What does “None of us, but all of Christ” mean?

[alaric]

Romans 7:15-21

I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

Everyone (Christians and non-Christians) born has sin in them. The bible has made it clear in Romans 7:20 “Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.”

Therefore when a Christian focus on their self-effort and will-power to do good, often they will most likely ended up doing Romans 7:15 “For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do.”

The more you focus yourself and depend on your own strength to do good and be right with God, you will end up failing and disappointed with yourself.

However, the bible has offered a solution.

Romans 7:24-25

What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!

The solution is to stop focusing on yourself and turn your attention to Jesus.

• Find out how perfect is Jesus in God’s sight. (1 John 3:5 “But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin.)
• Find out how much is Jesus accepted by God. (Mark 16:19 “After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God.”)

After understanding the standing of Jesus with God, identify yourself with Jesus.

1 John 4:17 “This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment: In this world we are like Jesus.”

Colossians 2:9-10 “For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and in Christ you have been brought to fullness.”

Once you understood your new identity, the burden of achieving to live right and doing good to please God will be gone. Because Jesus has already achieved it and imparted it to everyone who believes in him and his finished work. When you are identified with Jesus, you will slowly change and become like him. In another words, we will become lesser and Jesus will become more. None of us, but all of Christ.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Romans 7:15-21

I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

Everyone (Christians and non-Christians) born has sin in them. The bible has made it clear in Romans 7:20 “Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.”

Therefore when a Christian focus on their self-effort and will-power to do good, often they will most likely ended up doing Romans 7:15 “For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do.”

The more you focus yourself and depend on your own strength to do good and be right with God, you will end up failing and disappointed with yourself.

However, the bible has offered a solution.

Romans 7:24-25

What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!

The solution is to stop focusing on yourself and turn your attention to Jesus.

• Find out how perfect is Jesus in God’s sight. (1 John 3:5 “But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin.)
• Find out how much is Jesus accepted by God. (Mark 16:19 “After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God.”)

After understanding the standing of Jesus with God, identify yourself with Jesus.

1 John 4:17 “This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment: In this world we are like Jesus.”

Colossians 2:9-10 “For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and in Christ you have been brought to fullness.”

Once you understood your new identity, the burden of achieving to live right and doing good to please God will be gone. Because Jesus has already achieved it and imparted it to everyone who believes in him and his finished work. When you are identified with Jesus, you will slowly change and become like him. In another words, we will become lesser and Jesus will become more. None of us, but all of Christ.

Two thoughts:

1) There will come many who will tell you that Romans 7 is not about a believer. But that is not what Paul sounds like, there. The discussion does indeed lead up to verse 25 "Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!" He reiterates the same sentiment in 2 Corinthians 9:15 "But thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift" (of grace, redemption and freedom from slavery to sin, but also his mercy toward those he has already forgiven, and in whom he dwells. But in the greater context of the whole of scripture, and the force of argument in the whole book of Romans, you see the relevance of his conclusion for chapter 7: "So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin" So I agree with your use of Romans 7.

2) This is more difficult to do, this "giving up the burden of trying to be good enough", as I put it. Your posts I have read so far seem to be written from the delight of the transposition from death to life, in the complete forgiveness and substitution of Christ in your place, and rightly so! Also the joy in fellowship with him. Yet, the more you learn of him, and the better you get to know him, the more awful the realization of what sin is, against the backdrop of his burning purity, and the more painful the separation realized upon conviction of yet another time having pushed him away to return to the vomit. I can only tell of my experience, which came of seeing the inestimable grace of his having created at all. There is, in the end, one reason, though many-faceted. We are told of it constantly, from the beginning to the end. My favorite iteration of it is in Revelation 21: "God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God." This is already true, but we don't see its conclusion—yet. God will accomplish everything he set out to do, and it is beautiful in his sight. HE is satisfied, and full of Joy, concerning what he is making of us. This is not so closely related to what we want to achieve by ever-increasing obedience, but by his taking us through every single thing we go through— our failings as well as our obedience are all part of what he is using to make the particular member of that place that each will be. When I watch him at work, and delight in his enjoyment of what he is making, I suddenly realize I haven't even thought of myself for a while, nor even my eternal security, but only Him, and who he is. So, dependent on his mercy is the safest and most satisfying place to be.

