What does 2 Cor 1:22 and 5:5 mean?

[Butch5]

the critical point of Paul's message is one comfort and confidence which comes, not from a human king's seal, but God's seal and guarantee:

Now the one who establishes us together with you in Christ and who anoints us is God, who also sealed us and gave the down payment of the Spirit in our hearts.
​

Is a human seal comforting in times of affliction? No, not really.
Is God's seal comforting, even in times of affliction? Yes!

2 Corinthians 1:4-7, 10, 21-22 (LEB) ... The God of all comfort who comforts us in all our affliction, so that we may be able to comfort those who are in all affliction with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God.
​

Is it a human seal guaranteeing our future (full payment)t? No.
Is God's seal comforting and guarantee us, even in times of affliction? Yes!

For just as the sufferings of Christ overflow to us, thus through Christ our comfort overflows also.
​

Is it through our sufferings we are guaranteed salvation? No. Is it through Christ's sufferings? Yes.

But if we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation; if we are comforted, it is for your comfort that is at work in the patient endurance of the same sufferings that we also suffer.
​

Are we hoping for salvation based on a human's seal or guarantee? No. Or we shouldn't be.

And our hope for you is firm, because we know that as you are sharers in the sufferings, so also you will be sharers in the comfort. who delivered us from so great a risk of death, and will deliver us, in whom we have put our hope that he will also deliver us again,
​

Will God deliver salvation in the future to those that have placed their hope in Christ in the past? Yes.

How do we know this?

Now the one who establishes us together with you in Christ and who anoints us is God, who also sealed us and gave the down payment of the Spirit in our hearts. ​

God's not Santa Claus writing us a sealed letter. He's the God of the future, even in times of affliction. He even uses afflictions for His purposes. One purpose of which is to bring salvation to those He chooses through Christ (The Chosen One). We are sharers in Christ sealed by God (not man).

I'm not sure how this addresses the issue. Paul wrote to people who spoke a human language and he used that language to communicate what he wanted to say. The words he used must be understood in that language or they have no meaming.

 

[FreeGrace]

Turn it around, the burden of proof that the seal cannot be broken is on you.

No problem. There are no verses that say so. And believers are sealed for the day of redemption. If the seal has been, or will be, broken, why are there no verses that say so? We can't go by human assumptions on God's seal. If Scripture doesn't say that it has been, or will be, broken, then why assume that it can be?

The Scriptures use human language to convey what God wants to communicate. Therefore the seal means what it means in human language.

Again, if there are no verses that specifically address the assumption that the seal can be broken, let's not keep assuming what the Bible does not say.

There is nothing in the definition of seal that indicates it cannot be broken. As I've pointed out it's expected to be broken.

Assumptions.

When a king put his seal on a document it wasn't with the expectation that it could never be opened. A seal is put on something so that the one receiving it can validate that the contents are genuine. You're suggestion that a seal cannot be broken is foreign to the common understanding of the term therefore the burden of proof lies with you as you've assumed a definition the is not what the word means.

So, your view that it is "expected to be broken" is based on what human seals are for. And all your examples would easily indicate that. But where's the indication in Scripture that anyone has, or will, break the seal of the Holy Spirit.

Consider the fact that Jesus promised the Holy Spirit to be with believers forever. Why wouldn't that refute the idea that the seal of the Holy Spirit can be broken?

Your view is based on weak assumptions about human seals. But the issue is God's seal; the promised Holy Spirit, who will be with believers forever.

Without any evidence from Scripture that God's seal of the Holy Spirit can be broken, it is mere assumption to think that it can be.

 

[chessman]

I'm not sure how this addresses the issue. Paul wrote to people who spoke a human language and he used that language to communicate what he wanted to say. The words he used must be understood in that language or they have no meaming.

Because the issue is not that Paul wrote to people who spoke a human language (which is rather obvious). The issue is what did he communicate.

1. Reading the passage, we find out that is God's seal, not a human's seal, correct?

2. Reading the passage, we find out that the issue is a message of comfort, correct?

3. Reading the passage, we find out that the issue is a message of comfort concerning salvation, correct?

I'll stop with these three questions addresses in my previous post and see how you answer them.

 

[FreeGrace]

the critical point of Paul's message is one comfort and confidence which comes, not from a human king's seal, but God's seal and guarantee:

Now the one who establishes us together with you in Christ and who anoints us is God, who also sealed us and gave the down payment of the Spirit in our hearts.
​

Is a human seal comforting in times of affliction? No, not really.
Is God's seal comforting, even in times of affliction? Yes!

2 Corinthians 1:4-7, 10, 21-22 (LEB) ... The God of all comfort who comforts us in all our affliction, so that we may be able to comfort those who are in all affliction with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God.
​

Is it a human seal guaranteeing our future (full payment)t? No.
Is God's seal comforting and guarantee us, even in times of affliction? Yes!

