Belief and Faith

[MarkT]

I am considering that MarkT is discussing the U in TULIP, but unless he says so, I'm not going to assume this.

God always makes the first move in revealing Himself to man...
Man must reply to that revelation with a choice.

God does not force anyone to become worship and obey Him.
A choice must always be made...

Vain philosophy.

 

[MarkT]

How does the scripture say they were set free from sin?


But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. Romans 6:17


We thank God for His doctrine.

We thank God for His Spirit who inspires the doctrine.

We thank God for saving Paul who delivered the doctrine.

We thank God for His grace upon those who obeyed.



Never the less each of us must choose to obey the Lord:

His Gospel
His doctrine
His commandments


God does not do the obeying for us.



JLB

Romans 6:3 says, 'We were baptized into his death', and Romans 6:7 says, 'For he who has died is freed from sin' and Romans 6:11 says, "So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus."

So they were freed from sin by the death of our Lord.

That's how they were set free.

 

[JLB]

Paul’s teaching them that they were (past tense) “slaves of sin” but “were delivered” (past tense) by God! And giving God the thanks for it, not them. Yes, they obeyed (past tense), which is the same word often translated believed. But Paul’s giving thanks to God for them being delivered!

But thanks be to God that you were slaves of sin, but you obeyed from the heart the form of teaching to which you were delivered.Romans 6:17 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Romans 6:17&version=DLNT

Would they have been delivered if the didn’t obey the doctrine?



JLB

 

[JLB]

Romans 6:3 says, 'We were baptized into his death', and Romans 6:7 says, 'For he who has died is freed from sin' and Romans 6:11 says, "So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus."

So they were freed from sin by the death of our Lord.

That's how they were set free.

Obeying the doctrine is how they were set free.

That’s why it’s called the obedience of faith, which all of the book of Romans is expounding on, and is the context of the entire letter.

Paul begins in Romans 1 and ends in Romans 16 with the phrase obedience of faith.

By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name: Romans 1:5


But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith: Romans 16:26


JLB

 

[JLB]

Where does it say they had to make a conscious decision?

But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. Romans 6:17


These folks were slaves of sin, until they made a conscious decision to obey the doctrine by which they were delivered.


Going from being a slave of sin to being delivered requires that you change from what you were doing that made you a slave of sin, to obeying the doctrine by which you were delivered.

A person who hears the truth that will set them free must choose to make the conscious decision to obey that truth by which they are set free.


It’s you working by the power of the Spirit to bring about the deliverance by obeying the truth.

Paul teaches this principle in chapter 8 of Romans.


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.
Romans 8:13


Peter says it this way -


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, 1 Peter 1:22




JLB

 

[GodsGrace]

It doesn't say anything about choosing or deciding to obey. Plus he is talking about sin and obeying sin and being set free from sin Then he talks about becoming obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which they were committed. ie. to the teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ. And they have become slaves of righteousness. The subject is sin. OK?



Joshua said,
Joshua 24:15
And if you be unwilling to serve the Lord, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell; but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

So Joshua said If they were unwilling to serve the Lord, they should choose who they would serve, the gods of their fathers or the gods of the Amorites. So what? The people said they would serve the LORD. But these people knew the LORD and the work which he had done for Israel.

Note Joshua told them if they were unwilling to serve the Lord, they should choose foreign gods. Does that associate choosing with foreign gods?

Doesn't the word CHOOSE mean anything to you?
If we CHOOSE to do something, it means we have a choice...it measn we could have chosen the OTHER way.

My bible says DISAGREEABLE for Joshua 24:15
Your bible says UNWILLING.
Another bible will use a different word....the point is that Joshua was telling the Israelites to CHOOSE whom they would serve.

How do you explain
Deuteronomy 30:19 ??
19“I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants,

Again, we have been given a choice. Life and death were placed before us (as in the N.T.) and we have been advised to CHOOSE life.
Choose means we have a choice.

choose
/tʃuːz/
verb

1. pick out (someone or something) as being the best or most appropriate of two or more alternatives.
   "he chose a seat facing the door"
   sinonimi:select, pick, pick out, opt for, plump for, go for, take, settle on, decide on, fix on, come down in favour of, vote for;
   • decide on a course of action.
     "he chose to go"
     sinonimi:wish, want, desire, prefer, feel/be inclined, please, like, see fit;

 

[chessman]

Would they have been delivered if the didn’t obey the doctrine?