But that is me. I don't claim everyone needs to go through what I have. But I can tell you that takes my eyes off me, and onto him, not even by my effort, but by living in the dependence on his mercy rather than my obedience. It is not my faithfulness, but his.

 

[Stephen3141]

Romans 7:15-21

I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

Everyone (Christians and non-Christians) born has sin in them. The bible has made it clear in Romans 7:20 “Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.”

Therefore when a Christian focus on their self-effort and will-power to do good, often they will most likely ended up doing Romans 7:15 “For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do.”

The more you focus yourself and depend on your own strength to do good and be right with God, you will end up failing and disappointed with yourself.

However, the bible has offered a solution.

Romans 7:24-25

What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!

The solution is to stop focusing on yourself and turn your attention to Jesus.

• Find out how perfect is Jesus in God’s sight. (1 John 3:5 “But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin.)
• Find out how much is Jesus accepted by God. (Mark 16:19 “After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God.”)

After understanding the standing of Jesus with God, identify yourself with Jesus.

1 John 4:17 “This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment: In this world we are like Jesus.”

Colossians 2:9-10 “For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and in Christ you have been brought to fullness.”

Once you understood your new identity, the burden of achieving to live right and doing good to please God will be gone. Because Jesus has already achieved it and imparted it to everyone who believes in him and his finished work. When you are identified with Jesus, you will slowly change and become like him. In another words, we will become lesser and Jesus will become more. None of us, but all of Christ.

This section in Romans, is one of the most debated sections of the New Testament.

People who hold to different theologies, and different definitions of "salvation"
often read their own theology into the passage.

There is also a live debate over what "body" (in many english translations) means.
And, this gets into the debate over what "flesh" and "spirit" mean, in some of
Paul's dialogues.

I assert that Paul makes a clear distinction between entering into the New
Covenant by a choice of trusting God, and the ongoing struggle with the
temptations and testings that Christians go through.

I don't think that quoting some verses, gets into the substance of the
historic Christian discussion, of what Paul means.

 

[Mark Quayle]

This section in Romans, is one of the most debated sections of the New Testament.

People who hold to different theologies, and different definitions of "salvation"
often read their own theology into the passage.

There is also a live debate over what "body" (in many english translations) means.
And, this gets into the debate over what "flesh" and "spirit" mean, in some of
Paul's dialogues.

I assert that Paul makes a clear distinction between entering into the New
Covenant by a choice of trusting God, and the ongoing struggle with the
temptations and testings that Christians go through.

I don't think that quoting some verses, gets into the substance of the
historic Christian discussion, of what Paul means.

I agree with you about that. But the fact that orthodoxy is ambivalent on the use of Romans 7 doesn't mean it is useless.

Give the guy some credit. He has some good things to say. (Lol, besides, he agrees with me on the use of Romans 7 )

 

[fhansen]

Romans 7:15-21

I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

Everyone (Christians and non-Christians) born has sin in them. The bible has made it clear in Romans 7:20 “Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.”

Therefore when a Christian focus on their self-effort and will-power to do good, often they will most likely ended up doing Romans 7:15 “For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do.”

The more you focus yourself and depend on your own strength to do good and be right with God, you will end up failing and disappointed with yourself.

However, the bible has offered a solution.

Romans 7:24-25

What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!

The solution is to stop focusing on yourself and turn your attention to Jesus.

• Find out how perfect is Jesus in God’s sight. (1 John 3:5 “But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin.)
• Find out how much is Jesus accepted by God. (Mark 16:19 “After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God.”)

After understanding the standing of Jesus with God, identify yourself with Jesus.

1 John 4:17 “This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment: In this world we are like Jesus.”

Colossians 2:9-10 “For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and in Christ you have been brought to fullness.”

Once you understood your new identity, the burden of achieving to live right and doing good to please God will be gone. Because Jesus has already achieved it and imparted it to everyone who believes in him and his finished work. When you are identified with Jesus, you will slowly change and become like him. In another words, we will become lesser and Jesus will become more. None of us, but all of Christ.

