security of the believer

[littlelight]

Hello Drew.

Could you supply me with the Chapter and verse numbers for that quote. I did a bible search and never found the word obligation in Romans.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

Ro 8:12-13.

 

[Drew]

The verse you quoted Romans 8:12 has nothing to do against OSAS...NOTHING at all. In fact it's a small part of what OSAS is all about in context. Those who truly believe in Christ through faith are saved ....to the end. Paul describes those folks in the verses all around the verse you quoted. I did not twist one word of that verse to prove it.

I disagree - you are changing what Paul says in the verses I quoted. It means what it means! - the possibility of ultimate loss is indeed there for the believer.

I am fully aware of the context - Paul does indeed talk about the believer not being controlled by the sinful nature. But you cannot take truth and use it as grounds for denying the plain sense of the text I quoted. We need to respect all his words - and we should certainly not use one thing he says as the basis for dismissing something else he says.

There is a way we can be true to all Paul is saying here: he is, I believe, basically saying that while the Christian has indeed left the sinful nature behind, it is clearly possible to "revert" to it - to "go back" as it were. This is why he gives us the warning in the verse I quoted.

Verses 12-13 are clearly directed at believers.

Verses 12-13 make it clear that it is indeed possible to miss out on life.

I suggest that you are simply not honouring the text. The following verses clearly indicate the possibility of the believer being ultimately lost:

Therefore, brothers, we have an obligation—but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it. For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,

My taking this verse seriously does not do any violence to the context at all - as I have agreed - the believer is indeed led by the Spirit and has left sin behind. But unless we bend and morph and distort verses 12 and 13, we must acknowledge the possibility of "slipping back" into the "old man".

 

[Drew]

I politely suggest that the only way to "rescue" OSAS from Romans 8:12-13 is to bend it into something it is not. Here is the text again:

Therefore, brothers, we have an obligation—but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it. For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,

Who is Paul speaking to? Believers, clearly and without doubt. The letter is written to the church at Rome. Plus Paul directs his remarks to "brothers". So the "obligation" is for Christians. What is an obligation? It is something you have to do.

What is the consequence of not following through on the obligation? It is that you will, yes, die. And clearly Paul does not mean "you will in the sense that everone dies at the age of 80" - he means you will lose your final salvation. This is clear from what Paul says about those who "put to death the misdeeds of the body" - he says they will live, and he certainly cannot be suggesting that they will never experience death. No - the issue here is eternal state.

Again, we need to honour what Paul actually writes - and there is simply no way to properly read this text and salvage OSAS. Paul clearly says that the believer has an obligation which, if not fulfilled, leads to death (eternal loss).

Now some will argue that this cannot be - that context shows that this cannot be. Well, that's simply not good enough. Consider this text:

I love my dog. She is a friendly dog. She barks a lot. She likes to eat carrots. She chases squirrels. My cat is nice. My dog likes to go for walks. My dog is brown. My dog is 7 years old.....

The point is this: the fact that the context is generally stuff about my dog does not give me license to say that the statement about the cat is not a statement about my cat.

It is what it is - a statement that, despite where it appears, is not open to being read as being about my dog.

Same thing with Romans 8: yes Paul talks a lot about how the believer has left the sinful nature behind. But what he says in 12 and 13 shows that he cannot mean that one cannot go back to it. We should not muzzle Paul or bend his statements to the breaking point because we think "context" justifies this. There is, of course, a place for arguing from context. But that can only be pushed so far.

 

[Danus]

I disagree - you are changing what Paul says in the verses I quoted. It means what it means! - the possibility of ultimate loss is indeed there for the believer.

I am fully aware of the context - Paul does indeed talk about the believer not being controlled by the sinful nature. But you cannot take truth and use it as grounds for denying the plain sense of the text I quoted. We need to respect all his words - and we should certainly not use one thing he says as the basis for dismissing something else he says.

There is a way we can be true to all Paul is saying here: he is, I believe, basically saying that while the Christian has indeed left the sinful nature behind, it is clearly possible to "revert" to it - to "go back" as it were. This is why he gives us the warning in the verse I quoted.

Verses 12-13 are clearly directed at believers.

Verses 12-13 make it clear that it is indeed possible to miss out on life.

I suggest that you are simply not honouring the text. The following verses clearly indicate the possibility of the believer being ultimately lost:

Therefore, brothers, we have an obligation—but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it. For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,

My taking this verse seriously does not do any violence to the context at all - as I have agreed - the believer is indeed led by the Spirit and has left sin behind. But unless we bend and morph and distort verses 12 and 13, we must acknowledge the possibility of "slipping back" into the "old man".