For just as the sufferings of Christ overflow to us, thus through Christ our comfort overflows also.
​

Is it through our sufferings we are guaranteed salvation? No. Is it through Christ's sufferings? Yes.

But if we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation; if we are comforted, it is for your comfort that is at work in the patient endurance of the same sufferings that we also suffer.
​

Are we hoping for salvation based on a human's seal or guarantee? No. Or we shouldn't be.

And our hope for you is firm, because we know that as you are sharers in the sufferings, so also you will be sharers in the comfort. who delivered us from so great a risk of death, and will deliver us, in whom we have put our hope that he will also deliver us again,
​

Will God deliver salvation in the future to those that have placed their hope in Christ in the past? Yes.

How do we know this?

Now the one who establishes us together with you in Christ and who anoints us is God, who also sealed us and gave the down payment of the Spirit in our hearts. ​

God's not Santa Claus writing us a sealed letter. He's the God of the future, even in times of affliction. He even uses afflictions for His purposes. One purpose of which is to bring salvation to those He chooses through Christ (The Chosen One). We are sharers in Christ sealed by God (not man).

 

[Butch5]

No problem. There are no verses that say so. And believers are sealed for the day of redemption. If the seal has been, or will be, broken, why are there no verses that say so? We can't go by human assumptions on God's seal. If Scripture doesn't say that it has been, or will be, broken, then why assume that it can be?

Your whole argument is an assumption. You've assumed that the seal cannot be broken yet haven't given a shred of evidence to prove it. There's no need to for passages of Scripture saying the seal can be broken because the people Paul was writing to knew that a seal could be broken. I think just about everyone knows a seal can be broken.

Again, if there are no verses that specifically address the assumption that the seal can be broken, let's not keep assuming what the Bible does not say.

The assumption is that the seal cannot be broken. We know from looking at Scripture and everyday life that seals can be broken. Therefore, the onus is on you to prove that the seal cannot be broken.

Assumptions.

No assumptions, just go buy a gallon of milk and you'll see that a seal can be broken.

So, your view that it is "expected to be broken" is based on what human seals are for. And all your examples would easily indicate that. But where's the indication in Scripture that anyone has, or will, break the seal of the Holy Spirit.

Where's the Scripture that says it can't be. Again, you've assumed something without any support from Scripture.

Consider the fact that Jesus promised the Holy Spirit to be with believers forever. Why wouldn't that refute the idea that the seal of the Holy Spirit can be broken?

That assumes they believe forever.

Your view is based on weak assumptions about human seals. But the issue is God's seal; the promised Holy Spirit, who will be with believers forever.

Without any evidence from Scripture that God's seal of the Holy Spirit can be broken, it is mere assumption to think that it can be.

My view is based on the Scriptures. Paul is writing to humans who use a human language to communicate, they use words to exchange ideas, words have meanings, those meanings don't change just because someone wants them to. The Corinthians would know what a seal was and would understand it as such. Paul used simple word, He didn't say this was any special kind of seal, he didn't say it was a seal that could not be broken it was a seal.

 

[Butch5]

Because the issue is not that Paul wrote to people who spoke a human language (which is rather obvious). The issue is what did he communicate.

1. Reading the passage, we find out that is God's seal, not a human's seal, correct?

2. Reading the passage, we find out that the issue is a message of comfort, correct?

3. Reading the passage, we find out that the issue is a message of comfort concerning salvation, correct?

I'll stop with these three questions addresses in my previous post and see how you answer them.

It doesn't matter whose seal it is, the meaning of the word doesn't change. Paul is writing to people, those people need to understand what he is saying. If they have no idea what the words mean then they are useless. Paul used an ordinary word, he didn't say this is God's seal, it's a special seal that no one can break, he gave "NO" indication that this word was not to be understood in the typical manner.

You guys are just trying to force some theological concept onto the word. The seven seals in Revelation are God's seals too, right? Do they get broken?

3 And when he had opened the second seal, I heard the second beast say, Come and see. (Rev 6:3 KJV)
5 And when he had opened the third seal, I heard the third beast say, Come and see. And I beheld, and lo a black horse; and he that sat on him had a pair of balances in his hand. (Rev 6:5 KJV)
7 And when he had opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth beast say, Come and see. (Rev 6:7 KJV
9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: (Rev 6:9 KJV)
12 And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; (Rev 6:12 KJV)
And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour. (Rev 8:1 KJV)

3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season. (Rev 20:3 KJV)

 

[FreeGrace]

Your whole argument is an assumption. You've assumed that the seal cannot be broken yet haven't given a shred of evidence to prove it.

