Interpreting Romans 6:23 In Context

[Naomi25]

Well, on this, again the passage explains that the wages of sin is death:
"16 Do you not know that to whom you yield yourselves slaves to obey, his slaves you are to whom you obey; whether [as a slave] of sin unto death, or [as a slave] of obedience unto righteousness?... 23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."
Death here is placed here in juxtaposition to eternal life, so I do see salvation as in view here.

But...is not the passage wholly geared towards what has passed and what now is? Where we once WERE enslaved to sin, "thanks be to God" we are now set free and are slaves to righteousness. Paul is assuming throughout the whole passage that those under grace will never turn back into FULL enslavement to sin, because we can SEE what sort of fruit it bore.


But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness. -Romans 6:17–18

Same with the parable of unforgiving debtor. He is given over to the tormentors. Same with the parable of the talents. The wicked servant is cast into outer darkness, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Again, I see a great problem in assuming a whole doctrinal stance on a single event from these parables. You would suggest that in these parables we would see two Christian men who are flung into hell because they, apparently, failed a single time: one failed to pass forgiveness on. And the other failed to make a profit due to fear of his master. Now....I don't know about you, but I'm aware of many Christians...in fact I am one, who has messed up many more times than just once. The idea that we can garner from these parables the idea that failing to meet God's expectations in works will get us booted into the 'outer darkness' is horrifying. Are we then to expect we must earn salvation again, to loose it all over again next time we don't measure up? I cannot see that idea mentioned anywhere in scripture.
I fully expect you don't mean to suggest that a person CAN loose their salvation after only one mistake, but if we start trying to pull such doctrinal stances from parables, that's the sort of pitfalls we can end up in. Instead, we must build up our doctrines and ideas from all of scripture. And for me, scripture paints a picture of grace. John tells us that we lie if we claim not to sin; so we know sin is still a part of a Christian's life. We know, however, we are to fight against it daily. Paul tells us in Galatians that we are foolish if we try and continue on our own, that we must engage in this 'fight' towards perfection with the Spirit. James tells us that Christians must indeed work, but we already know from the above conclusions that our works will not be perfect. But we know, thanks to the assurances of Christ himself that he will not let us go, because he is stronger than any other force in this world, even our mistakes and sin.
So, armed with these ideas (which, yes, are built upon more scriptures but for sake of brevity I won't take the time to list them all), I look to the parables you mention and I simple cannot read them as Christian men who mess up and are tossed into the outer darkness and are cut apart. It flies in the face of all the other promises and statements made by God and his disciples to us.

While I'm in Matthew, let me show you another example of expectations being placed on believers, this time on the disciples (Matthew 24:45-51). Jesus warned them that if they should think He was not returning for awhile and begin to spiritually abuse the people of God, He would come at a time they were not aware of and cut them in pieces and appoint them their place with the hypocrites, again where there would be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

To me, that last phrase virtually guarantees that salvation is at issue here, although some argue it is not.

While I'm in Matthew, let me show you another example of expectations being placed on believers, this time on the disciples (Matthew 24:45-51). Jesus warned them that if they should think He was not returning for awhile and begin to spiritually abuse the people of God, He would come at a time they were not aware of and cut them in pieces and appoint them their place with the hypocrites, again where there would be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Yes, and I acknowledge this. I had to tell Enoch that "reward" was admittedly not the word to use, as it is misleading. Paul deliberately went out of his way to avoid using it when speaking of the free gift. I had to go back and change my wording in the OP.

:)

 

[Naomi25]

Yes! This is why I'm grateful to be discussing this. Now watch: If you read this carefully, he is referencing justification as paving the way for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, saying "since we have been (past tense) justified... we have peace with God" (a reference to the Holy Spirit), and he then again references the outpouring at the end of v.5. In other words, justification opens the door for the outpouring, and thus peace with God, but it does not guarantee salvation. This is still contingent on a proper response to grace. Hence he mentions still walking in hope of the glory of God (future tense).

I'm just gonna quote that passage again, cause I find it helps to be looking at something when I'm talking about it!

Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us. -Romans 5:1–5

You say that we have 'peace with God' through the Holy Spirit. However, it doesn't actually say that. It says we have peace with God through 'our Lord Jesus Christ'. That it is in him we have obtained access 'by faith'. Now, I understand that necessarily the Holy Spirit is a part of our justification; it is He that wakes the dead heart to see the beauty of Christ, replaces stone with flesh.
However, I do not believe this passage at all speaks about justification being an 'open door' for the outpouring, or that salvation is or is not guaranteed. That assumption is read into the passage. The fact is, the wording is present tense. And the 'hope' spoken of does not need to be a salvational hope. It could be anything from the resurrection hope to the blessed hope of his return.
And as far as being guaranteed of salvation! My word! The presence of the Spirit in each of us IS that guarantee!

And it is God who establishes us with you in Christ, and has anointed us, and who has also put his seal on us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee. -2 Corinthians 1:21–22

In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory. -Ephesians 1:13–14

Again, notice he uses future tense when speaking in regard to their (potential) salvation, provided they endure to the end, but past tense when referencing their having received reconciliation. Reconciliation has opened the door for the grace of the Spirit's outpouring and all the promises of God found in Christ. But salvation is still referenced in the future as something they are still hoping for.

Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.-Romans 5:9–11

I'm not sure how to express what I'm thinking here, so forgive me if this comes across as clunky. You say Paul uses 'future tense' to describe 'potential' salvation, but present tense for 'reconciliation'. The problem with this is that 'reconciliation' IS salvation. It IS justification. And there is nothing that stops something we have now, from being a future tense as well. It doesn't mean we have to earn it...loose it and regain it, or any such thing. It may only suggest that what we have now, we still have possession of in the future.
So, rather than attempting to wiggle a potential doctrine over what might fit in-between the unspoken present and future (which it doesn't not state), should we not focus on what the texts actually say? Which is that we DO have justification. That that justification means we SHALL be saved from the wrath of God. That if God SAVED us by the death of his own son while we were complete enemies, how much more will he bring us to glorification with the life of his son! This suggests an extreme mercy and grace on God's behalf, and to the contrary of what you're suggesting, tells us that we are not saved only to then by asked to play for our supper.

Absolutely, only this doesn't cancel out the implications in Romans 6:15-23. A man is still a slave to that which he obeys, and if he obeys sin, the end result will be death.

That depends if you read Romans 6:15-23 in the light of triumph or not. As I pointed out in my other post, Paul clearly is writing that passage as one who has stepped from chains into freedom. He writes that the Christian IS NOW free, that they are NO LONGER slaves to sin. He uses clear comparisons of what was to what now is. There isn't the expectation that the now free in Christ will slink back to the shadows, which Paul clearly tells us leads to death. Just because Paul gives us that information doesn't mean that is the future for Christians who don't measure up. I mean....does the text actually say that Christians must behave and perform works to keep salvation?
Thus when we come to: There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, -Romans 8:1–3
We can see again how Paul is not giving us information to try and bring the hammer down on our behaviour...but he is showing us the before and after, informing us of the clutches of death Christ has snatched us from. Is not the light made all the more beautiful when we understand just how bad the darkness really was?

I mentioned this verse earlier. This is one of those instances where the context is discussing the harrowing of Hades, so His reference to redemption here is more involved. Long story, LoL.

Okay...I can't say I really understand that, especially as there doesn't appear to be any mention of Hades anywhere in or near that verse. But, okay then. I still think the verse stands quite well by itself.

 

[Naomi25]

"guarantee of our inheritance" can be misleading here. The translator was trying to convey it as a type of down deposit, an investment in us if you will. Other translators go with the word "earnest." The seal of the Holy Spirit is a claim on ownership, but again it does not negate the freewill of men to turn aside from God and go back into the world, i.e. back to serving sin as their master and lord.