This question assumes incorrectly that their obedience preceded their delivery. Which is completely opposite the passage’s doctrine:

And having been set-free from sin, you were enslaved to righteousness​

Romans 6:18 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Romans 6:18&version=DLNT

Being “set free” from sin IS the delivery Paul’s teaching of here. And it came first. This delivery “leads to righteousness” (v16). Yes, it leads to righteousness through obedience.
But, they were delivered (set free from sin) prior to (not after) their obedience according to this doctrine according Paul lays out here.

Which is why Paul thanks God for their delivery, versus thanking them for their obedience.

Do you not know that to whom you are presenting yourselves as slaves for obedience, you are slaves to whom you are obeying— whether slaves of sin leading-to death, or slaves of obedience leading-to righteousness?​

Romans 6:16 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Romans 6:16&version=DLNT

On your view, is empowerment = enslavment?

shouldn’t we also thank God for our sanctification?

 

[JLB]

This question assumes incorrectly that their obedience preceded their delivery. Which is completely opposite the passage’s doctrine:

But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. Romans 6:16


Paul thanks God they obeyed.


Obeying is the focal point of Paul thanking God.



JLB

 

[JLB]

Which is why Paul thanks God for their delivery, versus thanking them for their obedience.

Paul thanksgiving to God is they obeyed.


I will emphasize with parentheses -


But God be thanked that (though you were slaves of sin, yet) you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. Romans 6:17


But God be thanked that...you obeyed



Paul is thanking God that they obeyed.


God gives each person grace, which is His power to enable the person to do what they must do in order to be saved, delivered, set free, cleansed.

Grace is the Holy Spirit; The power to obey.


I have shown from Paul’s writings about this.


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.
Romans 8:13

• if by the Spirit you put to death

Peter -


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 1 Peter 1:22

• you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit

JLB

 

[chessman]

Paul thanks God they obeyed.

Actually that’s part of the parenthetical.



Paul thanks God for two things in the passage:
1) you were slaves of sin ...
“And”
2) you were set-free from sin

I will emphasize with parentheses

But God be thanked that (though you were slaves of sin, yet) you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. Romans 6:17

That’s my point. But you put the parenthetical marks in the wrong place. Yet why??? Though what??? Theses words introduce a parenthetical.

Literally, v17 and v18 is one sentence grammatically, listing two thank you’s to God with a parenthetical in between. Which is obvious by simply answering the question; Why would Paul thank God for something God didn’t do but men did???

But thanks be to God that you were slaves of sin, but you have obeyed from the heart the pattern of teaching to which you were entrusted, and having been set free from sin, you became enslaved to righteousness.​

Romans 6:17-18 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Romans 6:17-18&version=LEB

Or as you attempted to emphasis using parentheses versus commas:

But thanks be to God that you were slaves of sin (but you have obeyed from the heart the pattern of teaching to which you were entrusted) and (having been set free from sin) you became enslaved to righteousness.

Or

But thanks be to God that you were slaves of sin ( ... ) and (...) you became enslaved to righteousness.

Which is simply another way of saying;

So also you, consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus.​

Romans 6:11 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Romans 6:11&version=LEB


The main (non-parenthetical) point of the passage is that Paul is thanking God (not them) for two things:
1) they were (past tense) slaves of sin
And
2) they became enslaved to righteousness.

Which is why I’ve repeatedly ask you how you got ‘empowerment’ from a verse talking about enslavement.

 

[GodsGrace]

Actually that’s part of the parenthetical.



Paul thanks God for two things in the passage:
1) you were slaves of sin ...
“And”
2) you were set-free from sin



That’s my point. But you put the parenthetical marks in the wrong place. Yet why??? Though what??? Theses words introduce a parenthetical.