I see it just the opposite. Those who claim God's seal can or will be broken have not a shred of evidence to prove that assumption. In fact the very wording of the OP verses indicates that the seal is FOR the day of redemption. How is that not exceptionally clear? Your assumption is based on the use of human seals. Not even close to what God has said about His seal.

Let me remind you of the pertinent verses:
2 Cor 1:21-22
21NowHe who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God,22who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge. NASB

2 Cor 5:5
5Now He who prepared us for this very purpose is God, who gave to us the Spirit as a pledge.

Here's how the NIV renders both verses:
21Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us, 22set his seal of ownership on us,and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.

5Now it is God who has made us for this very purpose and has given us the Spirit as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.

The scholars involved in translating the NIV render those verses with a guarantee!

And let's not forget Eph 1:13-14 and 4:30 as well:

13In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory. NASB

30Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. NASB

These verses not only tell believers that they have been sealed with the Holy Spirit, but that this seal if FOR the day of redemption.

There can be no more clear meaning than that God's "own possessions", His children, are guaranteed for the day of redemption. If that isn't eternal security, I do not know what is.

otoh, where are any verses that tell us that God will break that seal for any reason? They are non existent. That is my proof.

There's no need to for passages of Scripture saying the seal can be broken because the people Paul was writing to knew that a seal could be broken.

You are just adding assumptions to assumptions. On what basis do you make this assumption?

I think just about everyone knows a seal can be broken.

Human seals, sure. No problem. But one has to ignore Scripture to make that assumption about God's seal FOR the day of redemption.

And, btw, there IS a need for passages about God's seal (not man's) being broken.

The assumption is that the seal cannot be broken.

There is no assumption on my part. I've just given 4 verses that are very clear about WHY God seals, and for whom He seals. The purpose is FOR the day of redemption.

The burden is now on you to prove that these 4 verses do not relate to eternal security.

We know from looking at Scripture and everyday life that seals can be broken. Therefore, the onus is on you to prove that the seal cannot be broken.

Already been done. Now, you need to exegete these 4 verses to prove that they don't refer to eternal security, and that they can be broken BEFORE the day of redemption.

No assumptions, just go buy a gallon of milk and you'll see that a seal can be broken.

Irrelevant. I'm not talking about a human seal, which is DESIGNED to be broken. You haven't shown that God's seal can be broken. btw, God's seal is FOR the day of redemption. That's eternal security, unless you can prove otherwise.

Where's the Scripture that says it can't be.

Given in this post. Eph 1:13,14, 4:30, 2 Cor 1:22, and 5:5.

Again, you've assumed something without any support from Scripture.

Eph 1:13,14, 4:30, 2 Cor 1:22 and 5:5 refutes your assumption here.

That assumes they believe forever.

Another assumption. You need to prove this assumption by showing that God's seal is based on belief.

My view is based on the Scriptures.

Your view is totally based on assumption. You've equated God's seal FOR the day of redemption with man's seals.

Paul is writing to humans who use a human language to communicate, they use words to exchange ideas, words have meanings, those meanings don't change just because someone wants them to. The Corinthians would know what a seal was and would understand it as such. Paul used simple word, He didn't say this was any special kind of seal, he didn't say it was a seal that could not be broken it was a seal.

I would suggest paying close attention to the words that Paul used in Eph and 2 Cor about God's seal. Which was FOR the day of redemption. What does that mean to you?

 

[FreeGrace]

It doesn't matter whose seal it is, the meaning of the word doesn't change.

The problem with your view here is to focus only on one word, and you ignore all the other words that Paul used WITH that one word. The purpose of this seal from God is FOR the day of redemption. The burden is on you to prove that Paul wasn't referring to eternal security.

And let's quit bringing up man's seals, which are not relevant to what Paul wrote about God's seal.

 

[chessman]

It doesn't matter whose seal it is...

I think it does matter. It's God's seal given to believers as they wait for their redemption and salvation. And furthermore, we should ideally be waiting (even in times of affliction) with comfort and confidence in our redemption specifically because it is God's seal and guarantee, not just a human king's or ruler's seal. It matters because Paul told them (and tells us) that "God is faithful, by whom you were called..."
God is infinitely more faithful than any human king with their seals and their guarantees. That's NOT changing the word's meaning, that's using it within the context of the passage which bears God's inspiration upon it.

the meaning of the word doesn't change.

I'm not changing the meaning of the word "seal" or any other word. I'm seeing it used within the context of Paul's letter that's filled with many other similarly comforting and confidence building words, specifically written so that they would have confidence and firm assurances of their (our) salvation on the day of redemption.
With all due respect, Paul’s message is not even about a “seal”, it’s about salvation. Salvation that HAS been promised and HAS been "sealed" by God and HAS already been paid for with a firm down payment from God. The word “seal” is just a word within the broader message.
20 For as many as are the promises of God, in him they are “yes”...14 But thanks be to God, who always leads us in triumphal procession in Christ.
Your 'take' has, not just the "seal" being broken but, the down payment and a promise (both of which are also God's) broken. That’s my point.