I'm not sure that it matters, exactly. Whether 'guarantee' or 'down payment' for the greater to come...we still are bearers of the Holy Spirit, God within us. Even if we forget that Christ told us that what is his he will never let go of, even if we forget that Hebrews tells us that Christ himself is both author AND finisher of our faith, we still are told this about having the Spirit within us:

In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory. -Ephesians 1:13–14

This outright tells us that the Holy Spirit is a down-payment...a promise, a partial giving, of something, an inheritance, that is ours, that we will receive in the future. And it all stems back to our hearing the word, believing in faith, and receiving the Spirit. There is a clear line in the order of things: justification, sanctification and then glorification. And of course scripture is going to speak of future expectation yet to come; we have not yet been glorified. It is in this hope that we have been saved (Romans 8:23-24). But just because there is something clearly waiting for us in the future, does not mean that it is our salvation that is lacking or that we must work to keep it.

Again, reconciliation is now. Redemption will come at His return (Luke 21:28, Romans 8:23, Ephesians 1:14).


Well, I believe that the redemption of our bodies WILL be salvation : ) My contention is that in the present time, there is such a thing as presuming upon God for salvation, not taking into account the expectations involved in coming into a relationship with the True and Living God.

Well, as I showed, there is a clear cross over in the verses that speak of salvation and redemption. Some clearly speak of 'redemption' in salvific light, while others speak of 'that day'. It's not the only term in scripture that can be a little confusing. 'The Day of the Lord' was used in the OT as any great judgement of God, but also of that final coming of Christ, the end of all days. The mistake, I believe, is to just take the term and assign a blanket definition to it without giving any sort of nod to the surrounding context.

MAN! I knew inviting you was going to mean potentially a lot of work! : ) Oh, well. Good to be discussing this with you, Naomi, even if it means I'm going to be busy for the next month, LoL!

Ha...sorry. I don't mean to be difficult, although I often get the feeling that I am. But, you know...isn't that what doctrinal debates are for?? But...worry not...you're making my brain sweat too, if that's any consolation!!

 

[farouk]

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you here. Many times the NT discusses justification it is a present thing. Some examples:

Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us. -Romans 5:1–5

Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.-Romans 5:9–11

There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, -Romans 8:1–3

In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight -Ephesians 1:7–8

In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory. In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory. -Ephesians 1:11–14

He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. -Colossians 1:13–14

There are so many more, but trying to list them all would be pointless. Suffice to say, the NT speaks of our salvation, our redemption as now! The consummation...now, that is still future, but that is different than salvation or, as its sometimes called redemption. I suppose the terms get a bit iffy. Sometimes the term 'redemption' does refer to the final 'redemption' of both our bodies and the earth. But it also is used to refer to our salvation...the justification that takes place when we place our trust in Christ. Justification is what comes first, which is all God's work...the free gift. Then comes sanctification, which we do play a part in, but it also requires God's work in the Holy Spirit, as we are still in the flesh and stumble often. Then comes glorification, when we receive our new bodies and sin will be no more.



I think I might have covered this is my previous post to you (#62). But, briefly...I think there is a problem with defining something a gift, but then putting conditions upon it. If I tell my child that she can have (x), but only if she cleans her room, puts her clothes away and gets to bed on time for a whole week, (x) is not a free gift at all, it is something she earned by toeing the line. It is a reward. And a reward is NOT a gift. She gets to pat herself on the back and tell herself what a good job she did to earn (x), she gets to feel a little glow of achievement whenever she looks at (x) and enjoys it. And yes, she earned it, she did well. But....it is not a free gift.
And I just do not think scripture teaches that about the free gift at all. In fact, I think Paul goes out of his way to stress what a free gift is and isn't.

Great verses there; doctrinally, justification is a pivotal subject in Scripture.

 

[Enoch111]

Great verses there; doctrinally, justification is a pivotal subject in Scripture.

And if a Christian cannot tie justification by grace through faith with the free gift of eternal life, SHAME ON HIM OR HER.

We are seeing some bizarre and absurd notions being presented in this thread, and generally in Christendom today (concerning other matters also).

 

[Naomi25]

Great verses there; doctrinally, justification is a pivotal subject in Scripture.