Yes. The message, perhaps best related in John 15, is simple to me: man is made to be connected to the Vine and is lost, in chaos, disorder, injustice, rebellion to the extent that he's separated from Him-with sin being the inevitable result. Jesus came to reconcile us with God, and therefore with Himself, turning us from the alienation that Adam initiated for all humankind and back to subjugation of the creature to the Creator, but now joined by a bond cemented by the faith, hope, and love that Adam saw no use for yet in Eden, or wasn’t ready for. That relationship, itself, puts us back into the "right place", back to a state of justice, and from there our own obedience can begin to flow as sap through the Vine, as we remain in Him.

 

[FireDragon76]

Two thoughts:

1) There will come many who will tell you that Romans 7 is not about a believer. But that is not what Paul sounds like, there. The discussion does indeed lead up to verse 25 "Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!" He reiterates the same sentiment in 2 Corinthians 9:15 "But thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift" (of grace, redemption and freedom from slavery to sin, but also his mercy toward those he has already forgiven, and in whom he dwells. But in the greater context of the whole of scripture, and the force of argument in the whole book of Romans, you see the relevance of his conclusion for chapter 7: "So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin" So I agree with your use of Romans 7.

Both Lutherans and Reformed believe this passage is speaking about Paul's own struggle with sin. In fact it's more or less a doctrine that is essential to these two Protestant theological systems/traditions.

John also echoes this thought: 1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

So there you have two independent testimonies that imply that Christians are not sinless. It seems to me this is actually a settled matter, and even if it is a stumbling block for certain Holiness traditions that believe in Christian perfectionism.

 

[FireDragon76]

Yes. The message, perhaps best related in John 15, is simple to me: man is made to be connected to the Vine and is lost, in chaos, disorder, injustice, rebellion to the extent that he's separated from Him-with sin being the inevitable result. Jesus came to reconcile us with God, and therefore with Himself, turning us from the alienation that Adam initiated for all humankind and back to subjugation of the creature to the Creator, but now joined by a bond cemented by the faith, hope, and love that Adam saw no use for yet in Eden, or wasn’t ready for. That relationship, itself, puts us back into the "right place", back to a state of justice, and from there our own obedience can begin to flow as sap through the Vine, as we remain in Him.

Sort of... Paul is looking forward to the resurrection, when sin and death will be defeated on account of Christ's work. He is not looking forward to an event he expects to happen in the present age, but the next world. There is an element of this working of sanctification being present in the here and now, but it won't be fulfilled until the world to come.

It's just like Luther said,

"If you are a preacher of Grace, then preach a true, not a fictitious grace; if grace is true, you must bear a true and not a fictitious sin. God does not save people who are only fictitious sinners. Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly. For he is victorious over sin, death, and the world. As long as we are here we have to sin. This life in not the dwelling place of righteousness but, as Peter says, we look for a new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. " (Weimar ed. vol. 2, p. 371; Letters I, “Luther’s Works,” American Ed., Vol 48. p. 281- 282)

 

[fhansen]

Sort of... Paul is looking forward to the resurrection, when sin and death will be defeated on account of Christ's work. He is not looking forward to an event he expects to happen in the present age, but the next world. There is an element of this working of sanctification being present in the here and now, but it won't be fulfilled until the world to come.

It's just like Luther said,

Ok. It's not, however, as if sin need now be applauded and elevated in order for grace to do its job; sin has already made its mark in ourselves and our world. And we're now enabled to do more than merely believe-but to also become slaves to righteousness, to 'be righteous and be righteous boldly'-because Jesus came not only to forgive sin, which changes nothing in itself, but to take away and overcome it, to restore justice to His wayward creation. We were not created to sin after all.

But I'm also not trying to imply that, by virtue of becoming a branch grafted into the Vine, all becomes perfect here in this life-that any of us become perfectly sinless. That connection, that relationship, is the beginning of a new life, of eternal life, to the extent that we remain in it, in Him. The concept is related pretty well in 1 Cor 13:12:
"For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known."

Additionally, and incidentally, this new life isn't just a matter of escaping the fires of hell, but is the beginning of the fulfillment of our very purpose, our telos, the reason man was created.

 

[FireDragon76]

Ok. It's not, however, as if sin need now be applauded and elevated in order for grace to do its job; sin has already made its mark in ourselves and our world.

Luther is not applauding sin, merely stating a fact.

The Lutheran view of life is fundamentally tragic, but the tragedy is contained by hope, if that makes any sense. Some Reformed theologians off and on have had similar attitudes (especially the German Refromed tradition), but the Reformed tradition has been slightly more "rose colored glasses", so to speak.