Paul is writing to people, those people need to understand what he is saying.

I know. Amen. Those people (and us) do indeed need to understand that he's saying comforting and confidence building things and words about salvation on the day of redemption. And he's writing more than just the one word (seal) too. He's writing to them specifically so they would be comforted and at peace with their future salvation on the day of redemption that's been; promised, sealed and guaranteed by God as verified by the Holy Spirit's seal within each believer. Your take is applying a human seal's, promise's and guarantee's imperfection upon God's perfect promises, sealing (Holy spirit) and down payment.

If they have no idea what the words mean then they are useless.

They knew what the word(s) meant. So do I.

Paul used an ordinary word, he didn't say this is God's seal, it's a special seal that no one can break, he gave "NO" indication that this word was not to be understood in the typical manner.

Paul did say it was God's seal, God's promises and God's down payment. And actually, Paul gave numerous indications that the message (including the seal) was special and indicated in numerous ways that, not just the seal but God’s promises are true and the God’s down payment will be redeemed.
Speaking of a word’s meaning, I assume you know what it means to “redeem” a down payment?
All one needs to do is actually read the broader context (which I tried to get you to respond to with my questions). If you'll answer them for yourself, as each answer is obviously yes, then the implication of what Paul means by a “seal”, etc. are obvious.
1. It is God's seal, not a human's seal, correct? Yes.
2. The issue is a message of comfort, correct? Yes.
3. The issue is a message of comfort concerning salvation, correct? Yes.
Now the verse within this context:
21 Now the one who establishes us together with you in Christ and who anoints us is God, who also sealed us and gave the down payment of the Spirit in our hearts.
First, Paul ties his statement quite literally to his previous context in this chapter (comfort concerning salvation) by the inclusion of the conjunction "now". The statement (v21-22) simply must be viewed in light of the fact that Paul means what he’s saying to be comfort concerning their salvation sealed by God for the day of redemption.

So, just exactly how does a “seal” that can be pre-maturely broken by just any ole person, provide any comfort and confidence to them (or us) whatsoever? It doesn’t. Which is why your take is wrong.

 

[FreeGrace]

I think it does matter. It's God's seal given to believers as they wait for their redemption and salvation. And furthermore, we should ideally be waiting (even in times of affliction) with comfort and confidence in our redemption specifically because it is God's seal and guarantee, not just a human king's or ruler's seal. It matters because Paul told them (and tells us) that "God is faithful, by whom you were called..."
God is infinitely more faithful than any human king with their seals and their guarantees. That's NOT changing the word's meaning, that's using it within the context of the passage which bears God's inspiration upon it.
I'm not changing the meaning of the word "seal" or any other word. I'm seeing it used within the context of Paul's letter that's filled with many other similarly comforting and confidence building words, specifically written so that they would have confidence and firm assurances of their (our) salvation on the day of redemption.
With all due respect, Paul’s message is not even about a “seal”, it’s about salvation. Salvation that HAS been promised and HAS been "sealed" by God and HAS already been paid for with a firm down payment from God. The word “seal” is just a word within the broader message.
20 For as many as are the promises of God, in him they are “yes”...14 But thanks be to God, who always leads us in triumphal procession in Christ.
Your 'take' has, not just the "seal" being broken but, the down payment and a promise (both of which are also God's) broken. That’s my point.
I know. Amen. Those people (and us) do indeed need to understand that he's saying comforting and confidence building things and words about salvation on the day of redemption. And he's writing more than just the one word (seal) too. He's writing to them specifically so they would be comforted and at peace with their future salvation on the day of redemption that's been; promised, sealed and guaranteed by God as verified by the Holy Spirit's seal within each believer. Your take is applying a human seal's, promise's and guarantee's imperfection upon God's perfect promises, sealing (Holy spirit) and down payment.
They knew what the word(s) meant. So do I.
Paul did say it was God's seal, God's promises and God's down payment. And actually, Paul gave numerous indications that the message (including the seal) was special and indicated in numerous ways that, not just the seal but God’s promises are true and the God’s down payment will be redeemed.
Speaking of a word’s meaning, I assume you know what it means to “redeem” a down payment?
All one needs to do is actually read the broader context (which I tried to get you to respond to with my questions). If you'll answer them for yourself, as each answer is obviously yes, then the implication of what Paul means by a “seal”, etc. are obvious.
1. It is God's seal, not a human's seal, correct? Yes.
2. The issue is a message of comfort, correct? Yes.
3. The issue is a message of comfort concerning salvation, correct? Yes.
Now the verse within this context:
21 Now the one who establishes us together with you in Christ and who anoints us is God, who also sealed us and gave the down payment of the Spirit in our hearts.
First, Paul ties his statement quite literally to his previous context in this chapter (comfort concerning salvation) by the inclusion of the conjunction "now". The statement (v21-22) simply must be viewed in light of the fact that Paul means what he’s saying to be comfort concerning their salvation sealed by God for the day of redemption.