Oh, the weightiest subject! I clearly have my opinion (ahem), but its so weighty I worry about my ability and right to stand up and proclaim it. Am I getting it right? Am I portraying it correctly? It's the sort of topic that frees or binds. Yes...weighty. And while I'm happy to toss around ideas on it, sometimes I can't help feeling it should be left to the real teachers.

 

[farouk]

Oh, the weightiest subject! I clearly have my opinion (ahem), but its so weighty I worry about my ability and right to stand up and proclaim it. Am I getting it right? Am I portraying it correctly? It's the sort of topic that frees or binds. Yes...weighty. And while I'm happy to toss around ideas on it, sometimes I can't help feeling it should be left to the real teachers.

It was the battle ground of the Reformation, doctrinally.

 

[Naomi25]

It was the battle ground of the Reformation, doctrinally.

I think it still is a battle ground. Not one of stakes and burning, but still one of words and division. Which is sad. Even if such words are charitable, as they have been here, thank goodness, I suppose I still have a heavy heart that Christ would pay such a price to purchase something for us, for us to not avail ourselves of it...in fact, for us to do the very thing that he came to save us from; our works and the effort to use them to pay for eternity. Because whether we use them to pay for it initially or use them to keep us in it, it's still paying for it. It's just a matter of semantics, and the bible doesn't make that distinction. We do. Grace is the freedom from that. And grace frees us to do anything, everything for God, but do it with a completely free and open heart, full of love and without fear that if it isn't good enough, that gift will be taken away.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I do understand what you are saying, and I understand that this is a very deep topic that can have many nuances. My objection to the idea that a Christian must essentially work to keep their salvation and is under the threat of being booted out of God's grace if he doesn't perform as he should, is two...no, three things. The first would be the whole meaning of 'Grace' in the first place. The other two would be these verses:

Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? -Galatians 3:2–3

All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” -John 6:37–40

So, to my mind, while there can be conversations over Romans 6 and the meanings on what it means to slip back towards sin, I just can't see how we can dance around the clear directives in these two passages. Paul insists that initial salvation is by the 'Spirit' with faith, and that sanctification...'being perfected' must be the same...that trying to do so 'in the flesh', which is works, cannot be done. In fact, he calls it foolish!
Then Christ tells us that those who God has determined to be Christs WILL be Christ's. And Christ will not let them go or turn them away. He WILL raise them up on the last day. And that tells us what? That it is NOT by our works, which are imperfect, but by the work of Christ, which is both perfect and sure. It is by his strength, his perfection, his works, that we are raised up on that last day, just as we are saved.



I think there is a problem with ONLY holding to the slave analogy. While this passage certainly uses it, it's not the only one we see when the bible talks about the new status of the believer, and I think its important to link it in to this conversation to get the whole picture. The bible calls us adopted sons of God. We must also remember that the slavery in the bible is different than the sort of slavery that comes to our mind when we hear the word; its not the sort that happened in America back when. Biblical slavery wasn't the stealing of a person and forcing them into a life of forced labor. It was more when a person couldn't pay their debts they would agree to work them off by becoming that person's employee. They would have the same rights of other employees, they just had to stay until the debt was paid off. So, when we see the bible saying that we are rescued from slavery to sin and are now free to become slaves to righteousness, we add that to the picture of our adoption as sons of God. In affect, the picture that's being built for us is that situationally we've just been moved from indentured 'slave' to living in the masters house as 'son', with all the benefits that come with that.
So when Paul then calls us not to fall back into enslavement to sin, he saying how foolish it would be to be living 'the high life' but to get up each morning and trudge back off to work under the harsh eye of the foreman. We are needlessly experiencing the effects of our 'old life', rather than embracing the new.
However, I do not think that the text, or Paul, infers that a Christian, an adopted son of God, even acting in such a foolish and blind manner, gets 'un-adopted'. Any adopted child who lands in a really good, loving family will come to tell you that it didn't matter how they 'stuffed up', that family called them their own and welcomed them with open arms, even after they had done foolish things. This is how we must understand our adoption. We will all do foolish things. We will all slide backwards towards sin at times. But the God who sent his Son to die for us so we might become sons of God when it was obvious we could not get into the family by ourselves, does not then punish us for the same weakness. He encourages us to be better, he helps us to BE better by his Spirit. But he does not turn us away.