The point of Luthers preaching isn't necessarily to prescribe certain religious good works, a list of do's and don'ts (as in Roman Catholicism) but to have us respond to our neighbor's needs with compassion and forgiveness, because after all, "we are all beggars", as Luther said.

And we're now enabled to do more than merely believe-but to also become slaves to righteousness, to 'be righteous and be righteous boldly'-because Jesus came not only to forgive sin, which changes nothing in itself, but to take away and overcome it, to restore justice to His wayward creation. We were not created to sin after all.

Of course, but all our works are tainted by sin and are imperfect and do not merit eternal life. Forgiveness only takes away the guilt of sin, it doesn't remove sin itself in this life.

But I'm also not trying to imply that, by virtue of becoming a branch grafted into the Vine, all becomes perfect here in this life-that any of us become perfectly sinless. That connection, that relationship, is the beginning of a new life, of eternal life, to the extent that we remain in it, in Him. The concept is related pretty well in 1 Cor 13:12:
"For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known."

Additionally, and incidentally, this new life isn't just a matter of escaping the fires of hell, but is the beginning of the fulfillment of our very purpose, our telos, the reason man was created.

I don't think we are in essential disagreement on this point, it's a question of preaching emphasis and pastoral theology.

 

[fhansen]

John also echoes this thought: 1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

So there you have two independent testimonies that imply that Christians are not sinless. It seems to me this is actually a settled matter, and even if it is a stumbling block for certain Holiness traditions that believe in Christian perfectionism.

The problem comes when our theology makes it black or white: that believers cannot and need not overcome sin to any extent in this life or, alternatively, that they must and will overcome it totally in this life. Then some try to sort of bridge the gap by asserting that believers will somehow overcome sin "automatically" to some extent, while still maintaining that this really doesn't matter anyway, however, in terms of salvation, since justification, in their eyes is already a done deal, having nothing to with behaving ourselves-even though there are plenty of verses, in both John Paul, which oppose that notion as well.

"No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God’s seed remains in them; they cannot go on sinning, because they have been born of God. This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not God’s child, nor is anyone who does not love their brother and sister." 1 John 3:9-10

There must be a balanced perspective on this matter-and I believe it was aready in place prior to the Reformation.

 

[fhansen]

The point of Luthers preaching isn't necessarily to prescribe certain religious good works, a list of do's and don'ts (as in Roman Catholicism) but to have us respond to our neighbor's needs with compassion and forgiveness, because after all, "we are all beggars", as Luther said.

Ok, the do's and dont's have been retained in Lutheranism also, though, no?- in its practice of continuing to cite the ten commandments in its teachings, etc? And you understand that Catholicism teaches the absolute necessity of grace in order for man to obey, right?- perhaps culminating best in a current teaching that happened to originate during the Reformation:
"At the evening of life we shall be judged on our love."

I mean, compassion and forgiveness (love) fulfills the law anyway and that's a central aspect of the gospel, in fact, without which salvation hasn't or won't happen. (Matt 6:15, 1 John 3&4, Gal 5:14).

Of course, but all our works are tainted by sin and are imperfect and do not merit eternal life. Forgiveness only takes away the guilt of sin, it doesn't remove sin itself in this life.

And yet sin can exclude us from heaven, Rom 8:12-14, Gal 5:21, 6:7-8, Rev 22:14, etc. A major differnce is in whether or not we believe that righteousness is strictly declared rather than also imparted at justifcation, and in whether or not man can then willfully turn back away from that imparted justification-by living unjustly, choosing man's ways and values against God's all over again, to put it another way.

 

[FireDragon76]

Ok, the do's and dont's have been retained in Lutheranism also, though, no?- in its practice of continuing to cite the ten commandments in its teachings, etc?

The 10 Commandments don't function exactly the same as in Roman Catholicism. We speak of 3 uses of the Law. One is a civic use, the Second convicts us of sin, the Third is a guide to how we ought to live. And the Third is the most controversial, and the source of endless debates in Lutheran circles. The main emphasis is on the Second use of the Law, however; the conviction of sin.

And you understand that Catholicism teaches the absolute necessity of grace in order for man to obey, right?- perhaps culminating best in a current teaching that happened to originate during the Reformation:
"At the evening of life we shall be judged on our love."

