Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8993 total)
82 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 81 visitors)
Newest Member: Juvenissun
Post Volume: Total: 879,114 Year: 10,862/23,288 Month: 114/1,763 Week: 81/390 Day: 2/32 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Topic abandonment warning (read and/or suffer the consequences)


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Bible Inerrancy stands against all objections
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 70 of 232 (842131)
10-27-2018 12:07 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by GDR
10-23-2018 4:32 PM


Word of God is both Christ and Scripture
quote:

Your brand of fundamentalism is the modern equivalent of the Pharisees of Jesus’ time

For the most part, the Pharisees were simply attempting to properly interpret the "Law of Moses" (the 5 books of Moses, Genesis-Deuteronomy).

Look at the Pharisee documents.

The Talmudic writings have Jewish Christians (quoted as saying) saying that daughters have the same inheritance rights as sons. (I assume that was something the Jewish Christians actually said, but who knows?)

I suppose it was simply a "spiritual law", according to Christians, or what?

The Talmudic writings have Jewish Christians saying that the Law of Moses was abolished and replaced by the (written?) Gospel. Though the same writings say that there was some opportunistic double talk, and (what we now know as) "Matthew 5:17-18" was invoked.

However.

The Pharisees did have the Oral Law, which might be taken as something of a Jewish New Testament (though it was said to have been handed down at Sinai during the time of Moses, and frankly the oral laws were much more complementary and clarifying than selective and deceptive).

Conclusion:

Once can wonder how different the Pharisee's approach was from the Jewish Christians (whatever their written Gospel said exactly), but I would not smear the Pharisees by comparing them to modern Christians.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by GDR, posted 10-23-2018 4:32 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by GDR, posted 10-27-2018 2:07 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 71 of 232 (842132)
10-27-2018 12:30 AM


R.C. Sproul said scientists were right, and Luther & Calvin were wrong.
There was talk earlier about true science verse philosophy and whether scripture was factored into the older Christian interpretations.

quote:

R.C. Sproul

Both Calvin and Luther rejected Copernicus as a heretic in the 16th century. I don’t know anybody in orthodox Christianity today who’s pleading for geocentricity. Do you? Do you know anybody? In that case the church has said, “Look, we misinterpreted the teaching of the Bible with respect to the solar system, and thank you scientists for correcting our misunderstanding.”

And so I think that we can learn from nonbelieving scientists who are studying natural revelation. They may get a better sense of the truth from their study of natural revelation than I get from ignoring natural revelation. So I have a high view of natural revelation is what I’m saying.


Then, in Table Talk, June 4, 1539, Luther said:

quote:

There was mention of a certain new astrologer who wanted to prove that the earth moves and not the sky, the sun, and the moon. This would be as if somebody were riding on a cart or in a ship and imagined that he was standing still while the earth and the trees were moving. [Luther remarked] “So it goes now. Whoever wants to be clever must agree with nothing that others esteem. He must do something of his own. This is what that fellow does who wishes to turn the whole of astronomy upside down. Even in these things that are thrown into disorder I believe the Holy Scriptures, for Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth [Josh. 10:12].

Luther's Lectures on Genesis had these quotes:

quote:

Indeed, it is more likely that the bodies of the stars, like that of the sun, are round, and that they are fastened to the firmament like globes of fire, to shed light at night, each according to its endowment and its creation.

....

We Christians must be different from the philosophers [i.e. scientists] in the way we think about the causes of these things. And if some are beyond our comprehension (like those before us concerning the waters above the heavens), we must believe them and admit our lack of knowledge rather than either wickedly deny them or presumptuously interpret them in conformity with our understanding.


Here is a Christian website showing us John Calvin's words.

quote:

there is a statement he made in a sermon on 1 Corinthians that is relevant. There, Calvin warns against those who say, “that the sun does not move and that it is the earth that moves.”viii He describes those who hold this view as “stark raving mad” and as “possessed” by the devil.ix It is not clear that he is basing this warning on his interpretation of any particular passage of Scripture, and there is ongoing debate about how this statement coincides with Calvin’s other statements regarding general and special revelation, but the statement does at the very least indicate that geocentricity was firmly established in Calvin’s mind as the true explanation of the nature of God’s creation.

https://www.ligonier.org/...d-approach-science-and-scripture


quotes were found by typing this into a search engine:

john calvin earth sun philospohers


  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 89 of 232 (842209)
10-27-2018 7:18 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Faith
10-27-2018 3:23 PM


Martin Luther told us humans not to compromise scripture with (heliocentric) science.
quote:

Then, as I asked the stormy one, prove it. I have no reason not to take it as simply descriptive of the order of Creation in ancient terminology.