Literally, v17 and v18 is one sentence grammatically, listing two thank you’s to God with a parenthetical in between. Which is obvious by simply answering the question; Why would Paul thank God for something God didn’t do but men did???

But thanks be to God that you were slaves of sin, but you have obeyed from the heart the pattern of teaching to which you were entrusted, and having been set free from sin, you became enslaved to righteousness.​

Romans 6:17-18 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Romans 6:17-18&version=LEB

Or as you attempted to emphasis using parentheses versus commas:

But thanks be to God that you were slaves of sin (but you have obeyed from the heart the pattern of teaching to which you were entrusted) and (having been set free from sin) you became enslaved to righteousness.

Or

But thanks be to God that you were slaves of sin ( ... ) and (...) you became enslaved to righteousness.

Which is simply another way of saying;

So also you, consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus.​

Romans 6:11 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Romans 6:11&version=LEB


The main (non-parenthetical) point of the passage is that Paul is thanking God (not them) for two things:
1) they were (past tense) slaves of sin
And
2) they became enslaved to righteousness.

Which is why I’ve repeatedly ask you how you got ‘empowerment’ from a verse talking about enslavement.

Hi Chessman,
I find you to be too technical in all your views.
I mean, all this talk of parenthesis...

I like to simple things down:
We thank God for all the good we receive,
We thank Him every day that we are no longer slaves to sin but to God. We thank Him every day that Jesus died for us to free us from the grip of satan and the fear of death.

Romans 6:17-18
17But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed,
18and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness.

Paul is thanking God that they became obedient from the heart.
He can't be thanking God that they were slaves to sin, which SEEMS to be what you are saying.

Am I misunderstanding??

 

[chessman]

I find you to be too technical in all your views.
I mean, all this talk of parenthesis...

I wasn’t the first to mention there’s parenthetical words in the passage.
But yea, I’ve been told that once or twice before.

He can't be thanking God that they were slaves to sin, which SEEMS to be what you are saying.

Why not??? That’s what it says. Which is why verb tense is SO important. It’s like saying with emphasis;

But thanks be to God that you WERE slaves of sin versus you still ARE slaves of sin. Or as someone once said; “We thank Him every day that we are no longer slaves to sin”

 

[GodsGrace]

I wasn’t the first to mention there’s parenthetical words in the passage.
But yea, I’ve been told that once or twice before.


Why not??? That’s what it says. Which is why verb tense is SO important. It’s like saying with emphasis;

But thanks be to God that you WERE slaves of sin versus you still ARE slaves of sin. Or as someone once said; “We thank Him every day that we are no longer slaves to sin”

Romans 6:17-18
17But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed,
18and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness.

I hate to continue with this, but THOUGH has something to do with the sentence structure. Thanks be to God that THOUGH you were slaves to sin --- this cancels anything to do with the past...

THOUGH you were slaves to sin--YOU BECAME OBEDIENT...
This is what Paul is thanking God for:
YOU BECAME OBEDIENT (even though you were once slaves to sin)

It's so simple Chessman.
Are you going to make me run to my theologian friend again??

 

[chessman]

It's so simple Chessman.

If it’s so simple then why does every single translation use significantly different punctuation marks for this passage???

“Jesus wept”, now that’s a simple translation. Paul here, not so much.

Some even breaking it into two English sentences or as you noticed, even add words to clearly show the parenthetical clause?

And why have punctuation marks at all if they aren’t significant??? And can you start out a grammatically correct sentence with “and”?

What’s simple is the answer to my questions;
1. What, exactly, is Paul thanking God for doing here? Answer = their deliverance (being set-free).

And

2. Why would Paul thank God for doing something someone else has done? Answer = he wouldn’t.

Are you going to make me run to my theologian friend again??

No. You can walk or ride a bike if you prefer.

THOUGH has something to do with the sentence structure

Of course. It was added to clearly indicate that the clause that follows is subordinate. Which is my point. Or parentheses could be used or commas as other translations do.

Like saying:
This conversation is productive THOUGH technical.

Technically, “though” isn’t in the original it’s there to indicate what comes next is a subordinate clause.

