Weep Over Jerusalem?

[guuila]

I disagree. Paul did what he hated. "That which I hate I do."

Was someone holding a gun to his head?

 

[Hammster]

I disagree. Paul did what he hated. "That which I hate I do."

"I do". Nobody made Paul sin.

 

[Jack Terrence]

Was someone holding a gun to his head?

Yep!

"The law of sin which is in my members."

and he cried,

"Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?!"

 

[guuila]

Yep!

"The law of sin which is in my members."

and he cried,

"Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?!"

So when Paul sinned, he didn't make a choice to sin?

 

[Jack Terrence]

"I do". Nobody made Paul sin.

Paul's experience: "That which I hate I do."

Hammster's word on Paul's experience: "That which Paul ultimately wanted he did."

then this:

"It is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells in me."

 

[Jack Terrence]

So when Paul sinned, he didn't make a choice to sin?

At the beginning no. But he eventually grew in grace and later in his experience said,

"I beat my body and keep it under the subjection of me."

 

[Hammster]

Paul's experience: "That which I hate I do."

Hammster's word on Paul's experience: "That which Paul ultimately wanted he did."

then this:

"It is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells in me."

Who is responsible for Paul's sinful actions? Paul, or this impersonal sin?

 

[guuila]

At the beginning no. But he eventually grew in grace and later in his experience said,

"I beat my body and keep it under the subjection of me."

So he became sinless?

 

[cygnusx1]

I'm aware of the conflict over Romans 7 , I think Paul made it clear he didnt wish to sin but did that which he desired not .

I am hoping this doesn't spiral into an arguement , is it possible to debate or examine our dearly held positions ?

" I yet not I " indicates Paul wasn't saying it wasn't him who sinned , it was , yet he says he sinned against his will , he indicates not only a struggle but a real problem , a problem that can't be answered by his will .

Here's hoping for a genuine friendly interaction .......

 

[cygnusx1]

Who is responsible for Paul's sinful actions? Paul, or this impersonal sin?

Judging by what Paul said , I answer sin . Even though it was Paul who ended up sinning.

Sin is a power , a disease and a thing that develops.

 

[Hammster]

Judging by what Paul said , I answer sin . Even though it was Paul who ended up sinning.

Sin is a power , a disease and a thing that develops.

Maybe where the issue lies is what is meant by free will. The picture that comes into my mind when dealing with Romans 7 is C. S. Lewis in Mere Christianity. He uses the illustration of a soldier in the battlefield diving on a hand grenade to save his fellow soldiers. Does he want to live? Yes. That's his ultimate "will" if you will. But he still jumps in the grenade because that (saving his buddies) is ultimately what he desires at that moment.

 

[cygnusx1]

Maybe where the issue lies is what is meant by free will. The picture that comes into my mind when dealing with Romans 7 is C. S. Lewis in Mere Christianity. He uses the illustration of a soldier in the battlefield diving on a hand grenade to save his fellow soldiers. Does he want to live? Yes. That's his ultimate "will" if you will. But he still jumps in the grenade because that (saving his buddies) is ultimately what he desires at that moment.

The extraordinary thing about Romans 7 is Paul declaring he has not one but two problems , he says what he wants to do he cannot do it ( obviously not always) and then he also says what he doesn't will to do that he does !

So to be fair , I think the conflict in Romans 7 is a far more agonising , perplexing situation for Paul than one could expect from the CS Lewis analogy .

Paul even cried out in agony over this strange conflict which every believer knows .

Couple that with the quote from 1 John about a Christian unable to sin (with full consent) , obviously a Christian may still fall terribly and need correction yet the new nature cannot sin . The old nature (flesh) is the problem , the body of death.

At the center of this conflict is the will , a will that is far from free , preventative measures will help , yet this side of paradise none can claim perfection.