So, just exactly how does a “seal” that can be pre-maturely broken by just any ole person, provide any comfort and confidence to them (or us) whatsoever? It doesn’t. Which is why your take is wrong.

 

[Butch5]

I see it just the opposite. Those who claim God's seal can or will be broken have not a shred of evidence to prove that assumption. In fact the very wording of the OP verses indicates that the seal is FOR the day of redemption. How is that not exceptionally clear? Your assumption is based on the use of human seals. Not even close to what God has said about His seal.

That a seal can be broken is an established fact. Your claim that it cannot be broken is an assumption because you have given no evidence whatsoever that a seal cannot be broken.

The reason they are sealed doesn’t bear on the meaning of the word.

My understanding is based on human language. Paul was a human being who was writing to other human beings using a human language. He used a word that they were familiar with and that they would understand. However, it seems that since God is the one who placed the seal you have decided that the word no longer means what it means, that somehow this is some sort of super seal that cannot be broken and is beyond human understanding. If Paul had intended for his readers to think this was something of than a seal which they understood he would need to indicate that to his readers, yet we find nothing in Scripture that this seal is to be understood any differently than the Corinthians would normally understand a seal. Since we all know that seals can be broken the onus is on you to prove that this one cannot.

What exactly has God said about His seal?

Let me remind you of the pertinent verses:
2 Cor 1:21-22
21NowHe who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God,22who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge. NASB

2 Cor 5:5
5Now He who prepared us for this very purpose is God, who gave to us the Spirit as a pledge.

Here's how the NIV renders both verses:
21Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us, 22set his seal of ownership on us,and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.

5Now it is God who has made us for this very purpose and has given us the Spirit as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.

The scholars involved in translating the NIV render those verses with a guarantee!

But, don’t read the definition of a 21st century English word into a first century Greek word. The Greek word is “arrhabon,” it doesn’t mean something that is certain to happen. It means a deposit or down payment. The English word guarantee also carries that idea, however, “arrhabon” doesn’t carry the other definitions of guarantee.

And let's not forget Eph 1:13-14 and 4:30 as well:

13In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14who isgiven as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory. NASB

30Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. NASB

These verses not only tell believers that they have been sealed with the Holy Spirit, but that this seal if FOR the day of redemption.

There can be no more clear meaning than that God's "own possessions", His children, are guaranteed for the day of redemption. If that isn't eternal security, I do not know what is.

You’re using the wrong definition of guarantee. As I said above the idea of something being certain to happen is not what the Greek word “arrhabon” means.

otoh, where are any verses that tell us that God will break that seal for any reason? They are non existent. That is my proof.

Who said anything about God breaking the seal? However, a lack of Scripture saying the seal cannot be broken is an argument from silence, a logical fallacy.

You are just adding assumptions to assumptions. On what basis do you make this assumption?

I’ve made no assumptions, I’ve stated that a seal can be broken and given ample evidence to prove it.

Human seals, sure. No problem. But one has to ignore Scripture to make that assumption about God's seal FOR the day of redemption.

Not at all, show something from Scripture that says a seal made by God is any different than a seal made by anyone else.

Again, the purpose of the seal doesn’t bear on the meaning of the word.

And, btw, there IS a need for passages about God's seal (not man's) being broken.

No there isn’t because that argument is fallacious, it’s from silence.

The assumption is that the seal cannot be broken.

There is no assumption on my part. I've just given 4 verses that are very clear about WHY God seals, and for whom He seals. The purpose is FOR the day of redemption.

The purpose of the seal doesn’t bear on whether or not the seal can broken. It seems to me that you’re reading your theology back into the seal.

The burden is now on you to prove that these 4 verses do not relate to eternal security.

No, Jesus already refuted OSAS, there’s no need for me to.

We know from looking at Scripture and everyday life that seals can be broken. Therefore, the onus is on you to prove that the seal cannot be broken.

Already been done. Now, you need to exegete these 4 verses to prove that they don't refer to eternal security, and that they can be broken BEFORE the day of redemption.

It is? Which of the passages says seal cannot be broken?

Irrelevant. I'm not talking about a human seal, which is DESIGNED to be broken. You haven't shown that God's seal can be broken. btw, God's seal is FOR the day of redemption. That's eternal security, unless you can prove otherwise.

Well, since God choose the put His word in a human language for humans to understand and Paul choose to write in a human language so humans could understand, it’s only logical that one would understand it from a human perspective. God’s word is in human languages therefore it must be understood in human languages, therefore what the word means in a given language, which in this case Greek, must be understood as the meaning of the word.

