Romans 7 and 8 without confusing verses

[CharismaticLady]

I'm not sure I understand the question, but anyway, I posted that passage because someone had already posted the same passage earlier and I thought the TLB might be of some benifit to them. To answer the next question, if I have it right, is that I am sure all people are tempted by the things of the world while struggling to live a life that is pleasing to God, and as Paul obviously felt the same way sometimes, I thought it was encouraging to know that regardless of the temptations, he overcame them and got the victory.
.

You do realize that at the time of the writing he also wrote Romans 8:2. Romans 7:14-23 is before the freedom in Christ. Romans 8:2 is after. Romans 7:14-23 is the Old Covenant; we are under the New Covenant of the Spirit.

 

[amadeus]

Particularly the trash she wrote here, and it is filthy trash, is that I only Parrot Calvin. In fact, I've never quoted Calvin on this forum. Not one time. I don't get my doctrine from Calvin.

Perhaps you don't quote Mr. Calvin. I know little more about him than what I have read over the years on forums like this. You may not be parroting him, but you certainly are not quoting scripture either. You say that certain things, which according to you are derived from scripture, are true, but seldom do you attempt to explain yourself using scriptures why they are better understandings that those of many people with whom you are supposedly discussing or debating.

Of course you don't have to do that, but if you don't why would you ever expect anyone not already with you to join you? If you mean that you are one of God's finally chosen "saved ones" why do you even bother discussing such issues with people like @CharismaticLady or like me?

 

[reformed1689]

Perhaps you don't quote Mr. Calvin. I know little more about him than what I have read over the years on forums like this. You may not be parroting him, but you certainly are not quoting scripture either. You say that certain things, which according to you are derived from scripture, are true, but seldom do you attempt to explain yourself using scriptures why they are better understandings that those of many people with whom you are supposedly discussing or debating.

Of course you don't have to do that, but if you don't why would you ever expect anyone not already with you to join you? If you mean that you are one of God's finally chosen "saved ones" why do you even bother discussing such issues with people like @CharismaticLady or like me?

I'm here to correct error and call out false teachers. It is rampant here.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Perhaps you don't quote Mr. Calvin. I know little more about him than what I have read over the years on forums like this. You may not be parroting him, but you certainly are not quoting scripture either. You say that certain things, which according to you are derived from scripture, are true, but seldom do you attempt to explain yourself using scriptures why they are better understandings that those of many people with whom you are supposedly discussing or debating.

Of course you don't have to do that, but if you don't why would you ever expect anyone not already with you to join you? If you mean that you are one of God's finally chosen "saved ones" why do you even bother discussing such issues with people like @CharismaticLady or like me?

He just makes one line statements from Calvinism 101, not even a scripture reference to back them up. Of course, he'd have to know scripture to be able to quote it. I asked him to supply a teaching yesterday, and he just ignored the request. Does that tell you anything?

 

[amadeus]

I'm here to correct error and call out false teachers. It is rampant here.

Really? Then why don't you try to answer questions I have and that other people have about what you do or do not believe? To correct something to me means explaining what is wrong and why it is wrong and what needs to be done to correct it. If you really believe a teacher is false, why would anyone believe you if you do not explain your position using any applicable verses of scripture?

In another recent post of yours you said that Calvinism and Reformed are not the same but you made no effort to explain exactly what the differences were and why you espouse the one and not the other. I honestly don't expect you to convert me, but there are others reading these posts who might like to know what you believe and why.

 

[amadeus]

He just makes one line statements from Calvinism 101, not even a scripture reference to back them up. Of course, he'd have to know scripture to be able to quote it. I asked him to supply a teaching yesterday, and he just ignored the request. Does that tell you anything?

Yes, he has done the same thing to me before. If he really doesn't know, he is allowed to say, "I don't know". Rather he is quick to call yourself or others dishonest, even though you are telling it is like it is. His only argument against you is that is doesn't fit whatever pattern it is that tries to fit himself into... The word, "Reformed" alone doesn't tell me a thing. I presume one thing from his words and he tells me I don't understand, but he makes no effort to clarify. Is this what God expects from us?