But...are we to understand that the original man begging for his debts to be forgiven was truly a Christian? We know from other scriptures that there will be plenty of people who have 'called on the Lord' falsely. And that we know that not only on the Last Day, but by their fruits. And clearly, this man, having believed that everything was 'hunky dory' with his own debts, then turned around and showed the most rotten of fruits.
I think rather than showing that Christians must work to keep their salvation and are punished for not bearing good fruit, which I think is an idea contradicted by other passages (see above), it shows the folly of people sitting self-righteously in church, or wherever, believing them and God to be 'good', but then living a life completely not in step with a person who truly received grace.


Again...I'm not sure I would interpret that parable strictly in that light. So...in the parable we see two servants go out and work with what their master gave them, right? They are most pleased to use what their Master has given them. The third, however, is not. He doesn't like his master, in fact he claims he's scared of him. That could be true, or he could just be a lazy bum who's making excuses. Either way, he does nothing and then tries to blame it on the master, who rightly punishes him.
Now, I would suggest that rather than being a parable about the woes of not working for your salvation, it's a parable that highlights the heart and spirit of those who are saved versus those who are not. The two who are happy to take what their master; Christ, has given them, and work with them, is those who have new hearts. As James tells us in his book, faith is not a true faith unless it is accompanied by works. It's DOING stuff for Christ that evidences our new hearts. And it doesn't really matter if we stuff up, or if its big or small or we struggle with it, what matters is it will be there, and it will be growing. The third servant? Well, that man was clearly dead. He wanted nothing to do with his master or the talent his master gave him. According to James, this man is not saved.
That's how I'd take this parable.

Horray! Four substantive posts! : ) Naomi, thank you so much for taking the time to interact with me on this. I don't seem to be getting much genuine theological exchange from anyone yet, and I was thinking of reposting it in the debate forum with a much more provocative title if I didn't get more response.

But listen, I'm going to be working harder over the next two days than I will all year, so it may be a few days before I can read through everything and respond properly. But be patient. I don't think I could have found a better person to be discussing this subject matter with intellectually.

God bless, and talk to you soon!

 

[charity]

Thanks, Charity. Any comments on Posts #37, #47, or #65 you might want to share?

I'm seeking input from everyone on what they agree with and do not agree with.
Blessings.

Hello @Hidden In Him,

I have printed off the posts you have mentioned (#37, #47, #65), and will come back to you concerning them asap.

In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[Hidden In Him]

Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? -Galatians 3:2–3

Let me at least try and get in a few responses now if I can. In this passage the term used is more specifically, "works of the law." Now that is a different thing entirely. They were being seduced into keeping Jewish law, so the discussion here was not a debate over salvation by faith alone but rather over beginning the Christian walk by faith only to succumb to thinking it required keeping things like circumcision, keeping feast days, not eating unclean foods, etc. Different thing.

All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” -John 6:37–40

Ok, this one is a favorite of those who believe a Christian can never lose his or her salvation, but the way they take the expression "I should lose nothing" is out of context with what's actually being said. The full statement is, "And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day." Taken together, what this verse is saying is that He will not lose them to death because He will raise them up into everlasting life. But this applies only to those who are truly His and remain so, enduring until the end. As scripture says, "The Lord knows those who are His" (2 Timothy 2:19), and there are a number of instances in the NT where a believer can indeed commit sins that can cause a believer yo, such as denying Him before men (unless repented of), taking the mark of the beast, blaspheming the Holy Spirit, things like that...

Anyway, I didn't realize you were OSAS, so that would be a long discussion in and of itself.

I think there is a problem with ONLY holding to the slave analogy. While this passage certainly uses it, it's not the only one we see when the bible talks about the new status of the believer, and I think its important to link it in to this conversation to get the whole picture. The bible calls us adopted sons of God...

Uh, oh... this one looks involved... I'll have to give it a good read through later.

God bless, sister! And thanks once again!