 

[JLB]

Paul thanks God for two things in the passage:
1) you were slaves of sin ...
“And”
2) you were set-free from sin

I disagree.

The passage does not in any way convey the idea that Paul thanked God that these Christian’s were slaves of sin.

That would indicate thatGod was responsible for them being slaves of sin.


Paul simply thanked God that they obeyed.



JLB

 

[JLB]

Or as you attempted to emphasis using parentheses versus commas:

But thanks be to God that you were slaves of sin (but you have obeyed from the heart the pattern of teaching to which you were entrusted) and (having been set free from sin) you became enslaved to righteousness.

I put the phrase ...though you were slaves of sin, yet, in parentheses because I wanted you to read the sentence with out that phrase because that part was not the result of their obeying.

That part was what they were delivered from because they chose to obey.


But God be thanked ... you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered.


IOW everything beyond being a slave of sin is what Paul was thankful for.



JLB

 

[chessman]

I disagree

Okay but that’s what it says and your reason (stated below) is not Biblical.

That would indicate thatGod was responsible for them being slaves of sin.

No, Paul just told them who’s responsible for them being slaves of sin:

Because of this, just as sin entered into the world through one man, and death through sin, so also death spread to all people because all sinned.​

Romans 5:12 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Romans 5:12&version=LEB

For just as through the disobedience of the one man, the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one, the many will be made righteous.​

Romans 5:19 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Romans 5:19&version=LEB

Paul simply thanked God that they obeyed.

Why would Paul thank God for doing something that someone else had done?

 

[GodsGrace]

If it’s so simple then why does every single translation use significantly different punctuation marks for this passage???

“Jesus wept”, now that’s a simple translation. Paul here, not so much.

Some even breaking it into two English sentences or as you noticed, even add words to clearly show the parenthetical clause?

And why have punctuation marks at all if they aren’t significant??? And can you start out a grammatically correct sentence with “and”?

What’s simple is the answer to my questions;
1. What, exactly, is Paul thanking God for doing here? Answer = their deliverance (being set-free).

And

2. Why would Paul thank God for doing something someone else has done? Answer = he wouldn’t.


No. You can walk or ride a bike if you prefer.


Of course. It was added to clearly indicate that the clause that follows is subordinate. Which is my point. Or parentheses could be used or commas as other translations do.

Like saying:
This conversation is productive THOUGH technical.

Technically, “though” isn’t in the original it’s there to indicate what comes next is a subordinate clause.

Of course I could start a sentence with the word AND...this isn't a test is it? I already passed English with flying colors and needed it for my work. But, who cares about that. I could do whatever I want to now!!

So it seems the question is what Paul thanked God for doing.

Romans 6:17-18
17But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed,
18and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness.

The highlighted is why Paul was being thankful.

17 Paraphrased: Even though you were slaves to sin (would Paul thank God because they were slaves to sin?), you became obedient from the heart. (Paul is thanking God because they became obedient).

18 And now that you are free from sin, you have become slaves of righteousness.

For verse 18 Paul is making a STATEMENT that they are now free from sin, and is thankful that they have become SLAVES OF RIGHTEOUSNESS.

You said:
Like saying:
This conversation is productive THOUGH technical.
Here, would you be thanking God because this conversation is productive or technical?
Think carefully.

Do you study English or the bible?
You're too attached to the English and should, instead, take the entire thought into consideration.

And I'll be waiting for your reply.

 

[chessman]

I put the phrase ...though you were slaves of sin, yet, in parentheses because I wanted you to read the sentence with out that phrase

I know. But your error is that you put an ending parentheses behind the very word (yet) that is used (inserted) to introduce, not end, a parenthetical clause.

But God be thanked that (though you were slaves of sin, yet) you obeyed ...

“Yet” is a word that introduces a parenthetical, not ends one.

 

[GodsGrace]

I know. But your error is that you put an ending parentheses behind the very word (yet) that is used (inserted) to introduce, not end, a parenthetical clause.



“Yet” is a word that introduces a parenthetical, not ends one.

Time for English!!!