I copied and pasted the text, so no I did not change any of the words. It's the same in your bible.
We can make the same charge you stated against each other I suppose. I can simply say your not seeing the whole of it, but that's pretty much where we will have to disagree from the charges you've stated. You see it one way, I see it more than just that one verse.

 

[Adstar]

Ro 8:12-13.

One must read the verses in context. Understanding comes from reading the verses before. Now i will post the verses before in Romans 7 and Romans 8.. I also note that the break between chapter 7 and 8 is artificial they should not be read or studdied in separation they are part of the same all in one message.

So read and understand.

Romans 7
14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. 15 For what I am doing, I do not understand. For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do. 16 If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good. 17 But now, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. 18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find. 19 For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice. 20 Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.


Romans 8
4 that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5 For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. 6 For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.


Romans 8
12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors—not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. 13 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.


It is all about attitude towards sin. If we have the right Spirit then we hate sin and love what is good this being Spiritually Minded. But having love for sin and being focused on perusing a life of it is being carnally Minded and that leads to death. Not sin itself but the love of that sin. People who are wilful sinners. meaning they sin in wilful rebellion against the will of God shall die (eternal death) These people live according to the flesh. But those who hate sin and wish to do good they live according to the Spirit.

Those who are carnal minded do not accept God's will, they do not accept the conviction of the Holy Spirit, they do not acknowledge their need to be forgiven through the Messiah Jesus because for them sin is ok.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days



All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[Danus]

It is all about attitude towards sin. If we have the right Spirit then we hate sin and love what is good this being Spiritually Minded. But having love for sin and being focused on perusing a life of it is being carnally Minded and that leads to death. Not sin itself but the love of that sin. People who are wilful sinners. meaning they sin in wilful rebellion against the will of God shall die (eternal death) These people live according to the flesh. But those who hate sin and wish to do good they live according to the Spirit.

Those who are carnal minded do not accept God's will, they do not accept the conviction of the Holy Spirit, they do not acknowledge their need to be forgiven through the Messiah Jesus because for them sin is ok.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days



All Praise The Ancient Of Days

Good Job.
Reading more than one verse, or all of Romans, sure helps with the contextual meaning of the difficult verses. :yes

 

[Drew]

I copied and pasted the text, so no I did not change any of the words. It's the same in your bible.

I was not referring to the text you copied and pasted. My point was that, in order for your view to work, you need to "bend" or "modify" the content of verses 12 and 13. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[Drew]

One must read the verses in context.

Yes, but that argument only goes so far. Sentences are only "open" to context-dependent interpretation to a certain degree. Thus, and as per my post above, the sentence "the cat is black" cannot be argued to be a statement that the dog is black, even if the context suggests that dogs are on the mind of the author. There is simply no way to read the following text properly and hold to OSAS:

Therefore, brothers, we have an obligation—but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it. For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,

But if I am wrong, tell me how I am wrong by analyzing the sentence. Please do not simply argue that the context is such and such. Please - invoke context if you like, but at least analyze these two verses and explain how one can preserve OSAS.

 

[Danus]

Yes, but that argument only goes so far. Sentences are only "open" to context-dependent interpretation to a certain degree. Thus, and as per my post above, the sentence "the cat is black" cannot be argued to be a statement that the dog is black, even if the context suggests that dogs are on the mind of the author. There is simply no way to read the following text properly and hold to OSAS:

Therefore, brothers, we have an obligation—but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it. For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,

But if I am wrong, tell me how I am wrong by analyzing the sentence. Please do not simply argue that the context is such and such. Please - invoke context if you like, but at least analyze these two verses and explain how one can preserve OSAS.

If the book of Romans where just that verse...you would be totally correct. But, placed and read along with all the other verse in Romans it means something much more.

 

[Drew]

If the book of Romans where just that verse...you would be totally correct. But, placed and read along with all the other verse in Romans it means something much more.

You are evading the key challenge. Context is, of course, important. But as I have already argued it is not license to change the clear meaning of certain statements.

And you need to walk us through verses 12 and 13, explaining how that material can indeed be read without ditching OSAS. I am convinced it cannot be read in any legitimate manner that rescues OSAS.

I cannot emphasize this enough - while certain statements have a certain degree of "flexibility" in respect to how they are interpreted, and while context provides the means of pinning the intended meaning down, that argument can only be pushed so far.

To repeat: Paul addresses what he says in 12 and 13 to believers. And he clearly warns them that living a certain way will result in them losing out on eternal life. People do not warn others about a fate that is impossible for them to suffer.

So please, walk us through 12 and 13, and tell us what Paul is saying, granted the context.