 

[Hidden In Him]

Hello @Hidden In Him,

I have printed off the posts you have mentioned (#37, #47, #65), and will come back to you concerning them asap.

In Christ Jesus
Chris

Please do, Charity! All responses are welcome : )

Have a great day!

 

[charity]

Hello @Hidden In Him,

Having read through your interpretation of Romans 6:15-23, I find myself in disagreement with you.

In the opening section of Romans 6, we have been shown that sanctification operates within a new sphere - in 'newness of life' in Christ, and presupposes justification as an accomplished fact. Justification brings, 'peace with God', and, 'access by faith into the grace wherein we stand' (Romans 5:1-2). This new sphere necessitates a new condition - 'oneness with Christ'. It is impossible to think of newness of life and union with Christ, and at the same time of a state of bondage; therefore we have seen that there is a new state also - freedom from bondage:- 'For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace' (Romans 6:14).

This is the language of heaven. This must be the atmosphere of the new creation, but what is the possible effect upon believers during this present time of imperfect realisation while in this mortal body? Unfortunately, we know only too well.

'For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty;
only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh,
but by love serve one another.'
(Gal 5:13)

* Liberty in the scriptural sense acknowledges the Lord, 'Whose we are, and Whom we serve'.
* Licence casts away all restraint, denies all responsibility, and acknowledges no lord but self.

It is to make these two distinctions clear that the Apostle Paul writes in Romans 6:14+, in order to correct any error consequent on misunderstanding the meaning of the liberty that the believer has been brought into, in Christ.

These believers have been saved by grace, the gift of life is theirs in the person of their Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ, and will not be taken away from them; yet they are in danger of suffering loss.

I have to stop here, forgive me for not taking it verse by verse, but time will not allow that at the moment.

In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[Hidden In Him]

I think there is a problem with ONLY holding to the slave analogy. While this passage certainly uses it, it's not the only one we see when the bible talks about the new status of the believer, and I think its important to link it in to this conversation to get the whole picture. The bible calls us adopted sons of God. We must also remember that the slavery in the bible is different than the sort of slavery that comes to our mind when we hear the word; its not the sort that happened in America back when. Biblical slavery wasn't the stealing of a person and forcing them into a life of forced labor. It was more when a person couldn't pay their debts they would agree to work them off by becoming that person's employee. They would have the same rights of other employees, they just had to stay until the debt was paid off. So, when we see the bible saying that we are rescued from slavery to sin and are now free to become slaves to righteousness, we add that to the picture of our adoption as sons of God. In affect, the picture that's being built for us is that situationally we've just been moved from indentured 'slave' to living in the masters house as 'son', with all the benefits that come with that.
So when Paul then calls us not to fall back into enslavement to sin, he saying how foolish it would be to be living 'the high life' but to get up each morning and trudge back off to work under the harsh eye of the foreman. We are needlessly experiencing the effects of our 'old life', rather than embracing the new.
However, I do not think that the text, or Paul, infers that a Christian, an adopted son of God, even acting in such a foolish and blind manner, gets 'un-adopted'. Any adopted child who lands in a really good, loving family will come to tell you that it didn't matter how they 'stuffed up', that family called them their own and welcomed them with open arms, even after they had done foolish things. This is how we must understand our adoption. We will all do foolish things. We will all slide backwards towards sin at times. But the God who sent his Son to die for us so we might become sons of God when it was obvious we could not get into the family by ourselves, does not then punish us for the same weakness. He encourages us to be better, he helps us to BE better by his Spirit. But he does not turn us away.

Ok, I understand what you are saying here, but in Romans 6:15-23 the analogy is used not to teach we are more than slaves but rather adopted sons. It is used to warn what will happen if we go back to serving our former master of sin. This is what is suggested by v.15-16, "What then? Shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace? God forbid. Do you not know that to whom you yield yourselves slaves to obey, his slaves you are to whom you obey; whether [as a slave] of sin unto death, or [as a slave] of obedience unto righteousness?" These sentences imply that we can indeed go back to serving sin, and as Peter said, those who do are like a dog returning to their vomit, or a pig to wallowing in the mud. So, too, is a man freed from enslavement to sin through Christ who returns to serving sin despite being freed from it. And in such a state, not serving the Lord who delivered him but returning to his former master who brought him only shame, his end will be to be paid by the master whom he was truly serving. I understand fully that if we sin we have an advocate with the Father, but at the same time Jesus is not called our Lord in name only. He is to be our Lord in reality, for if He is not, we have no rightful place in His kingdom.