We don't understand grace the same way. For Lutherans, grace is understood primarily as God's favor, just as the original Greek usage. In Catholicism, grace is a metaphysical substance.

The notion we are judged by our love is specifically something that Lutherans rejected early on as a pernicious distortion of the Gospel. We are taught to have confidence in Christ's finished work alone. Not in our capacity to love. Of course, we should and ought to love our neighbor (for their sake, and not for ours), but our love in no way puts away sin.

I mean, compassion and forgiveness (love) fulfills the law anyway and that's a central aspect of the gospel, in fact, without which salvation hasn't or won't happen. (Matt 6:15, 1 John 3&4, Gal 5:14).

The issue is whose love saves us? God's, or ours? The Lutheran would have to say, it is God's love that saves us, not our own.

And yet sin can exclude us from heaven, Rom 8:12-14, Gal 5:21, 6:7-8, Rev 22:14, etc.

We don't teach a doctrine of mortal sin in the way Rome does. We don't believe there's a certain set of or degree of sins that are venial and others that are mortal. All sin before God represents offenses against God's divine majesty. However, before our neighbor, not all sins are equal, obviously.

 

[FireDragon76]

The problem comes when our theology makes it black or white: that believers cannot and need not overcome sin to any extent in this life or, alternatively, that they must and will overcome it totally in this life. Then some try to sort of bridge the gap by asserting that believers will somehow overcome sin "automatically" to some extent, while still maintaining that this really doesn't matter anyway, however, in terms of salvation, since justification, in their eyes is already a done deal, having nothing to with behaving ourselves-even though there are plenty of verses, in both John Paul, which oppose that notion as well.

There's a saying from a Japanese Buddhist tradition (in many ways consonant with Lutheranism on certain points) my old pastor resonated with "One you have the antidote, you do not need to continue to drink poison". But the antidote is still the antidote to the poison, nonetheless. I am afraid that Rome is more ambiguous about the nature of the antidote ,and whether it will really cure the poison.

The point of Lutheran theology is primarily to provide a framework that protects a person from moral trauma, which allows a person, hopefully, to widen their moral horizons, following the example that God has shown us in the person of Jesus. It is not to proscribe a rigid, legalistic sent of rules that are strictly necessary. The Law functions primarily in classical Protestantism as aspirational ideals, not cudgels to manipulate people with.

 

[fhansen]

The 10 Commandments don't function exactly the same as in Roman Catholicism. We speak of 3 uses of the Law. One is a civic use, the Second convicts us of sin, the Third is a guide to how we ought to live. And the Third is the most controversial, and the source of endless debates in Lutheran circles. The main emphasis is on the Second use of the Law, however; the conviction of sin.

I don't think there's any difference there, at least not with the second and third. A difference may be that the third is still useful to the extent that the law continues to inform and convict us of sin to the extent that we're not overcoming it by the power of the Holy Spirit since, in Catholicism, while the law cannot accomplish obedience in us, the HS, God, can. Again, it's about connection to the Vine, apart from whom we can do nothing.

We don't understand grace the same way. For Lutherans, grace is understood primarily as God's favor, just as the original Greek usage. In Catholicism, grace is a metaphysical substance.

Yes, we understand it as favor and also as the ongoing life or presence and work of God the Holy Spirit in us, consistent with how the EO understand it, as I see it.

The notion we are judged by our love is specifically something that Lutherans rejected early on as a pernicious distortion of the Gospel. We are taught to have confidence in Christ's finished work alone. Not in our capacity to love. Of course, we should and ought to love our neighbor (for their sake, and not for ours), but our love in no way puts away sin.

Yes, that's been sometimes understood as 'fiduciary faith", faith in one's faith, and represents a sort of stifled view of the role and purpose of faith IMO.

The issue is whose love saves us? God's, or ours? The Lutheran would have to say, it is God's love that saves us, not our own.

It all starts with His, of course: "We love Him because He first loved us". But if that encounter with that love doesn't change us, recreate us, then no salvation, no sonship, has taken place. He did more for us than forgiveness and wants more for and from us than to remain as we were. To become like Him is salvation. Again, salvation isn't only about making it into heaven rather than hell, but about fulfilling a purpose that God created man for.

