefore he who is trying to reach heaven by his own works in keeping the law, is attempting an impossibility. True, man cannot be saved in disobedience, but his works should not be of himself.

Christ must work in him to will and to do of his own good pleasure. If man could save himself by his own works, he might have something in himself in which to rejoice. But it is only through the grace of Christ that we can receive power to perform a righteous act."

------------------
"...We believe that through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, we shall be saved..."  (Acts 15:11).

Your brother in Christ

David T. Battler


M.A. Crawford

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1666
    • http://
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #49 on: April 20, 2001, 10:14:00 AM »
I, too, wanted to comment earlier on the post dated 03-03-2001 but got sidetracked with other messages. Permit me to briefly offer at this time my reflections on that particular message.

The Seventh-day Adventist Church is one of the few churches I know where everyone who dares to pontificate on Bible topics oftentimes think they are "experts" of some kind or other where theological matters are concerned. Just about everybody today that has an opinion about anything Biblical is writing a book. Let me make it clear that there is nothing wrong with writing books. I believe there are spiritual benefits that can be derived from reading spirit-filled literature. But one must be VERY, VERY CAREFUL and make sure that whatever one reads unto salvation is based upon the Word of God AND NOT solely on the unsubstantiated theories and opinions of men and women.

Another major area where I believe the problem lies is: there are too many "chiefs" and not enough "indians" where spiritual instruction is concerned. There are too many people who are trying to teach and lead and not enough who are trying to listen and follow. Consequently what we have is a smorgasbord of religious ideas on practically every Bible topic imaginable that provide a "cafeteria style," take-your-pick kind of offering that is more often than not devoid of any real spiritual sustenance. How do we safely navigate through the theological maze of error and confusion that confronts us?

"To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them" (Isa. 8:20).

Whatever men and women say in the myriad of religious books on the market MUST uplift Jesus Christ, the Light of the world, and the Word of God as the Source of salvation for all humankind. Otherwise, IT HAS NO REDEEMING VALUE! One must also beware of books and materials that quote the Bible from cover to cover but MISINTERPRET those same quotations by offering the personal opinions of these writers that are not supported by other Scripture, or the writings of Ellen G. White. Oftentimes Mrs. White's writings themselves are misquoted and misinterpreted by writers who try to make them say WHAT THEY WANT THEM TO SAY rather than letting them speak for themselves.

This is, I believe, one of the problems with regards to the question on commandments mentioned in the post dated 03-03-2001. We must study the Word of God and know what it says for ourselves. But, if we are to be saved, it must go beyond just studying and knowing. We must also be DOERS of the Word and not just hearers--those who have knowledge--only (Jas. 1:22). We must be PRACTIONERS of the Word and demonstrate it in our everyday living. If we are to acquire eternal life, we must make sure we have dotted every "i" and crossed every "t" where ordering our lives after the Example of Jesus Christ is concerned.

M.A.  

M.A.

Harry Elliott

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 95
    • http://
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #50 on: April 20, 2001, 02:52:00 PM »
Hi Richard--

Having been an Adventist for three score and eight, I’m very familiar with the moral-law/ceremonial-law theory.   But I’m unaware of any scriptural basis for it. The terms do not occur in the Bible, nor do I find such a division under any other terminology.  I have learned that the medieval Catholic Church devised the idea, but I’ve never found their explanation.  Their authority was such that they probably didn’t have to justify it.  Luther imported it into Protestantism by default.

For example, why would the weekly sabbath be moral and the monthly sabbath be ceremonial?  Simply asserting that we know something is no substitute for a plain declaration of Scripture establishing it.  Where does the Bible say that part of the law was tutorial,  while the rest  (the decalog) was not?

That’s what I look for these days: clear, unambiguous scriptural statements.  I continue to be amazed at  how much Christian tradition has evolved without clear support. No wonder there is so much theological disagreement among us.  :)

--Harry


Wendy

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1834
    • http://www.megspace.com/religion/cainan/
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #51 on: April 20, 2001, 06:46:00 PM »
Hi Harry~

You are right that there are no terms such as ceremonial law-moral law. Those are terms that we've come up with in recent times to help us make it clear which kind of law we are talking about and there is a difference.

Maybe more descriptive words would be prophetic law - non-prophetic law. Jesus made the distinction in Matthew 5:18, "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.".

When we say ceremonial law we are talking about law that is prophetic (eg. slaying the lamb, keeping the seven year Sabbath etc). When we say moral law we are talking about the law that doesn't point forward to anything (isn't prophetic) and therefore can't be fulfilled or pass away (eg. thou shalt not kill, remember the 7th day Sabbath etc).

------------------
WendyL ~ Maranatha! :)

[This message has been edited by Wendy (edited 04-20-2001).]

WendyL ~ Maranatha!:)

Richard Myers

  • Servant
  • Posts: 38512
  • A glorious sunset teaches of trust and faith.....
    • The Remnant Online
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #52 on: April 20, 2001, 08:23:00 PM »
Brother Harry, the implication of what you say is rather astounding. I gave you Biblical support for the distinction. The sacrificial system ended. I have no problem with you wanting to look at different aspects of what was part of the sacrificial system of teaching, but you must acknowlege that it does not take a command from God to know that there was a temple and it had services that were "shadows" of heavenly things and this is what we call "ceremonial".

This is a subject for the Sanctuary thread. Now, back to the law. Paul in Romans 7 is speaking of the moral law, for the ceremonial law was ended. But, it really makes no difference. He was speaking of his inability to obey what he knew to be right. He saw himself condemned by the broken law, which ever law you like.

Richard

Jesus receives His reward when we reflect His character, the fruits of His Spirit......We deny Jesus His reward when we do not.

