What is Salvation?

[hyssop]

Hashem's Plan (cont'd)

Scripture states that Yeshua was foreordained from the foundation of the world -- before Adam and Eve existed. Now, if Yeshua was destined to be our Passover lamb from the foundation of the world, it stands to reason that Yahweh knew that Adam and Eve would "fall" before they were even created.

Hmmm . . . if Adam and Eve were destined to fall, did they really have a choice?

Further, how could Adam and Eve have a knowledge of good and evil <I>before</i> they ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? So, if they didn't know the difference between good and evil, what real choice could they make but to follow their carnal desires?

[simcha]

Hyssop,

I do not presume to explain the things of Hashem, only what little insight He has given me.

Isaiah 55:8 "For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Neither are your ways My ways," declares the LORD.
9 "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts.

So here goes with what little insight I have.

With Hashem there is not time constraints, therefore he knows from here to eternity (whatever that is). He knows what is going to be, therefore he knew Adam and Chava would disobey him. However, they did it of their own free will. Had He stopped them, they would not have had free will.

The only choice I see that they had was to obey or not to obey. They were told the consequences, yet they chose to go with their own desires. They did not know good and evil, yet they did know to obey Hashem.

"My thoughts for what it's worth."

Simcha

[hyssop]

Simcha,

Okay, you feel that Adam and Chavah possessed a free will to choose to follow Hashem's commandment (or not). It does appear to be the state of things in Hagan Eden.

Do you think that we have this free will, too?

[simcha]

Hyssop,

Yes, I believe Adam and Chava were given a free will in Gan Edan and we possess that same free will.

Simcha

[hyssop]

Hi, Simcha:

You know, it really does seem that we do have free will. Every day we are faced with all kinds of choices, and we decide what we are and are not going to do. And . . . we usually like it that way: not many people enjoy being "bossed around." We like the freedom of choosing (and doing) what we want.

We can decide, for example, that we will not steal that $10 bill from our brother's available wallet . . . or . . . we can decide to do so . . . it's our "free will" choice. Hopefully, we choose to do good.

And, so we go through life . . . making our choices all along the way . . . thousands of choices . . . hundreds of thousands . . . and when we focus our attention on any single choice: unless someone was holding a gun to our head, it was <I>our</i> choice.

With all of this said, I have another question: Do you think that we could both decide that, starting tomorrow morning, we are going to exercise our "free will" for the rest of our lives to choose to do <U>only good</u>? What I mean is: from this moment on, when we are faced with a decision between what we know is good and what we know is sin, we will forevermore choose good.

[simcha]

Hyssop,

I believe we can make that decision to do good every day. I make that decision almost daily, but then I slip and fall short. I guess I am in good company.

Romans 8:19 For the good that I wish, I do not do; but I practice the very evil that I do not wish.
20 But if I am doing the very thing I do not wish, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me.
21 I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wishes to do good.
22 For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man,
23 but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind, and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members.
24 Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death?
25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.

Even Paul could not seem to conquer sin in his flesh. It does not mean that we do not keep trying. We must strive to conquer the flesh.

Simcha

[hyssop]

simcha,

Indeed, we are in good company. What do you think that Paul meant when he said that the members of my body made him a <U>prisoner</u> of the law of sin? Do prisoners have free will?

[cook]

Hello all,

For many years, I had a problem with Romans 7:19-25 because it wasn't in harmony with many scriptures. For instance:

1John 2:4: He who says: I know Him, but does not keep his Law, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoever keeps His Law, in him truly is the love of Yahweh perfected: by this we know that we are in Him. He who says he abides in Him, is himself also OBLIGATED to walk EXACTLY as He walked.

1John 3:6: Whoever abides in Him does not sin; whoever sins, has not seen Him, neither knows Him.

1John 3:9: Whoever is begotten of Yahweh does not commit sin; for His seed remains in Him; and it is possible for him not to sin, because he has been begotten of Yahweh.

1John 5:18: We know that whoever is born of Yahweh does not sin; but he who has been begotten of Yahweh keeps himself, and the evil one does not touch him.

2John 1:9: Whoever transgresses, and does not abide in the doctrine of the Messiah, does not have Yahweh.

3John 1:11: He who does righteousness is of Yahweh, but he who does evil has not seen Yahweh.

James 1:4 But let patience have her perfect (wanting nothing necessary to completeness) work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.

Hebrews 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, {written: or, enrolled}

Hebrews 7:19 For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. {the bringing…: or, it was the bringing in}


And then in Hebrews, the renewed covenant is Yah writing his law in our hearts and thereby giving us the desire and ability not to sin.

I believe the English translation of Romans 7 is faulty, to uphold the doctrine of confession (anglican and catholic), and to sustain the doctrine of hierarchy where we would seek salvation (acceptance) by bishops and priests, etc.

