I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me (Galatians 2:20). Paul says that Christ remaineth/liveth in him.
A look at 1 John 3.6
- Thread starter MisterE
- Start date
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
Yes he does, but you keep jumping around a lot rather than dealing with the actual verse at hand, which you keep trying to retranslate into various things which are not found in the text.
What that generally means, Live2B, is that you are attempting to make the scriptures say something they do not, and that's not what anyone can regard as responsible exegesis. You evade a question that would expose flaws in your theology by simply rewriting the Biblical text, but you will never arrive at the truth like that.
You do err not knowing how to rightly divide Greek Grammar. To argue that the first person present tense verbs in Rom 7.14-25 are historic presents, which is what your position is saying, ignores the semantic pattern of the category of usage, of the hundreds of undisputed historic Presents in the NT, ALL ARE IN THE THIRD PERSON. There is no exception to this rule. Paul is definitely discussing his present situation. Paul is using the FIRST PERSON Present. To simplify what I said above, Paul is using the FIRST PERSON PRESENT TENSE, the only Historic Presents in the NT are in the THIRD PERSON. Historic Presents in this passage are impossible. (See Wallace GGBB p. 2)
OK, I didn't realize that the substitution of the word "Spirit" for "seed" had been made.
I agree with you on the on that, but not that "seed" means "word".
To me, seed in this case, just means seed: in order to illustrate the gendering effect of being reborn of God.
No longer being of Adam's seed, we can no longer bring forth Adam's fruit.
Yes, the more mature a believer is, the more acutely sensitive he would feel of sins - his own from his past, his struggle at present, and other people's around him. You've probably heard this quote - the church is neither the state's servant or master, but CONSCIENCE. That applies to every individual member of the church as well. If Rom. 7 is dismissed as "unrelatable", "past tense", "legalistic", then one's conscience must've been seared with hot iron.
Ok, but now look at the parallel passage in 1st Peter:
22 Since you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit in sincere love of the brethren, love one another fervently with a pure heart, 23 having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever, 24 because
“All flesh is as grass,
And all the glory of man as the flower of the grass.
The grass withers,
And its flower falls away,
25 But the word of the Lord endures forever.”
Now this is the word which by the gospel was preached to you.
Now the "incorruptible seed" being referred to here is unquestionably the word, correct?
I don't think I am evaiding the question or rewriting the Biblical text. The text in 1 John 3:9 plainly says that he who is born of God does not sin and cannot sin. To say that everyone including apostles sin is, using your words, "attempting to make the scriptures say something they do not". We may also not agree about the "seed" in such person. I believe it is Christ, His Spirit. You think it is the word. However, in the Bible, the word of God is also Christ (John 1:1, Rev 19:13) and spirit (John 6:63).
Last edited:
There is no publicly known Christain in your lifetime that you can name who has made the claim that they have not sinned since becoming Christian .
Not one !
Of all the hundreds of Christian Authors , in any of the thousands of Christian books written by them in your lifetime you will not find one solitary quote of never committing a sin can be found on any page, by any Christian author .
Not one .
You can't do it !
And I don't even have to spend 2 seconds researching it to know you have no possibility of finding such a claim from any Christian author .
How is it I am able to make that claim and know with complete confidence you have no possibility of proving me wrong anywhere in the millions of lines of text written by any one of a thousand Christain authors in your lifetime ?
Thoughts ?
Not one .
You can't do it !
And I don't even have to spend 2 seconds researching it to know you have no possibility of finding such a claim from any Christian author .
How is it I am able to make that claim and know with complete confidence you have no possibility of proving me wrong anywhere in the millions of lines of text written by any one of a thousand Christain authors in your lifetime ?
Thoughts ?
It is a good point. Why Paul was using present tense in Romans 7? Please see these short explanations:
Why Paul Wrote in the Present Tense in Romans 7
www.gospeltruth.net
Confused by Romans 7’s Present Tense?
Have you ever shucked corn – take an ear of corn from the stalk in the field [or supermarket], then shuck it? To get to the corn on the cob, the grain, you must remove the outer husk. …
freeinchristblog.wordpress.com
Armenian Bible Church - Historical Present
armenianbiblechurch.org
Just to let you know, I hate reading books or articles that someone recommends. But I took the time to look these articles over. What disappointed me was that the authors were unaware of the Greek construct for a Historical Present. They did not address the Greek Grammar of a Historical Present used in this passage. ALL Historic Presents are used in the THIRD PERSON, but Rom 7 uses the FIRST PERSON. Even if you want a Historic Present to be used with a Present Tense verb, it still has to meet the grammatical requirements. So that, Rom 7 can not be interpreted as Historic Presents which the authors argued for.It is a good point. Why Paul was using present tense in Romans 7? Please see these short explanations:
Why Paul Wrote in the Present Tense in Romans 7
www.gospeltruth.netConfused by Romans 7’s Present Tense?
