Chapter # 8 Paragraph # 5 Study # 7
June 17, 2008
Lincolnton, N.C.

• I. Being a "Conqueror".
  • A. The use of the term in the New Testament
    • 1. Luke 11:22 declares that conquering someone else is rooted in a greater "strength" (ischuroteros -- comparative adjective from the word for "inherent strength-assets").
    • 2. In John 16:33 Jesus plainly declares, "...I have overcome the world" so that those who trust Him "...might have peace..." out of the words He has spoken to them (obviously, they have to "believe" them for this to work, which means they have to be "true").
    • 3. Paul used the word in Romans 3:4 in a quote out of Psalm 51 that argues that God will "overcome" when He is "judged". His meaning is that no one will ever be able to make a false accusation against God stand. This implies Luke's meaning (above) in that it would take a more powerful "morality" and "intelligence" to "overcome" God's holiness and omniscience in order to make any charge against Him stick.
    • 4. Paul used the word again in Romans 12:21 in an exhortation to refuse to allow evil to "overcome" you by "overcoming" evil with good.
    • 5. In 1 John 2:13 John says that he is writing what he is writing to the "young men" because they have "overcome" the wicked one. He explains their victory in 2:14 by saying they are "strong" (ischuros) by reason of the fact that the word of God abides in them.
    • 6. 1 John 4:4 brings up the Lukan issue: "Ye ... have overcome ... because greater is He that is in you than he that is in the world."
    • 7. John goes further in 1 John 5:4-5 by explaining how the "victory" has come: by faith in the fact that Jesus is the Son of God.
    • 8. The remaining uses of the word are found in the Book of the Revelation.
  • B. The salient fact that must be considered for our understanding of Paul's declaration in Romans 8:37 is this: all of Paul's "triumph" theology is rooted in "grace" which, itself, is heavily rooted in "substitutionary/vicarious" theology (someone doing something in the place of, and for the benefit of, another). This is the ancient David/Goliath scenario where one man acts in the place of, and for the benefit of, the entire nation for whom he takes his action. No one does anything except the surrogate, but all experience (i.e., "live out the results of") that one surrogate's victory/defeat.
    • 1. In one sense, this is really the entire issue of "warfare". An army (seen as a single entity) represents the nation which fielded it so that the non-combatants do no fighting, but experience the results of the success/failure of the army. And, the same thing is true even within the context of the "army". If a soldier is wounded immediately as the battle commences and can do nothing else for the entire battle, he still participates as a winner/loser according to the success/failure of the army. So, within (wounded soldiers) and without (civilian non-combatants), the concept of "overcoming" is rooted in the concept of a "vicarious" participation that has, at its roots, the notion of one doing for all.
    • 2. It is only because men refuse to be at-one with their Surrogate that we now have all manner of "works" ("Look at what I have accomplished") theologies that are rooted in "free (self) will" theology.