About the adoption analogy, I think Romans teaches something similar in Chapter 8:
12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
13 For if you live after the flesh, you shall die: but if through the Spirit you do mortify the deeds of the body, you shall live.
14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
15 For you have not received the Spirit of bondage again to fear; but you have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, "Abba, Father."
16 The Spirit itself bears witness with our spirit that we are the children of God:
17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

Now, suppose the adopted son refuses to suffer with Him. Suppose he denies Him before men to avoid enduring persecution. Is he still counted worthy to be called a son? And maybe more to your argument, what about the adopted son who lives after the flesh and does NOT mortify the deeds of the body? As adopted sons we are called to conform to the image of our Father, and that does not mean physically but rather in how we conduct ourselves in our everyday affairs. Would we still be counted worthy to be called His true sons if we never did conform ourselves to His image, but went back to walking in the image of the evil one who formed our behavior before we were adopted?

 

[Hidden In Him]

But...are we to understand that the original man begging for his debts to be forgiven was truly a Christian? We know from other scriptures that there will be plenty of people who have 'called on the Lord' falsely. And that we know that not only on the Last Day, but by their fruits. And clearly, this man, having believed that everything was 'hunky dory' with his own debts, then turned around and showed the most rotten of fruits.

:)
I've heard this argument before, but in the parable the Lord actively forgives his entire debt. It doesn't say that he offers to forgive his debt, it says he forgives it, completely and totally. If the debt represents his sin debt, then this can be nothing other than a Christian who has entered into a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ through grace, having had his sin debt completely forgiven.

Again...I'm not sure I would interpret that parable strictly in that light. So...in the parable we see two servants go out and work with what their master gave them, right? They are most pleased to use what their Master has given them. The third, however, is not. He doesn't like his master, in fact he claims he's scared of him. That could be true, or he could just be a lazy bum who's making excuses. Either way, he does nothing and then tries to blame it on the master, who rightly punishes him.

Here you might have a stronger argument, only again the master gives him something (suggesting a relationship has been formed); something which he gave to the other two as well, only in a lesser quantity. Interpreters debate what that something represents. Judging by the context of the surrounding text, I believe the talents represent wisdom and revelation from God they were to increase in, so as to be able to teach His people and give them something "to eat." (see Matthew 24:45 and Matthew 25:35). But whatever it represented, this parable again describes a servant not responding properly to his Lord, as the others had done.

 

[Hidden In Him]

But...is not the passage wholly geared towards what has passed and what now is? Where we once WERE enslaved to sin, "thanks be to God" we are now set free and are slaves to righteousness. Paul is assuming throughout the whole passage that those under grace will never turn back into FULL enslavement to sin, because we can SEE what sort of fruit it bore.

But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness. -Romans 6:17–18

This is a common interpretation, yes. But now I'm glad you brought this up because there is an error I see many make when it comes to interpreting passages like this: They have this way of applying statements made to a specific group of individuals 2,000 years ago to all Christians everywhere at all times, in all circumstances, regardless of what lives they lead. But Paul was writing to this group of people specifically, and describing their spiritual history and their spiritual state as it now existed at the time of writing:

17 But God be thanked, that you were the slaves of sin, but you have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
18 Being then made free from sin, you became the slaves of righteousness.
19 I speak after the manner of men because of the weakness of your flesh: for as you have yielded your members slaves to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members slaves to righteousness unto holiness.
20 For when you were the slaves of sin, you were free from righteousness.
21 What fruit then did you have in those things whereof you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death.
22 But now being made free from sin, and having become slaves to God, you have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

Thus, these were not theoretical statements. They actually HAD obeyed from the heart the teachings of the apostles. Paul would not have written these things to them in such a way if they had not obeyed from the heart the doctrine that had been delivered them, simply to teach a theoretical truth. So yes, to answer your question, it had indeed "passed and now was." But the question is, has it come to pass in our lives and now is, just as it came to pass in theirs. If we have not obeyed from the heart the doctrines delivered to us, then we are in a different set of circumstances then they were.