We don't teach a doctrine of mortal sin in the way Rome does. We don't believe there's a certain set of or degree of sins that are venial and others that are mortal. All sin before God represents offenses against God's divine majesty. However, before our neighbor, not all sins are equal, obviously.

I think that division is the only honest and workable way to deal with it: sin that leads to death vs sin that still offends God and still ultimately tends towards death but doesn't mark or represent a complete turning away from Him. The CC puts it this way:

1855 Mortal sin destroys charity [love] in the heart of man by a grave violation of God's law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him.

Venial sin allows charity to subsist, even though it offends and wounds it.

1856 Mortal sin, by attacking the vital principle within us - that is, charity [love]- necessitates a new initiative of God's mercy and a conversion of heart which is normally accomplished within the setting of the sacrament of reconciliation:

When the will sets itself upon something that is of its nature incompatible with the charity that orients man toward his ultimate end, then the sin is mortal by its very object . . . whether it contradicts the love of God, such as blasphemy or perjury, or the love of neighbor, such as homicide or adultery. . . . But when the sinner's will is set upon something that of its nature involves a disorder, but is not opposed to the love of God and neighbor, such as thoughtless chatter or immoderate laughter and the like, such sins are venial.130

 

[fhansen]

There's a saying from a Japanese Buddhist tradition (in many ways consonant with Lutheranism on certain points) my old pastor resonated with "One you have the antidote, you do not need to continue to drink poison". But the antidote is still the antidote to the poison, nonetheless. I am afraid that Rome is more ambiguous about the nature of the antidote ,and whether it will really cure the poison.

The antedote doesn't effect a complete cure if one's still drawn to what makes him sick. Concupiscense doesn't go away even if potentially it could have no effect on those who walk faithfully by the Spirit. IMO, Rome is the most straightforward because it acknowledges and addresses the matter of sin head on. The alternative seems to be saying that sin doesn't matter for a believer, but, "Oh yeah, a believer doesn't sin as much anyway because we're saved by a faith that isn't alone but, then again, it doesn't really matter whether or not faith is alone anyway because justification has no connection to our sinlessness...." I see no resolution there. The bottom-line question: Should a believer who persistently, willfully, wantonly engages in rape, murder, torture still expect to make it into heaven? And, if not, or if that disqualifies him from being a "true believer" to begin with, then how much sin, or how grave must that sin be, in order to disqualify him? That would be a question that leads to the Catholic position.

The point of Lutheran theology is primarily to provide a framework that protects a person from moral trauma, which allows a person, hopefully, to widen their moral horizons, following the example that God has shown us in the person of Jesus. It is not to proscribe a rigid, legalistic sent of rules that are strictly necessary. The Law functions primarily in classical Protestantism as aspirational ideals, not cudgels to manipulate people with.

But should we make it evil now to expose or reveal our own evil, to be made aware of sin? Paul tells us that the law is holy, spiritual, and good; it's not the problem, we are. The answer, again, is to be reconciled with and connected back to the Vine. That's why Jesus came. Forgiveness of sin is one essential part of that reconciliation. The ability to sin no more, to become enslaved to righteousness as a new creation instead of enslaved to sin, is the other. This is what Augustine was speaking of here in "On the Spirit and the Letter":

"The law was given that grace might be sought; and grace was given that the law might be fulfilled." (De Spiritu et Littera)

 

[FireDragon76]

The antedote doesn't effect a complete cure if one's still drawn to what makes him sick.

It doesn't immediately, but it is effecacious enough. In both the Lutheran and Shin Buddhist traditions, eventually we will depart this mortal life, and enter into a life without sin or ignorance or any of those impediments to complete sanctification, enlightenment, or whatever symbol of ultimacy we have at hand.

Concupiscense doesn't go away even if potentially it could have no effect on those who walk faithfully by the Spirit. IMO, Rome is the most straightforward because it acknowledges and addresses the matter of sin head on. The alternative seems to be saying that sin doesn't matter for a believer, but, "Oh yeah, a believer doesn't sin as much anyway because we're saved by a faith that isn't alone but, then again, it doesn't really matter whether or not faith is alone anyway because justification has no connection to our sinlessness...." I see no resolution there. The bottom-line question: Should a believer who persistently, willfully, wantonly engages in rape, murder, torture still expect to make it into heaven?

I think the Lutheran response would be to doubt that person was actually a believer in the first place.