God didn’t give His word in some strange unknown language where words don’t mean what they mean in normal language,(although I think quite a few Christians may believe this). He gave His word in a human language, a language which had words and those words had meanings. So, given the meaning of the word seal in Paul’s day, we can ascertain that those seals were broken. Since your claim is the exact opposite it’s up to you to show other than what the evidence shows.

Given in this post. Eph 1:13,14, 4:30, 2 Cor 1:22, and 5:5.

I’ll ask again, which of these passages says a seal can’t be broken?

Eph 1:13,14, 4:30, 2 Cor 1:22 and 5:5 refutes your assumption here.

I’ll ask again, which of these passages says a seal can’t be broken?

Your view is totally based on assumption. You've equated God's seal FOR the day of redemption with man's seals.

All you need to do is look at the book of Revelation 7 of God’s seals were broken.

That you keep post that the seal is for the day of redemption suggests to me that you defining seal based on your theology rather than on Scripture and grammar.

I would suggest paying close attention to the words that Paul used in Eph and 2 Cor about God's seal. Which was FOR the day of redemption. What does that mean to you?

It’s interesting that you would say that since I don’t see anything in any of those verses that say the seal cannot broken.


I’m not sure why you're putting “FOR” in all caps, it really has no bearing on the issue. The Greek word is “eis” and it means unto or towards, ‘whereby you are sealed towards the day of redemption[/quote]

 

[Butch5]

The problem with your view here is to focus only on one word, and you ignore all the other words that Paul used WITH that one word. The purpose of this seal from God is FOR the day of redemption. The burden is on you to prove that Paul wasn't referring to eternal security.

And let's quit bringing up man's seals, which are not relevant to what Paul wrote about God's seal.

No, the problem is reading one's theology into the word seal. Can a seal be broken? It's an easy question, yes a seal can be broken. That's a whole different question than, will God break the seal. It seems you guys want to argue that God will not break the seal, I think that's a given, however, that doesn't answer the question of whether or not a seal can be broken. This is the same argument that we see in other OSAS threads, those in favor of OSAS point out passages that speak of God's role in salvation and say, see, God would never reject a believer. However, that is a straw man argument, even those who argue against OSAS wouldn't say that God isn't powerful enough to save or that He would reject believers. The issue comes down to man and whether or not he is faithful.

So, claiming that God won't break the seal does nothing to prove that a seal cannot be broken, it only proves that God won't break the seal.

 

[FreeGrace]

No, the problem is reading one's theology into the word seal.

Actually, I'm reading ALL of what Paul wrote about the seal of God.

Btw, please note WHAT God's seal is: it isn't something that can be broken, like any human seal. No. It's the Holy Spirit Himself which is God's seal. And the Holy Spirit cannot be "broken". Now, if you can prove that during this church age that God removes His Holy Spirit from believers, you would have a point.

But recall that when Jesus promised the Holy Spirit, He said "who would be with you forever". So, obviously, the Holy Spirit cannot be "recalled" from believers. Therefore, God's seal on the believer, who is the Holy Spirit, CANNOT be broken.

The flaw in your view is trying to compare a literal seal that humans create with God's seal, who is the Holy Spirit.

So, if you can show that God recalls the Holy Spirit during this age, you will have a point. But I know that you won't find any such evidence, esp because of what Jesus promised regarding the Holy Spirit.

End of discussion, I believe.

 

[Butch5]

Actually, I'm reading ALL of what Paul wrote about the seal of God.

Btw, please note WHAT God's seal is: it isn't something that can be broken, like any human seal. No. It's the Holy Spirit Himself which is God's seal. And the Holy Spirit cannot be "broken". Now, if you can prove that during this church age that God removes His Holy Spirit from believers, you would have a point.

But recall that when Jesus promised the Holy Spirit, He said "who would be with you forever". So, obviously, the Holy Spirit cannot be "recalled" from believers. Therefore, God's seal on the believer, who is the Holy Spirit, CANNOT be broken.

The flaw in your view is trying to compare a literal seal that humans create with God's seal, who is the Holy Spirit.

So, if you can show that God recalls the Holy Spirit during this age, you will have a point. But I know that you won't find any such evidence, esp because of what Jesus promised regarding the Holy Spirit.

End of discussion, I believe.

That's not necessary because you cannot prove that the seal can be broken, It seems you want me to debate your unproven premise. In Revelation there are 7 seals, they are God's seals, they are broken, thus God's seals can be broken. Now, you have Scriptural evidence that God's seals can be broken, yet you claim they can't, thus the onus is on you to prove your claim.