Again, I see a great problem in assuming a whole doctrinal stance on a single event from these parables. You would suggest that in these parables we would see two Christian men who are flung into hell because they, apparently, failed a single time: one failed to pass forgiveness on. And the other failed to make a profit due to fear of his master. Now....I don't know about you, but I'm aware of many Christians...in fact I am one, who has messed up many more times than just once. The idea that we can garner from these parables the idea that failing to meet God's expectations in works will get us booted into the 'outer darkness' is horrifying. Are we then to expect we must earn salvation again, to loose it all over again next time we don't measure up? I cannot see that idea mentioned anywhere in scripture.
I fully expect you don't mean to suggest that a person CAN loose their salvation after only one mistake, but if we start trying to pull such doctrinal stances from parables, that's the sort of pitfalls we can end up in. Instead, we must build up our doctrines and ideas from all of scripture. And for me, scripture paints a picture of grace. John tells us that we lie if we claim not to sin; so we know sin is still a part of a Christian's life. We know, however, we are to fight against it daily. Paul tells us in Galatians that we are foolish if we try and continue on our own, that we must engage in this 'fight' towards perfection with the Spirit. James tells us that Christians must indeed work, but we already know from the above conclusions that our works will not be perfect. But we know, thanks to the assurances of Christ himself that he will not let us go, because he is stronger than any other force in this world, even our mistakes and sin.

Ah... please don't misunderstand me here, Naomi, as this is I believe at the very heart of why a teaching like the one I present in this thread might be rejected by some: It is NOT about Christians being rejected by God for committing one little sin. You are correct in saying that's not what I would teach, and I pray no one reading this thinks it would be. But what I believe these parables teach is that a persistent refusal to obey God in certain matters will ultimately lead to damnation. A lot of time apparently passed in the parable of the talents, because it says "after a long time the master of those servants returned" (Matthew 25:19). So the wicked servant continued for a very long time in sins that, by his own admission, he was being convicted of, in deciding to bury his lord's talent. He had a long time to repent but refused to.

In the parable of the unforgiving debtor, persistent refusal to forgive is implied by his refusing to forgive even after the man pleaded and begged him to be patient and give him time. Then he had the man thrown in prison "until he should pay back the money," which I believe would have been impossible, since he would not be able to make any money in prison, and he currently did not have the money to pay him or he would have. So you have here a person who was declaring by his actions that he was intent on never forgiving the debtor, ever.

But no. I am absolutely opposed to anyone teaching that one little sin would have the capability of causing a Christian to lose their salvation. Some may think me nonsensical, but I'm not that crazy, LoL.

:)

:)

 

[Zachary]

It is because God is God that your ideas are NONSENSICAL.

FEI, everyone's nonsensical except for the Enoch.
FEI = For everyone's information

 

[Zachary]

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you here. Many times the NT discusses justification it is a present thing.

It's a present thing until you become a habitual sinner, fall away from the faith, etc.
.

 

[Zachary]

... we are expected to ... become overcomers.
Rev 3:5 He who overcomes will, like them, be dressed in white.
I will never blot out his name from the book of life,
but will acknowledge his name before my Father and his angels.
Overcoming is not a one off event, but a walk, with failures and struggles,
that sees faith and truth conquer desire and delusion, to the glory of Christ, Amen.

Here is Jesus' definition of "an overcomer" ...

Rev 3:21
"To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne,
as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne."

Jesus overcame sin, the world, non-believers, Satan, persecution, etc.
.

 

[marks]

that all depends on who you ask.... i have studied both sides of the coin . so let me ask at what exact point has one fell from Grace ?

That would be when someone stops trusting in Christ alone, and begins to look to what they think they have to do.

Much love!