Am I the only one on the planet who understands Romans 7?
- Thread starter Peterlag
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
I have no concept of slick sidesteps nor have I ever thought I was proven wrong about anything on here. Take for example the spirit inside of us is not the Spirit which is God. The words “HOLY SPIRIT” in the Bible are primarily used in two very different ways: One way is to refer to God Himself and the other is referring to God’s nature that He gives to people. God is holy and is spirit and therefore “the Holy Spirit” with a capital “H” and a capital “S” is one of the many “names” or designations for God. God gives His holy spirit nature to people as a gift and when HOLY SPIRIT is used that way it should be translated as the “holy spirit” with a lowercase “h” and a lowercase “s.” The Bible says there is one God, and one Lord, who is the man Jesus Christ; and one gift of the holy spirit. Most Christians are aware that the original manuscripts of the Bible were written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. However, it's not well known that Hebrew and Aramaic do not have upper-case and lower-case letters, but rather they just have one form for their letters.
Greek does have upper and lower-case letters, but the early Greek manuscripts were all written with only upper-case letters. Therefore, the early manuscripts had no such thing as the “Holy Spirit” or the “holy spirit” because what was always written was the "HOLY SPIRIT." The capital or lower-case letters are always a translator’s interpretation whenever we read “Holy Spirit” or “holy spirit” or “Spirit” or “spirit” in the English Bible. The difference is usually due to the theology of the translator. The bottom line is we cannot know from the Hebrew or Greek texts whether the Author meant the “Holy Spirit” or the “holy spirit” because we must decide based on the context and scope of Scripture whether the reference being made is to God or God’s gift.
They say you lost the argument when you stop talking about the topic and start attacking the other guy. And that's what you have started to do with me. You do not comment on what I write. You attack me personally.
Crucify is a good biblical word. I use it a lot. I do wonder why you say that I don't. Here it is again right off my very own writings...
We undergo a miraculous exchange at the center of our being once we have the spirit of Christ. Who we were in Adam is no longer there. We become a new person because we are now a child of God who is in Christ. The key event causing this exchange is a death, burial, and resurrection with Christ. This miraculous exchange is not figurative or symbolic, but literal and actual.
The spiritual part of every Christian has literally and actually been crucified, buried, and raised with Christ. The fact that this occurs spiritually and not physically doesn’t make it any less real. So what happens to the old self that was in Adam? The old self is entirely obliterated once the spirit of Christ enters the Christian.
I know this comes as a complete shock to many of you who have been indoctrinated in the-old-nature-versus-the-new-nature theology. Most Christians have been taught to believe that after salvation, they are still the same at their core, and they live the rest of their lives trying to restrain this old nature. They believe they have two natures.
I respond to what folks say. As they turn from what I write and start attacking me is when I write about me. Here's an example. Folks say you are an idiot if you do not believe we are sinners in God's eyes. Therefore you need to learn how to read the Bible. So I come back with I'm already an expert in biblical concepts. Then along comes another reader like yourself who says see he only talks about himself.
Here's a few pages I wrote on walking in the spirit. Does it look like I don't know the subject... www.carb-fat.com/walking-by-the-spirit.html
rebuilder 454
Well-Known Member
rebuilder 454
Well-Known Member
Contesting what you are asserting is not attacking.
Ahem...you first accused me of talking about myself. So my declaration over your self engrandizement was just following your example.
Like i said you are not reading for comprehension.
CadyandZoe
Well-Known Member
The first half of the chapter is an analogy based on the Law concerning Marriage. Do you know what the analogy means?
The bottom line is Paul is not writing about Christians. In Romans 7 he's writing about those living in the flesh and in this case it's Israel.
We do seem to be on two different pages. Could it be that I speak too much concerning that which is spiritual? That's often the case even for Paul or Jesus.
Very correct. We walk in the gift. We don't walk in God. It's spirit not Spirit.
CadyandZoe
Well-Known Member
Peter, you don't understand the chapter or the points Paul makes there. I'm sorry.
CadyandZoe
Well-Known Member
I asked you to explain the analogy and you couldn't. This is clear evidence that you don't understand the passage.
There is nothing I can't explain about the New Testament.
Paul did all this self talk while he was thinking of himself under the Law before he received the spirit of Christ. Because after he became a Christian he had no sin within him that God could see...
Colossians 2:14
Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
And then when Paul started walking in the spirit it became impossible for him to sin...
1 John 3:6I
Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him.
To abide in him is to be in Christ. It's the same as walking by the spirit. This is a lost art because the Bible preachers teach their people to walk in the flesh. The Catholics were the first to teach we are sinners and that we should look at ourselves and our sin. Paul taught we should look at Christ and to walk in his spirit.
amigo de christo
Well-Known Member
Let us examine this my friend .
Before coming TO CHRIST i did many sins , sins i had no conscious that were wrong or even sin .
YET later , when by grace i was drawn to FAITH in CHRIST and my heart changed
SIN became exceeding sinful to me , AKA i became aware of its evil , i now see the sin in my flesh
as A MONSTER . no longer do i have any peace in sin , rather its but a vexation to my soul
when the flesh arises to pop them lustful thoughts into my head . SO yeah . Just a reminder my friend .
One it seems you might already know yourself . too many just love to twist romans seven
as they do other scrips unto their own destruction . SIN , i became aware of it AS SIN , DIED TO IT etc .
hate it now . That occured AFTER having come to CHRIST .
the more i read that bible , the more by grace sin became more evil to me
and soon i too had to cry for the LORD to save me even from my own flesh and evils . A deep need
FOR JESUS grew and grew and grew . I came to the realization that all are evil and there is no good in the flesh
BUT THAT IN JESUS CHRIST we can OVERCOME and shall overcome .
CadyandZoe
Well-Known Member
I'm not asking you to explain the New Testament. Paul is using the Law concerning marriage as an analogy. If you can't explain the analogy, how can you claim to understand the chapter?
What language in the passage supports your contention that he had his epiphany before he received the spirit of Christ? Your view seems forced.
I don't think you are paying attention to the passage. You seem to ignore verses that contradict your view. Consider the following verse for instance.
Romans 7:24 Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!
The question is, "Who WILL set me free . . . " indicating what will happen in the future. Unless you want to claim that Paul plans to be come a Christian in the future, this verse contradicts your view.
Similar threads