 

[Drew]

Romans 7
14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. 15 For what I am doing, I do not understand. For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do. 16 If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good. 17 But now, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. 18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find. 19 For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice. 20 Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.

Not sure what the point is. The above text describes that status of the unbelieving Jew under the Law of Moses. What does this have to do with OSAS?

Romans 8
4 that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5 For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. 6 For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

Again, I would certainly not dispute this, but it is not, in itself, a chunk of text that supports OSAS.

Romans 8
12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors—not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. 13 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.


It is all about attitude towards sin.

No. It is not about "attitude". This is the kind of thing I am talking about - Paul is making a statement about how the believer actually lives and raising the possibilty of loss.

If we have the right Spirit then we hate sin and love what is good this being Spiritually Minded. But having love for sin and being focused on perusing a life of it is being carnally Minded and that leads to death. Not sin itself but the love of that sin. People who are wilful sinners. meaning they sin in wilful rebellion against the will of God shall die (eternal death) These people live according to the flesh. But those who hate sin and wish to do good they live according to the Spirit.

You are not addressing the point. Paul is speaking to believers. And, yes, he warns them of the possibility of final loss if they live a certain way. What you say above is substantially correct, but it does not address the fact that Paul addresses his remarks to believers.

This is what I mean about the limitations of context. Context is not enough to change the fact that Paul addresses his remarks to believers. Context is not enough to change the fact that Paul says those believers have an obligation to live a certain way, and that eternal fates are in the balance.

 

[Danus]

You are evading the key challenge. Context is, of course, important. But as I have already argued it is not license to change the clear meaning of certain statements.

And you need to walk us through verses 12 and 13, explaining how that material can indeed be read without ditching OSAS. I am convinced it cannot be read in any legitimate manner that rescues OSAS.

I cannot emphasize this enough - while certain statements have a certain degree of "flexibility" in respect to how they are interpreted, and while context provides the means of pinning the intended meaning down, that argument can only be pushed so far.

To repeat: Paul addresses what he says in 12 and 13 to believers. And he clearly warns them that living a certain way will result in them losing out on eternal life. People do not warn others about a fate that is impossible for them to suffer.

So please, walk us through 12 and 13, and tell us what Paul is saying, granted the context.

Drew Brother, your pinning this down too narrow. I'm not trying to win anything here. I understand if you don't accept the idea of security in your eternal salvation, but I think you'd be much more if you could get it warped around your heart.

In another thread you posted an excellent post in full context regarding the olivet discourse where you where willing to go to great lengths to explain your position, I assume because you care passionately for those who may not understand it. but you seem to want to cage the OSAS debate down to a few verses, not allowing anyone to explain those verse in full context.

If your just wanting to win an argument against OSAS then congratulations; you won and here is your trophy for what it's worth to you.

View attachment 1579

 

[Drew]

Drew Brother, your pinning this down too narrow. I'm not trying to win anything here. I understand if you don't accept the idea of security in your eternal salvation, but I think you'd be much more if you could get it warped around your heart.

I appreciate your polite manner, but you really are avoiding the challenge. If your context argument is correct, you should be able to walk the reader through verses 12 and 13 and "clause by clause" or "word by word", explain how it can be read so that OSAS survives. I am interested in your explanation of who Paul is talking to and why, if he is addressing believers, he warns them about about a fate that, if OSAS is true, they simply cannot experience. I trust you are aware that it makes no sense to warn someone about what they cannot experience. Would we warn men about their risk of ovarian cancer?

.... but you seem to want to cage the OSAS debate down to a few verses, not allowing anyone to explain those verse in full context.

Well, each statement of Paul's must be taken seriously. And I see no explanation from you guys. All I see is a statement that "the context" means that verses 12-13 cannot mean what they appear to clearly mean. I agree - the context is about the believer and that Paul has said they have left the sinful nature behind. I have clearly acknowledged this. But, because I have to take Paul seriously in the fine-grained details of what he writes, I conclude that he means what he says in 12-13 and clearly believes that there is a possibility for the believer to "go back" to the old state of affairs.

Again, why, why, would Paul warn believers about a fate of death that, if OSAS is true, they cannot possibly be at risk for? I am simply asking for an explanation - that's all.

To be fair to you, you have every right to challenge me to "explain" how other texts can be reconciled with the "you can lose your salvation" position. Like the one in 1 Corinthians about "escaping as though by fire"

 

[smaller]

THE DEATH that Paul speaks of in Romans 8 is THE SAME DEATH that John speaks of here and has ZERO to do with a BELIEVER being ETERNALLY TORTURED, SEPARATED or ANNIHILATED by God. The DEATH that Paul speaks of is a FALLING BACK into the control of the 'god of this world, SATAN, upon their minds and hearts that PUTS THEM BACK into DEATH, even while they WALK in this present life:

1 John 3:14
We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren.

He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.