 

[guuila]

For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. (Romans 7:15-20 ESV)

It seems to me that given the context, Paul's struggle was with how he wanted to keep the holy law of God yet he didn't have the ability due to being attached his flesh. In other words, Christians desire to be sinless, yet we don't have the ability to carry it out due to being incased in this body of death. So when he says "I don't do what I want" he's saying "I want to be perfect" and "but I do the very thing I hate" he's saying he still sins, and he hates it. I don't think Paul's point here is to make a grand philosophical argument about the nature of the will. I think if read in its broader context, it makes sense that Paul is vindicating the law of God and explaining that the problem is indwelling sin. I can relate to Paul when he says he keeps on doing the very thing he hates... I keep on sinning, and I hate it. But when I do sin, nobody is holding a gun to my head making me do it. I do it willingly, and when it happens, it's edifying to the flesh. It's the indwelling Spirit that causes me to hate the sin that I'm willingly doing, and that same Spirit gives me the power to overcome the desires of the flesh. The unbeliever who doesn't have a new nature has no power to do that. The unbeliever doesn't know anything about this struggle.

 

[cygnusx1]

For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. (Romans 7:15-20 ESV)

It seems to me that given the context, Paul's struggle was with how he wanted to keep the holy law of God yet he didn't have the ability due to being attached his flesh. In other words, Christians desire to be sinless, yet we don't have the ability to carry it out due to being incased in this body of death. So when he says "I don't do what I want" he's saying "I want to be perfect" and "but I do the very thing I hate" he's saying he still sins, and he hates it. I don't think Paul's point here is to make a grand philosophical argument about the nature of the will. I think if read in its broader context, it makes sense that Paul is vindicating the law of God and explaining that the problem is indwelling sin. I can relate to Paul when he says he keeps on doing the very thing he hates... I keep on sinning, and I hate it. But when I do sin, nobody is holding a gun to my head making me do it. I do it willingly, and when it happens, it's edifying to the flesh. It's the indwelling Spirit that causes me to hate the sin that I'm willingly doing, and that same Spirit gives me the power to overcome the desires of the flesh. The unbeliever who doesn't have a new nature has no power to do that. The unbeliever doesn't know anything about this struggle.

I agree 90% , at least we agree it is the Christians experience , many deny it and see Paul relating a pre-Christian experience .

I wonder , are their any sins you commit that you are unwilling to commit ? You don't need to disclose anything .... Just keep it objective .

Did Pilate desire to let Jesus go but sin got the better of him ?



Do we underestimate the power of sin to enslave our wills by deluding our rational minds ?

 

[guuila]

I agree 90% , at least we agree it is the Christians experience , many deny it and see Paul relating a pre-Christian experience .

Yeah, I came out of a church like that. It was terrible.

I wonder , are their any sins you commit that you are unwilling to commit ? You don't need to disclose anything .... Just keep it objective.

I honestly have no idea.

Did Pilate desire to let Jesus go but sin got the better of him ?

I don't know.

 

[Jack Terrence]

Who is responsible for Paul's sinful actions? Paul, or this impersonal sin?

Paul answered it himself.

"It is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells in me."

He called it "the law of sin which is in my members."

 

[cygnusx1]

Yeah, I came out of a church like that. It was terrible.



I honestly have no idea.



I don't know.

Regarding Pilate ,


Pilate sought to release him - Pilate made five several attempts to release our Lord; as we may learn from Luke 23:4, Luke 23:15, Luke 23:20, Luke 23:22; John 19:4, John 19:12, John 19:13.

Yet Pilate found himself unable to do what he desired ......

 

[Hammster]

Paul answered it himself.

"It is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells in me."

He called it "the law of sin which is in my members."

Then why is he held accountable for his sins?

 

[Hammster]

Regarding Pilate ,


Pilate sought to release him - Pilate made five several attempts to release our Lord; as we may learn from Luke 23:4, Luke 23:15, Luke 23:20, Luke 23:22; John 19:4, John 19:12, John 19:13.

Yet Pilate found himself unable to do what he desired ......

We also don't know how God was working in him.

 

[cygnusx1]

Then why is he held accountable for his sins?

The exact question is asked of Calvinists

If men are born depraved with a corrupt will why are they held accountable ?