Have you ever shucked corn – take an ear of corn from the stalk in the field [or supermarket], then shuck it? To get to the corn on the cob, the grain, you must remove the outer husk. …Armenian Bible Church - Historical Present
armenianbiblechurch.org
Yes, Christ is the word made flesh. But now you have to take each verse in its context to know exactly how a word is being used. I'm simply showing you like I did Hopeful in Post #46 that the scriptural support elsewhere is strongly in favor of interpreting "seed" there to mean the word when it is put together in that specific contextual package like it is, and one misapplies and misinterprets it if they take it to mean precisely what I think you seem to be suggesting it should. It's exegetically unsound from a more strict and exacting point of view, IMO.
But blessings in Christ, and I appreciate the cordial back and forth just the same.
Hidden In Him
Please see this example of Paul using the first person in present tense but refering to the state of a person under the law (not to his present state as a beliver) - similar to Romans 7:
For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? (Romans 3:7).
Thank you for sharing. Although i did not read that many books, I agree that the prevailing notion (if not the only one as you say) is that Christians continue to sin. Yet, the Savior told his disciples, "ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free [from sin]" (John 8:32). I will be happy to share my thoughts but would like to know your opinion first. Do you believe the Saviour's words?
I can't agree.
The incorruptible seed needs the word of God to 'do its thing'. (...through the word...)
They are, seemingly, different things.
One facilitating the other.
As the seed, and the word, and the Spirit, are so intrinsically linked together, it doesn't behoove us to quarrel over which came first.
Or which has precedence.
Illogical analogy. The seed doesn't cause the seed to grow, water causes the seed to grow. The Holy Spirit is compared to water in scripture, such as in Isaiah, where it states:
For I will pour water on the thirsty land, and currents on the dry ground. I will pour out My Spirit on your descendants, and My blessing on your offspring. (Isaiah 44:3)
Also Psalm 1 where it states:
1 Blessed is the man whose... delight is in the law of the Lord, And in His law he meditates day and night. 3 He shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that brings forth its fruit in its season, whose leaf also shall not wither; and whatever he does shall prosper.
The Law here is the word, and the rivers of water he is planted by are the Spirit of God which causes the word to grow. Same with Joel 2. The word is the seed that produces wheat, olives and grapes, but it is the former and latter rains of the Holy Spirit that will cause them to grow:
21 Fear not, O land. Be glad and rejoice, for the Lord has done marvelous things!.. For He has given you the former rain faithfully, and He will cause the rain to come down for you—The former rain, and the latter rain in the first month. 24 The threshing floors shall be full of wheat, and the vats shall overflow with new wine and oil. 25 “So I will restore to you the years that the swarming locust has eaten,... 28 “And it shall come to pass afterward that I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy. Your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions. 29 And also on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days.
It is the word that is often compared to seed, such as in the Parable of the Sower:
13 And He said to them, “Do you not understand this parable? How then will you understand all the parables? 14 The sower sows the word. 15 And these are the ones by the wayside where the word is sown. When they hear, Satan comes immediately and takes away the word that was sown in their hearts. 16 These likewise are the ones sown on stony ground who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness; 17 and they have no root in themselves, and so endure only for a time. Afterward, when tribulation or persecution arises for the word’s sake, immediately they stumble. 18 Now these are the ones sown among thorns; they are the ones who hear the word, 19 and the cares of this world, the deceitfulness of riches, and the desires for other things entering in choke the word, and it becomes unfruitful. 20 But these are the ones sown on good ground, those who hear the word, accept it, and bear fruit: some thirtyfold, some sixty, and some a hundred.” (Mark 4:13-20)
When you have the seed planted within the heart of the believer and the Spirit comes and waters it, then you see the growth of the word according to scripture.
Completely Lost in your flesh focused conversation of what freedom from sin is, is God's Spiritual interpretation of what the paramount importance of being made "free from sin" actually is.
Not being free from the presence of sin but being free from the power of death .
God's interpretation is not about the act as the carnal mind walking in the flesh loves to revel in.
God's interpretation is about the new attitude of the Spirit.
The old nature of flesh knows no law, never has , never will.
The new nature needs no law.
God declared to Adam & Eve, who had direct communion with God the Father, that if they sinned they would die. yet they lived in their flesh many hundred years after they first sinned.
Do you believe that having lived thru that first sin and having learned their lesson , that for the next couple hundred years that Adam & Eve never sinned again ?
Do you believe you will meet Adam & Eve one day ?
How can that be if God said that their one solitary sin would cause them to die ?
Do you believe if you are to ask them when you meet them did they ever commit another sin after the fall they will tell you , yes or no ?
Ezekial 18:4
... the soul that sinneth, it shall die.
Could you rephrase your question. I am not following what you are asking. Be as specific as possible. Thank you in advance.
You are mixing your "metaphors".
Seed can only bring forth after itself.
That is the context of 1 John 3:9.
Those reborn of God cannot ever bring forth the devil's fruit.
You were implying that seed causes seed to grow, which is what I was disagreeing with. I would never disagree that seed brings forth after its kind. That's logical.