Of course, there's nothing to prevent a person from being a psychopath in Lutheranism and not only deceive themselves but others. But most people aren't psychopaths like that... the vast majority, in fact.

And, if not, or if that disqualifies him from being a "true believer" to begin with, then how much sin, or how grave must that sin be, in order to disqualify him? That would be a question that leads to the Catholic position.

From a Lutheran perspective, that's like asking how much we can get away with, and reflects a fallen religious consciousness, and not true freedom in Christ.

Luther's 1st thesis in the 95 Theses is that the whole of the Christian life ought to be one of repentance, that repentance isn't a religiously proscribed act, like a penance.

But should we make it evil now to expose or reveal our own evil, to be made aware of sin? Paul tells us that the law is holy, spiritual, and good; it's not the problem, we are.

Yes, indeed. Nothing in Lutheranism negates that. But the Law is incapable of delivering what it demands, which is why grace is needed.

 

[fhansen]

Of course, there's nothing to prevent a person from being a psychopath in Lutheranism and not only deceive themselves but others. But most people aren't psychopaths like that... the vast majority, in fact.

Hmm, I see self-decption as a fairly common trait of fallen humanity. Maybe I'm more of a pessimist about fallen man and more of an optimist about risen man.

From a Lutheran perspective, that's like asking how much we can get away with, and reflects a fallen religious consciousness, and not true freedom in Christ.

It's just that freedom in Christ is freedom from the slavery of sin rather than a carte blanc freedom from its penalties regardless of the nature and willfulness of the sin. So I think the question is practical if sin can ruin my relationship with God, can compromise my state of justice with injusitce. IOW I need a way to know if I'm disqualified, or have become disqualified.

Yes, indeed. Nothing in Lutheranism negates that. But the Law is incapable of delivering what it demands, which is why grace is needed.

Then we get back to the defintion of grace. If the law simply identifies me as a sinner, which it does, should the antidote really just be forgiveness of sin? But why bother indicting man to begin with, then, beginning with Adam? Augustine would say that, since the law is incapable of delivering what it demands, we need grace in order to become capable of delivering what it demands, of fulfilling it. Then we could obey the law without even hearing the law- Rom 2:13. The basis of the new covenant, the real difference between it and the old, is union with God, our becomimg His people so that He can put His law in our minds and write it on our hearts- Jer 31:33. Or did Jesus come just to tell us to stop being so scrupulous?

 

[FireDragon76]

Hmm, I see self-decption as a fairly common trait of fallen humanity. Maybe I'm more of a pessimist about fallen man and more of an optimist about risen man.

It's just that freedom in Christ is freedom from the slavery of sin rather than a carte blanc freedom from its penalties regardless of the nature and willfulness of the sin. So I think the question is practical if sin can ruin my relationship with God, can compromise my state of justice with injusitce. IOW I need a way to know if I'm disqualified, or have become disqualified.

Then we get back to the defintion of grace. If the law simply identifies me as a sinner, which it does, should the antidote really just be forgiveness of sin? But why bother indicting man to begin with, then, beginning with Adam? Augustine would say that, since the law is incapable of delivering what it demands, we need grace in order to become capable of delivering what it demands, of fulfilling it. Then we could obey the law without even hearing the law- Rom 2:13. The basis of the new covenant, the real difference between it and the old, is union with God, our becomimg His people so that He can put His law in our minds and write it on our hearts- Jer 31:33. Or did Jesus come just to tell us to stop being so scrupulous?

You're skipping ahead to sanctification . Luther is interested in the basis for how we can be acceptable to God at all. It isn't due to our capacities, but due to God's favor towards us.

 

[fhansen]

You're skipping ahead to sanctification . Luther is interested in the basis for how we can be acceptable to God at all. It isn't due to our capacities, but due to God's favor towards us.

And in Catholic theology God's favor includes more than forgiveness but also the "gift of righteousness", sancitification being the continuation, outworking, growth in that gift rather than a totally separate act. And either way Romans 6:22 and elsewhere point to the fact that sanctification is necessary in order to gain eternal life. IOW, we must be holy, not only forgiven. Is that sanctification automatic for a true believer? I don't think so, going by experience, for one thing. We must make the effort: Heb 12:14. But the power, the strength, the Holy Spirit, is now there.