Romans 7 is one of those times where Paul is speaking in the "historical present". This is how "online bible" describes it:

Some phrases which might be rendered as past tense in English
will often occur in the present tense in Greek. These are
termed "historical presents," and such occurrences dramatize
the event described as if the reader were there watching the
event occur. Some English translations render such historical
presents in the English past tense, while others permit the
tense to remain in the present.

So, the English should have rendered Rom 7 in past tense as follows:

Rom 7:14 - For we know that the Law is spiritual; but I was carnal, sold into the power of sin. For what I would have done, that I did not do; but what I hated, that is what I did. And if I did what I did not want to do, I agreed that the Law is righteous. As it was, it was no longer I myself who did it, but it was sin living in me. For I know that nothing righteous dwelt within me, that is, in my flesh. For I had the will to do what was right, but I did not carry it out. For the righteousness that I wanted to do, I did not do; but the evil which I did not want to do, that I did. Now if I did what I did not want to do, it was no longer I who did it, but it was sin living in me that did it. So I found this law at work: That evel was present with me-the very one who wanted to do righteousness: For I delight in the Law of Yahweh according to the inward man; But I saw another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the Law in my mind, and bringing me into captivity of the law of sin, which is in my members. O wretched man that I was! Who will deliver me from the body of death?

The BIG LIE is that Yah's SPIRIT is not powerful enough to enable us not to sin. Messiah, is living proof!

[hyssop]

Wow, Cook! It appears to me like you're arbitrarily rewriting scripture to fit your belief system. You are not the first . . . and certainly will not be the last to look at scripture and use some "scholarly" wording to explain why the words that are clearly written really don't mean what they say. You know, Martin Luther wanted the whole book of James taken out of the Bible, because he thought that "faith without works is dead" wasn't "in harmony with many scriptures."

When you retranslated Romans 7:14, how did you decide to leave the first verb in the present tense and then choose to change the last verb to the "historical present" (e.g. past tense)? I guess a scripture that states, "For we know that the law <U>was</u> spiritual:" might be a bit of a stretch. And, again in verse 22: you decided not to change that present tense verb to say, "For I <U>delighted</u> in the law . . ."

Your new translation says that, when you <B>were</b> carnal, you agreed that the law was righteous and something that you wanted to do . . . that you hated performing unrighteousness. Are you now going to have to rewrite Rom 8:7 - "Because the carnal mind <i>is</i> enmity against G-d"?

I believe that the carnal (fleshly) mind is in agreement with the flesh. Neither wants to follow Yahweh's commandments. When we are converted, Yahwah's commandments are written in our hearts and we no longer delight in sin; our "inward man" now wants to please our heavenly father, wants to keep his commandments. But the flesh is weak; it continues to rebel against Yahweh's will. Our spiritual man is no longer in agreement with the flesh; the spiritual man wants to perform Yahweh's commandments -- the very thing that the flesh does not wish to do. This is a lifelong war and, I agree with you, one that each of can win (with Yahweh's spirit). Those who overcome and endure unto the end are surely kings of the earth (they will have ruled their bodies of dust).

[simcha]

Very well said, Hyssop.

Thanks!
Simcha

[cook]

Hello Hyssop:

In my previous post, my purpose was not to re-translate, but to give the INTENT of the author, Paul. Both you and Simcha, by your previous posts about Rom 7, are agreeing that Paul was still sinning, and therefore JUSTIFYING your trespasses by saying he, Paul was doing the same thing in Rom 7.

But Paul in 1Cor 9:26,27 says: I therefore so run, not as uncertainly; so fight I, not as one that beateth the air:
But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

1Cor 9:27 would be BETTER translated as: Therefore, I do not run like a man running aimlessly; I do not fight like a man who beats the air. No, I discipline my body and bring in into subjection, so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.

The outcome of the KJV translation of Romans 7 is that Paul has one mind and his body has another "mind of its own". By the KJV translators using the word 'FLESH' the INTENT of Paul is erroneously construed. The word FLESH should have been translated CARNAL MIND.

Verse 25 of Rom 7 is the summation of the chapter which is very misleading in english: I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

This verse would be better translated: Thanks be to Yah, I have deliverance through Yahshua Messiah our King! So then, with this same mind, I myself serve the Law of Yah; but with the carnal mind the law of sin.

And the next verse: Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are as Yahshua Messiah, who do not walk according to the carnal mind, but according to the Spirit.

Both you Hyssop and Simcha sound like my sons when they were young, saying "well so and so does it"! (Your making excuses for each other)

[hyssop]

Cook,

Your first attempt at giving us Paul's "INTENT" in Rom 7 involved re-translating verbs very clearly written in the present tense into the past tense. Now you are clarifying scripture by adding words that are not there at all.