Harry Elliott

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 95
    • http://
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #53 on: May 05, 2001, 04:08:00 PM »
Hi Wendy--

I believe that it was Dr Bacchiocchi who pointed out that the moral law - ceremonial law division was the product of the medieval Catholic Church. But we don’t normally accept Catholic doctrines without a challenge.  :)

Some Catholic ideas are valid, of course, because they are based on explicit scriptural statements.  I haven’t been able to discover the texts that divide the law into two laws.

Don’t you believe that Jesus was referring to the entire law in the text you quoted?

--Harry


Richard Myers

  • Servant
  • Posts: 38512
  • A glorious sunset teaches of trust and faith.....
    • The Remnant Online
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #54 on: May 05, 2001, 07:44:00 PM »
Brother Harry, the "law" says to take our lamb to the temple, shall we do it? Do you blieve the law of God has ceased to be law for us?

Richard

Jesus receives His reward when we reflect His character, the fruits of His Spirit......We deny Jesus His reward when we do not.

Harry Elliott

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 95
    • http://
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #55 on: May 06, 2001, 03:31:00 PM »
Hi Richard--

I'm intrigued by your question. Could you identify the text of the commandment to take the lamb to the temple?

--Harry


Richard Myers

  • Servant
  • Posts: 38512
  • A glorious sunset teaches of trust and faith.....
    • The Remnant Online
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #56 on: May 20, 2001, 06:18:00 AM »
Brother Harry, here is one such command:  "And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest:" Lev. 12:6

This is the law. Now are you saying we are to be doing this today? Or may we divide the law into ceremonial and moral?

Richard

Jesus receives His reward when we reflect His character, the fruits of His Spirit......We deny Jesus His reward when we do not.

Richard Myers

  • Servant
  • Posts: 38512
  • A glorious sunset teaches of trust and faith.....
    • The Remnant Online
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #57 on: May 28, 2001, 12:10:00 AM »
It is very interesting reading the thoughts of those who believe that when the Holy Spirit indwells a person, who stills has sinful flesh, that He can sin. There is a simple truth that is not understood in these cases. The truth is this; without Jesus in the heart we cannot help but sin. We are dependent upon Christ continually to resist sin. Now the converse is a simple truth also. Jesus does not sin. If we abide in Him and He in us, we shall not sin. We must loose our connection with Christ before we can sin.

Any interpretation of Romans 7 that does not fit the above is a false interpretation. Now, many will judge the Bible by their own experience. This is sad. We must take the Bible as it reads.  The law is an agent in every true conversion.  What does this mean? It means that before one can be converted he must see himself a sinner under the condemnation of the law. Then as he seeks to keep the law, he will find that it is impossible unless he has help. Most Christians find their first experience to be very difficult because they do not know of their need of Jesus in the heart CONTINUALLY. So, they attempt to keep the law by themselves which is an impossiblity. We must allow the grace of Christ into the heart before we can keep the law of God. When we allow our mind to wander away from Jesus, we are left without power to keep the law, we sin. Until we know Jesus as a Saviour, we will be doing the things we do not want to do and not doing the things we ought to do. It is true this can happen after one is converted, for many times we shall separate from Christ, BUT we ought to discover that Jesus is the key to victory over sin. This is to say that we no longer ask, "Who shall deliver me from this body of death."
Jesus receives His reward when we reflect His character, the fruits of His Spirit......We deny Jesus His reward when we do not.

Richard Myers

  • Servant
  • Posts: 38512
  • A glorious sunset teaches of trust and faith.....
    • The Remnant Online
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #58 on: July 17, 2001, 06:24:00 AM »
Looking again at the essence of the message in these texts we want to come into unity. Sister Joan said "The verses 14 and onward show the
               effects of the man after conversion but not filled with the baptism of
               the Holy Spirit. The man is renewed in his state of mind, cleansed and
               made at peace with God but hasn't grasped what it means to live the
               Spirit led life. He is deciding for himself to fulfill the law of God in the
               efforts of his own flesh."

If we have not His Spirit, we are none of His. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirt of God dwellin you. If Christ be in you, the body is dead...

Richard

Jesus receives His reward when we reflect His character, the fruits of His Spirit......We deny Jesus His reward when we do not.

jherbertthompson

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 157
Re: Romans 7 and 8
« Reply #59 on: July 17, 2001, 04:02:00 PM »
Brethren and Sister's...I'm not really sure which way to go with this topic.  ???

There is a REAL SEPARATION between the MORAL and CEREMONIAL Law's...The MORAL law was written by the *finger of God*[Exodus 31:18]; and, the ceremonial law was written, in a book, by Moses [Deuteronomy 31:24-26]...

Brother Myers extension on this *law which is written in the heart*; or, the *heart change* which must occur as in *re-birth*; are right down *main-stream* christianity [including SDA] today...

However, in Romans, I think one need look at the audience to whom Paul was writing.  As I understand it, he was speaking to a particular group of *Jews*; who, amoung other things, had challenged Paul to debate *the law*, and it's demands on newly converted *Gentiles* and *slaves* alike...The Jewish leadership were, in their usual dogmatic way, trying to say that in order for these *new Christians* to be rightly accepted; they [the gentilles in particular] must heed Jewish *tradition(s)* and be *circumcised*, etc.

What is most interesting to me when looking up some of this argument in the EGW Estate search; she actually makes reference to these ceremonial laws; sabbaths; and feasts...Her comments are that if one feels *compelled* to honor them in his/her's experience, than no one should make judgment in one way or another...

If I'm so off base that my addition to this thread is comical, I'll back-out completely, as there are several other area's in which I have participated and will continue to do so as long as the topics are open...

Your brother in Christ.