 

[reformed1689]

He just makes one line statements from Calvinism 101, not even a scripture reference to back them up. Of course, he'd have to know scripture to be able to quote it. I asked him to supply a teaching yesterday, and he just ignored the request. Does that tell you anything?

When/where did you ask me to supply a teaching?

 

[reformed1689]

Really? Then why don't you try to answer questions I have and that other people have about what you do or do not believe?

I do. In fact, I have answered you on MULTIPLE occasions.

If you really believe a teacher is false, why would anyone believe you if you do not explain your position using any applicable verses of scripture?

I do explain, just not every time.

In another recent post of yours you said that Calvinism and Reformed are not the same but you made no effort to explain exactly what the differences were and why you espouse the one and not the other. I honestly don't expect you to convert me, but there are others reading these posts who might like to know what you believe and why.

Reformed simply means biblical. Calvin wrote systematic theologies that help explain the position and that is why many people call it Calvinism. But it did not start with Calvin. It started with the biblical writers themselves. And it was evident in the early church and the church fathers. It wasn't new in the 15th century.

I don't particularly like the term Calvinist because it implies you agree with Calvin on everything. I do not. For example, I do not believe Infant Baptism is biblical, Calvin did. So when people say Calvinist, they assume it means you follow everything Calvin taught and that simply is not the case. People try to use it to distract from the actual doctrine and issues.

 

[amadeus]

I do. In fact, I have answered you on MULTIPLE occasions.

Likely you have on some items, but do you not think it important that any new reader should understand why each time you respond?

I do explain, just not every time.

OK, but don't believe it would be a good idea to explain your position on each thread in which you participate at least once? You may do as you wish, but it seems like a good idea to me.

Reformed simply means biblical. Calvin wrote systematic theologies that help explain the position and that is why many people call it Calvinism. But it did not start with Calvin. It started with the biblical writers themselves. And it was evident in the early church and the church fathers. It wasn't new in the 15th century.

Do you know that over the past 70 years I have belonged to several different Christian groups and everyone of them, including the Catholic, indicated that they were "biblical" and every one of them had some well versed people who could explain exactly why they were "biblical"? In spite of that from what I have been able to see there were differences between them... some of them radically different. I could ask, how you know that you are right and the rest are wrong, but I won't. Your statement this morning on that other thread we are both on clarified where you stand. Digging deeper into that with you again won't help.

I don't particularly like the term Calvinist because it implies you agree with Calvin on everything. I do not. For example, I do not believe Infant Baptism is biblical, Calvin did. So when people say Calvinist, they assume it means you follow everything Calvin taught and that simply is not the case. People try to use it to distract from the actual doctrine and issues.

Your one doctrine that the saved were preselected by God with no other real choices, leaves me speechless as far as you are concerned. Being honest, to me your stand is on a foundation of sand although I might see there being an exception, but not being God I'll leave you with it. If you ever decide to seriously do as I have suggested by going back to the bottom [the lowest room] with nothing, let me know as I would be willing to help...

I still cannot understand why you bother to argue the points you do with people.

For example, given your disagreement with Calvin on infant baptism, what difference could baptism, as a baby or as a well informed adult, make to a preselected person anyway... or to someone who is not preselected?

 

[CharismaticLady]

Giggles for God, is demon possessed!

That is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

 

[CharismaticLady]

'Likewise reckon ye also yourselves
.. to be dead indeed unto sin,
.... but alive unto God
...... through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body,
.. that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.
.... Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin:
but yield yourselves unto God,
.. as those that are alive from the dead,
.... and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.
For sin shall not have dominion over you:
.. for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
(Romans 6:11-14)

Hello CharismaticLady,

The whole of Romans 6 needs to be read, for it deals with the reckoning of faith, We are told to reckon ourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God. It is a reckoning of faith. Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

In Christ Jesus
Chris

Hi there, I didn't notice this first time through. Remember to put a @ attached to the front of my name so I'll get an alert.

Romans 6:2 shows us a fact. That we are dead to sin. But that fact must be believed, thus the reckoning. It is all about knowing who we are in Christ. When you know you are a child of the God who made the whole universe, you can command sickness to leave and it will obey. Proverbs 23:7 "For as he thinks in his heart, so is he.