THOSE OF YOU WHO SEEK TO IMPALE YOUR FELLOW fallen BELIEVERS with ETERNAL TORTURE IN FIRE should if GOD ALLOWS, SEE YOUR OWN CONDITION.

see YOUR OWN CONDITION.

s

 

[Drew]

THOSE OF YOU WHO SEEK TO IMPALE YOUR FELLOW fallen BELIEVERS with ETERNAL TORTURE IN FIRE should if GOD ALLOWS, SEE YOUR OWN CONDITION.

see YOUR OWN CONDITION.

s

In case this "yell" is directed at me, at least in part, you should know that I reject eternal torment - I believe the Bible teaches that the lost will ultimately be annihilated.

 

[smaller]

In case this "yell" is directed at me, at least in part, you should know that I reject eternal torment - I believe the Bible teaches that the lost will ultimately be annihilated.

Well, you just HAVE A BLAST while you bask in that ETERNAL ANNIHILATION condition of those you are to LOVE.

Only God within the heart can BRING LIGHT and TRUE LASTING LOVE within.

All others carry DEATH, as you obviously demonstrate.

s

 

[smaller]

Jesus spoke of this exact activity, here:

Mark 13:
12 Now the brother shall betray the brother to death

All of you who CLAIM ETERNAL DEATH upon your brother believers are betrayers OF LIFE and conveyors OF DEATH. Death is WRITTEN, SEARED and SEALED across your heart and lips.

This is the fate of those who ABIDE IN DEATH. They KNOW NOT LOVE. They DO NOT LOVE. The BEAT their fellow slaves of GOD with their BLUNT DOCTRINAL instruments, FALSELY claiming to SIT in the SEAT of The Eternal Judge.

The instant you claim to know ANYONES eternal fate unto DEATH or TORTURE FIRE, you have in fact ascended AND SEATED your SINNING SELF, IN A THRONE that does not BELONG TO YOU.

God in Christ has issued BELIEVERS a COMMAND to SHARE IN HIS ETERNAL LIFE, not only with our 'brothers' but with ALL MANKIND. Your command was NOT given TO BE or to ACT as a DICTATOR OF ETERNAL DEATH to those you are TO LOVE.

There is NO SUCH COMMANDMENT!

 

[Adstar]

Yes, but that argument only goes so far. Sentences are only "open" to context-dependent interpretation to a certain degree. Thus, and as per my post above, the sentence "the cat is black" cannot be argued to be a statement that the dog is black, even if the context suggests that dogs are on the mind of the author. There is simply no way to read the following text properly and hold to OSAS:

Therefore, brothers, we have an obligation—but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it. For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,

But if I am wrong, tell me how I am wrong by analysing the sentence. Please do not simply argue that the context is such and such. Please - invoke context if you like, but at least analyze these two verses and explain how one can preserve OSAS.

Oh sorry I really only got moved to add thoughts to this thread in response to the preaching of sinlessness in the flesh. That being a true Christian means you will never sin again, and anyone who does sin shows themselves as a false Christian. I always oppose this toxic doctrine.

I am not a supporter of the OSAS doctrine, which is a part of the 5 pillars of calvinism which i do not believe in.


Hope that clarifies things.


All Praise The Ancient of Days

 

[Adstar]

Not sure what the point is. The above text describes that status of the unbelieving Jew under the Law of Moses. What does this have to do with OSAS?



Again, I would certainly not dispute this, but it is not, in itself, a chunk of text that supports OSAS.



No. It is not about "attitude". This is the kind of thing I am talking about - Paul is making a statement about how the believer actually lives and raising the possibilty of loss.


You are not addressing the point. Paul is speaking to believers. And, yes, he warns them of the possibility of final loss if they live a certain way. What you say above is substantially correct, but it does not address the fact that Paul addresses his remarks to believers.

This is what I mean about the limitations of context. Context is not enough to change the fact that Paul addresses his remarks to believers. Context is not enough to change the fact that Paul says those believers have an obligation to live a certain way, and that eternal fates are in the balance.

Once again you have totaly misread my post and what it was posted for.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[Drew]

All others carry DEATH, as you obviously demonstrate.

s

You are a rude person who brings great discredit to the gospel.

What an outrageous, innappropriate, unwarranted, and entirely destructive statement.

Remember, smaller, we will all be called to account for "careless words" spoken.

And the rest of your post, the suggestion that I enjoy the thought of people being annihilated is equally outrageous and uncacceptable.