There's no flaw in my view, Paul is writing to people that he expects to understand him. If what he says is beyond their understanding there is no need for him to write to them. As I've pointed out several times Paul give no indication that the Corinthians should understand this seal any differently than they normally would. With the way you guys want to reads it we could take any word and simply claim it means something different and come up with all kinds of doctrines. If the words don't mean what they mean then we might as well just set the Bible aside because none us could understand it since we have to rely on the meanings of words.

 

[Butch5]

I think it does matter. It's God's seal given to believers as they wait for their redemption and salvation. And furthermore, we should ideally be waiting (even in times of affliction) with comfort and confidence in our redemption specifically because it is God's seal and guarantee, not just a human king's or ruler's seal. It matters because Paul told them (and tells us) that "God is faithful, by whom you were called..."
God is infinitely more faithful than any human king with their seals and their guarantees. That's NOT changing the word's meaning, that's using it within the context of the passage which bears God's inspiration upon it.

Except that no one is suggesting God would break the seal. The question isn’t who breaks the seal, the question is can the seal be broken? I’ve already given you 7 of God’s seals that are broken.

I'm not changing the meaning of the word "seal" or any other word. I'm seeing it used within the context of Paul's letter that's filled with many other similarly comforting and confidence building words, specifically written so that they would have confidence and firm assurances of their (our) salvation on the day of redemption.
With all due respect, Paul’s message is not even about a “seal”, it’s about salvation. Salvation that HAS been promised and HAS been "sealed" by God and HAS already been paid for with a firm down payment from God. The word “seal” is just a word within the broader message.
20For as many as are the promises of God, in him they are “yes”...14 But thanks be to God, who always leads us in triumphal procession in Christ.
Your 'take' has, not just the "seal" being broken but, the down payment and a promise (both of which are also God's) broken. That’s my point.

Again, this isn’t about who breaks the seal, but, rather can it be broken. The Holy Spirit being given as a seal doesn’t preclude on from turning and becoming an idolater.


How does one understand words when reading theology into them? It’s obvious to everyone that a seal can be broken, this is the image that Paul readers would have. They didn’t have any theological lens through witch to view the Scriptures. They would understand seal as the normal word seal in their day. Paul didn’t give any indication that this word was to be understood any differently than it normally would.

I know. Amen. Those people (and us) do indeed need to understand that he's saying comforting and confidence building things and words about salvation on the day of redemption. And he's writing more than just the one word (seal) too. He's writing to them specifically so they would be comforted and at peace with their future salvation on the day of redemption that's been; promised, sealed and guaranteed by God as verified by the Holy Spirit's seal within each believer. Your take is applying a human seal's, promise's and guarantee's imperfection upon God's perfect promises, sealing (Holy spirit) and down payment.

My take is applying seal in the normal sense of the word just as Paul would expect his readers to do. Just because God wouldn’t break the seal doesn’t mean the seal can’t be broken. That’s like saying God would never do anything evil therefore there is no evil. Just because God would commit evil doesn’t mean it can’t be done.

They knew what the word(s) meant. So do I.

Then why argue that a seal can’t be broken when we see evidence that it can?

Paul did say it was God's seal, God's promises and God's down payment. And actually, Paul gave numerous indications that the message (including the seal) was special and indicated in numerous ways that, not just the seal but God’s promises are true and the God’s down payment will be redeemed.
Speaking of a word’s meaning, I assume you know what it means to “redeem” a down payment?
All one needs to do is actually read the broader context (which I tried to get you to respond to with my questions). If you'll answer them for yourself, as each answer is obviously yes, then the implication of what Paul means by a “seal”, etc. are obvious.
1. It is God's seal, not a human's seal, correct? Yes.
2. The issue is a message of comfort, correct? Yes.
3. The issue is a message of comfort concerning salvation, correct? Yes.
Now the verse within this context:
21Now the one who establishes us together with you in Christ and who anoints us is God, who also sealed us and gave the down payment of the Spirit in our hearts.
First, Paul ties his statement quite literally to his previous context in this chapter (comfort concerning salvation) by the inclusion of the conjunction "now". The statement (v21-22) simply must be viewed in light of the fact that Paul means what he’s saying to be comfort concerning their salvation sealed by God for the day of redemption.

So, just exactly how does a “seal” that can be pre-maturely broken by just any ole person, provide any comfort and confidence to them (or us) whatsoever? It doesn’t. Which is why your take is wrong.

My understanding of seal is not wrong. I’m simply not imposing anything on the word. The word seal means the same thing no matter who applies the seal. We know that God doesn’t go back on his word, so He won’t break the seal until the appropriate time. However, God breaking the seal is not the issue, the issue is, is it possible to break the seal? Free Grace has been arguing that the seal is the Holy Spirit. If that is so then one who has the Holy Spirit has been sealed. Can the seal be broken?

1 13 Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the midst of his brothers; and the Spirit of the LORD came upon David from that day forward. So Samuel arose and went to Ramah.