Cook: "So then, with this <B>same</b> mind, I myself serve the Law of Yah; but with the carnal <B>mind</b> the law of sin."

I do not believe that Paul's INTENT was to let us know that his mind had two masters: Yah's law and the law of sin. Paul did not say the <B>same</b> mind (you added "same"); Paul did not say carnal <B>mind</b> (you added "mind").

Paul is saying that his spiritual mind is struggling with the carnal desires of his physical body. Paul said, "But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members."

Paul said that his spiritual mind was warring against his "members" (G3196 - a limb or part of the body). Paul then said, "who shall deliver me from the body (G4983. soma, so'-mah; from G4982; the body, used in a very wide application, lit. or fig.:--bodily, body, slave) of this death?"

It is very clear to me that, at the very moment that Paul was writing the chapter (in the present tense), he was battling the fleshly desires of the physical body in which his spiritual mind was residing.

[cook]

Hello all:

It's becoming obvious to me that you have little understanding of Romans. First, in previous posts on this thread, you question whether a man has "free choice" and it is now becoming obvious that you think Paul didn't have free choice over the "members" of his own body. You paint a picture that somehow Paul is detached from his body, his mind UNABLE to control his body and his body just keeps on sinning even though his mind wills it not to.

All of Romans is tied together and Paul starts referring to "members" in 6:13 (I'll start in verse 12)

Rom 6:12: Therefore, do not allow sin to rule in your mortal body, so that you do not obey its sinful lusts. 13: And do not present the members of your body to sin, as instruments of unrighteousness; but present yourselves to Yah, as those who have returned from death to life, and the members of your body to Him as instruments of righteousness.

Paul is exhorting the brethren to RULE over their bodies, rather than allowing their old CARNAL MINDS to yield their bodies (members) to sin.

The next place Paul refers to "members" is verse 6:19 and I'll once again give the INTENT.

6:19: I put this in human terms because of the weakness of your CARNAL NATURE. For just as you used to offer the MEMBERS of your body as servants of uncleanness, and of sin (which leads) to (more) sin; so now yield your members as servants to righteousness and hnoliness (apartness).

Now it should be becoming obvious to you Hyssop, if you have any discernment, that the WAR isn't between you and your body, but between your carnal nature (the nature you were born with)and your determination to be led by the Spirit (the nature you were REBORN FROM ABOVE with).

Any thinking man knows that if he has an itch, his mind orders his hand (member) to ITCH IT.

Hyssop: I do not believe that Paul's INTENT was to let us know that his mind had two masters: Yah's law and the law of sin. Paul did not say the same mind (you added "same"); Paul did not say carnal mind (you added "mind").

Cook: YES, PAUL'S INTENT WAS TO LET US KNOW THAT HIS MIND HAD TWO MASTERS! Go to the very next chapter - Rom 8:6,7 - and this time I'll directly quote KJV.

Rom 8:6,7: For to be CARNALLY MINDED is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the CARNAL MIND is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

The word "carnally" is the same word as "flesh" (#4561). Verse 8:5 drives the point home! (and I'll give the INTENT) - For they that are according to the CARNAL (flesh), SET THEIR MINDS ON THE THINGS OF THE FLESH (carnality); but they that are according to the Spirit, (set their minds on) the THINGS OF THE SPIRIT.

So yes, Hyssop, the battle is in the mind, the fleshly mind versus the spiritual mind.

The "body" is a whole other issue. One is the "body of Messiah" (everliving) and the other is the "body according to those 'in place of Messiah'" - Those of our Government coupled with religiosity - of which we are supposed to COME OUT OF.

But that's a story that you aren't ready for as long as your still denying what a witness is; or whether we have free will; or whether the battle is between our mind and bodies.

[hyssop]

Cook,

I am given the impression that you feel you have the ability to exercise your "free will" and have total control of your fleshly body. So, I've got to ask you: <ul><li>Do you believe that to be so?</li><li>Are you without sin?</li><li>Do you perform <B>every word</b> of Yah <B>every day</b> without fail?</li><li>Do you have total control of your tongue? That is, do you never say anything that you wish, later, that you hadn't said?</li></ul> Should your answer be "yes" to the above, when did you gain this control? Was it at the moment of your conversion?

[cook]

Hi Hyssop:

The best way for me to explain "free will" is to give you an example:

Let's say I get angry, with or without a cause, towards my brother. It is totally my choice to feel anger towards him. I make the choice myself in my own mind whether to be angry or not. He can't make me angry, I choose to be angry. There is no truth in the oft quoted phrase "you made me mad"; in reality "you" chose to be mad.