Experiential death and the Christian

Bob,

Do you believe that a man is justified by faith WITHOUT GOOD WORKS? If not, then your "circling back" argument is pointless as you have nothing to circle back to. Romans 2:6-8 is about either being JUSTIFIED BY GOOD WORKS as defined by the Law or being CONDEMNED by BAD WORKS as defined by the Law as it is the Law that is the standard being used in Romans 2:6-13. The human conscience defines works the same way - good or evil (Rom. 2:15). Paul repeatedly uses the phrase "without works" (Rom. 3:28; 4:5-6) in defining his doctrine of justification.

Repentance from "dead works" means "without works" or justification by faith without good works as defined by Law or conscience to be "good." Is that the kind of justification by faith you embrace? If not, then your circling argument is dead in the water.

I have already dealt with your eisgetical interpretation of this parable. Doctrine is not built upon parables, spiritualizations, allegories, etc.

 

Your exposition of Romans 7 is correct. Your conclusion that the Bible commands us not to sin is also correct.

However, IF it is your conclusion that Romans 6,8 and 1 John 3 teach that the Christian can actuallly live above sin then you are dead wrong.

Philippians 3 and 1 John 1:8-10 give the proper conclusion. Sinlessness is something all Christians strive after but never obtain in this life and the person or theologion who supposes he does is deceived (Philip. 3: 1 Jn. 1:8).



12 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.
13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,
14 I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.
15 ¶ Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.

In verse 12 he denies he has reached perfection or sinlessness but in verse 15 he claims to be "perfect." Now bob, here is your quandry. The term translated "perfect" is used to mean one of two ideas. (1) sinlessness; (2) relative maturity. In our text it is used two different ways and thus one of the two fit the idea of "maturity" while the other refers to "sinlessness"! The first use in verse 12 must mean "sinlessness" or esle you are denying that Paul was a "mature" Christianity. In verse 15 his argument is simple. As many as be "perfect" (mature) will be thus minded (that no one has reaced sinlessness). However, if you think you have obtained (sinless perfection) God shall reveal the fact that you have not yet obtained it. Just ask your wife or best friend - they will set you straight.

All who believe they can live above sin redefine the law's standard and reduce it so they can live above sin.

I Jn. 1:8 ¶ If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.2:1 ¶ My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

Bob, according to your undersanding you have no need of verse 9 or the latter part of 2:1! One who lives above sin don't need to confess sins and one commanded to sin not don't need to be told "And if any man sin"

I have already demonstrated that the pronouns define "any man" and "you" in context as saved persons and you have not even tried to overthrow the evidence (just don't like it and accept it). Until you can overthrow the grammatical evidences I have placed in front of your nose don't come back and say the context deals with both saved and lost because I can prove you are lying by the grammer used in context.