14 But the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and a distressing spirit from the LORD troubled him. (1Sa 16:13-14 NKJ)


Here are a few passages that speak of a seal. Paul was a Pharisee so he’d like understand this.

NKJ 1 Kings 21:8 And she wrote letters in Ahab's name, sealed them with his seal, and sent the letters to the elders and the nobles who were dwelling in the city with Naboth.

NKJ Nehemiah 9:38 "And because of all this, We make a sure covenant, and write it; Our leaders, our Levites, and our priests seal it."

NKJ Nehemiah 10:1 Now those who placed their seal on the document were: Nehemiah the governor, the son of Hacaliah, and Zedekiah,

NKJ Esther 8:8 "You yourselves write a decree concerning the Jews, as you please, in the king's name, and seal it with the king's signet ring; for whatever is written in the king's name and sealed with the king's signet ring no one can revoke."

NKJ Job 38:14 It takes on form like clay under a seal, And stands out like a garment.

NKJ Job 41:15 His rows of scales are his pride, Shut up tightly as with a seal;

NKJ Song of Solomon 8:6 THE SHULAMITE TO HER BELOVED Set me as a seal upon your heart, As a seal upon your arm; For love is as strong as death, Jealousy as cruel as the grave; Its flames are flames of fire, A most vehement flame.

NKJ Isaiah 8:16 Bind up the testimony, Seal the law among my disciples.

NKJ Jeremiah 32:44 `Men will buy fields for money, sign deeds and seal them, and take witnesses, in the land of Benjamin, in the places around Jerusalem, in the cities of Judah, in the cities of the mountains, in the cities of the lowland, and in the cities of the South; for I will cause their captives to return,' says the LORD."

 

[ReginaForbes]

For me, when I read these verses, I think of the "before and after" I got saved. Before I got saved I was looking for God, then when I found Him, I didn't need to look anymore- I'm "sealed". It's an over done deal and now I'm exploring my relationship with Him...no more wandering for me!

 

[chessman]

How does one understand words when reading theology into them?

Evidently by ignoring the fact that Paul's words were a comforting letter of firm assurance of their future redemptiion and salvation containing much more than the one word "seal".

 

[FreeGrace]

That's not necessary because you cannot prove that the seal can be broken, It seems you want me to debate your unproven premise. In Revelation there are 7 seals, they are God's seals, they are broken, thus God's seals can be broken.

I wish that you had read my last post. The seal in Eph 1:13, 4:30, 2 Cor 1:22 and 5:5 is the Holy Spirit, not some inanimate object. Your analogy falls apart on that basis.

Now, you have Scriptural evidence that God's seals can be broken, yet you claim they can't, thus the onus is on you to prove your claim.

So, are you trying to suggest that God breaks the Holy Spirit???????

There's no flaw in my view,

Rather, it's huge.

Paul is writing to people that he expects to understand him. If what he says is beyond their understanding there is no need for him to write to them. As I've pointed out several times Paul give no indication that the Corinthians should understand this seal any differently than they normally would. With the way you guys want to reads it we could take any word and simply claim it means something different and come up with all kinds of doctrines. If the words don't mean what they mean then we might as well just set the Bible aside because none us could understand it since we have to rely on the meanings of words.

It's as clear as crystal. The seal of the believer is the Holy Spirit. He cannot be "broken" in ANY sense of the word.

Your point is refuted by Scripture.

 

[Butch5]

Evidently by ignoring the fact that Paul's words were a comforting letter of firm assurance of their future redemptiion and salvation containing much more than the one word "seal".

Give some Scripture showing the seal can't be broken. Your argument is basically the God won't break the seal. I never said God would break the seal, however, as I've said, that doesn't mean the seal can't be broken. What precludes the sealed one from breaking the seal?

 

[Butch5]

I wish that you had read my last post. The seal in Eph 1:13, 4:30, 2 Cor 1:22 and 5:5 is the Holy Spirit, not some inanimate object. Your analogy falls apart on that basis.

No, it doesn't. You're evaluating my position based on your understanding of Scripture. You believe OSAS therefore you believe that one cannot lost the Holy Spirit. It's on that basis that you analyze my position. However, the premise that one cannot lose the Holy Spirit is flawed.

So, are you trying to suggest that God breaks the Holy Spirit???????

You give the proof. It's the giving of the Holy Spirit that is the seal, the Spirit Himself is not a seal.

Rather, it's huge.

No, it's based on what is seen in Scripture not an assumption.

It's as clear as crystal. The seal of the believer is the Holy Spirit. He cannot be "broken" in ANY sense of the word.

Your point is refuted by Scripture.

As I said, it's the giving of the Spirit that is the seal and we see that the Spirit left Saul, thus the Holy Spirit can depart from a person.