 

[CharismaticLady]

When/where did you ask me to supply a teaching?

Looks like I missed it, sorry.

If you were to tell someone about grace, how would you describe it?

In it is simplest form, grace is something given to you that you do not deserve based on nothing that you have done but on the person bestowing that grace.

BTW, I disagree. John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

So the Father gave Jesus grace He didn't deserve based on nothing that He did but on the Father who bestowed that grace? What does it mean for a Christian with regards to sin?

 

[Paul Christensen]

Nice post.

However, the only way to beat the sin problem is to pray in the Spirit.

It is a nightmare trying to serve Jesus without His hands on Spiritual assistance.

We, as Paul, need to acknowledge our hidden carnal nature, then pray until the Holy Ghost minimizes it's effect on our inner man.

Only the presence of the Spirit can conquer our fleshly desires as we yield to the Spirit.

This process can get uncomfortable and messy, but in the end, transform our inner man.

I am speaking of getting alone with God and praying in tongues for at least a half hour(Paul said "my spirit prayeth"), then the flesh will begin to break.

After coming out of that type of environment, it is nearly impossible to be tempted to sin, but if we don't redo it, the spirit "wears off", if you know what I mean.

Absolutely. I have been praying in the Spirit for many years, and I wouldn't be without it. It bubbles up from within when I turn my heart to the Lord. It enables me to express my heart to Him when I can't find English words to do it.

I fellowshiped with a good friend through Messenger video yesterday, whom I hadn't spoken to for a number of years, and the first thing he did was speak a sentence in tongues to me by way of greeting, and the joy just rose up in me and we both had a good laugh together. It happens when my spirit links with the spirit of a brother in love and joy in fellowship.

It is because when we speak in tongues, we are giving the most excellent praise and worship to God in the Spirit, and when two brothers in Christ greet each other this way, we are giving mutual praise and honour to the Lord in saying we love the Lord and each other in Christ. Nothing beats it.

 

[reformed1689]

Looks like I missed it, sorry.





BTW, I disagree. John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

So the Father gave Jesus grace He didn't deserve based on nothing that He did but on the Father who bestowed that grace? What does it mean for a Christian with regards to sin?

How on earth do you get that meaning the Father showed grace to Christ? The Father is also full of grace, did he give grace to himself? No. Goodness..

 

[reformed1689]

That is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

The holy rollers being slain in the spirit and stuff? Yeah you are right, it is.

 

[reformed1689]

Absolutely. I have been praying in the Spirit for many years, and I wouldn't be without it. It bubbles up from within when I turn my heart to the Lord. It enables me to express my heart to Him when I can't find English words to do it.

I fellowshiped with a good friend through Messenger video yesterday, whom I hadn't spoken to for a number of years, and the first thing he did was speak a sentence in tongues to me by way of greeting, and the joy just rose up in me and we both had a good laugh together. It happens when my spirit links with the spirit of a brother in love and joy in fellowship.

It is because when we speak in tongues, we are giving the most excellent praise and worship to God in the Spirit, and when two brothers in Christ greet each other this way, we are giving mutual praise and honour to the Lord in saying we love the Lord and each other in Christ. Nothing beats it.

Unless there is an interpreter if you are greeting each other this way it is unbiblical.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Unless there is an interpreter if you are greeting each other this way it is unbiblical.

Who cares? Someone who has never received the gift is uninformed and cannot give any useful comment about it.

 

[reformed1689]

Who cares? Someone who has never received the gift is uninformed and cannot give any useful comment about it.

Well it is debatable as to whether or not the gift actually exists as a prayer language since Scripture doesn't describe it that way. I'll stick with Scripture.

 

[reformed1689]

Who cares? Someone who has never received the gift is uninformed and cannot give any useful comment about it.

And since Scripture says there must be an interpreter you should care.

 

[Preacher4Truth]

BTW, I disagree. John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

So the Father gave Jesus grace He didn't deserve based on nothing that He did but on the Father who bestowed that grace?

Nothing in that text says the Father gave Christ grace. Your argument is silly.