R.C. Sproul said that the scientists were right and the leading lights of Protestantism were wrong.

Scripture was misunderstood to contradict science.

Heliocentrism was correct.

So, what is wrong with biological evolution? (The theory of Evolution is way more consistent with scripture than heliocentrism is)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Faith, posted 10-27-2018 3:23 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Faith, posted 10-27-2018 8:11 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 108 of 232 (842268)
10-28-2018 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by Faith
10-27-2018 8:11 PM


Faith: "Scripture says death didn't enter until the Fall."
"Please quote.

Evolution requires death, scripture says death didn't enter until the Fall."

I'll start with the evolution part.

I will just say that the correctness of the "death requirement for evolution" depends on which exact (constantly changing) theory of evolution actually is true.

But as to the scripture part (in your short post), then I need to get right back to the issue of the scientific views of the day.

They have been changing.

They have been incorrect.

(Both the ONCE popular scriptural readings and scientific views)

quote:

The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History
By Elizabeth Kolbert

pp.24-25

Extinction may be the first scientific idea that kids today have to grapple with. One-year-olds are given toy dinosaurs to play with, and two-year-olds understand, in a vague sort of way at least, that these small plastic creatures represent very large animals. If they're quick learners - or, alternatively, slow toilet trainers - children still in diapers can explain that there were once lots of kinds of dinosaurs and that they all died off long ago. ... All of which is to say that extinction strikes us as an obvious idea. It isn't.

Aristotle wrote a ten-book History of Animals without ever considering the possibility that animals actually had a history. Pliny's Natural History included descriptions of animals that are real and descriptions of animals that are fabulous, but no descriptions of animals that are extinct. The idea did not crop up during the Middle Ages or during the Renaissance, when the word "fossil" was used to refer to anything dug up from the ground (hence the term "fossil fuels"). In the Enlightenment, the prevailing view was that every species was a link in a great unbreakable "chain of being." As Alexander Pope put it in his Essay on Man

All are but parts of one stupendous whole,
Whose body nature is, and God one soul.

When Carl Linnaeus introduced his system of binomial nomenclature, he made no distinction between the living and the dead because, in his view, none was required. The tenth edition of his Systema Naturae, published in 1758, lists sixty-three species of scarab beetle, thirty-four species of cone snail, and sixteen species of flat fishes. And yet in the Systema Naturae, there is really only one kinf of animal - those that exist.

The view persisted despite a sizable body of evidence to the contrary. Cabinets of curiosities in London, Paris, and Berlin were filled with traces of strange creatures that no one had ever seen - the remains of animals that would now be identified as trilobites, belemnites, and ammonites. Some of the last were so large their fossilized shells approached the size of wagon wheels. In the eighteenth century, mammoth bones increasingly made their way to Europe from Siberia. These, too, were showhorned into the system. The bones looked a lot like those of elephants. Since there clearly were no elephants in contemporary Russia, it was decided that they must have belonged to beasts that had been washed north in the great flood of Genesis.

Extinction finally emerged as a concept, probably not coincidentally, in revolutionary France. It did so largely thanks to one animal, the creature now called the American mastadon, or Mammut americanum, and one man, the naturalist Jean-Leopold-Nicolas-Frederic Cuvier, known after a dead brother simply as Georges.Cuvier is an equivocal figure in the history of science. He was far ahead of his contemporaries yet also held many of them back; he could be charming and he could be viscious; he was a visionary and, at the same time, a reactionary. By the middle of the nineteenth century, many of his ideas had been discredited. But the most recent discoveries have tended to support those very theories of his that were most thoroughly vilified, with the result that Cuvier's essentially tragic vision of earth history has come to seem prophetic.


I hope you can see that the issue of creationists Christians being wrong ( and ignorant) is unquestionable.

I hope you can see that the scientific community has been wrong (and ignorant, despite the best efforts).

The history of being WRONG is long.

Today's Creationists admit that Luther and Calvin were wrong when they powerfully asserted that the Earth does not move BECAUSE OF THE HOLY TEXT being read incorrectly.

Do you admit that EXTINCTION was an area of ignorance among those who read and interpreted the Bible during the previous 2000 years (laying aside the last 200 years plus when there was enlightenment)?

The issue of death itself might be misunderstood (there sure the heck is alot of ignorance of food issues and what exactly the Bible said about what was and was not allowed), and frankly it is not actually spelled out. "The Fall" happened, then children were born. The children then went on to begin to kill each other. (It is still debated if Abel even offered up a creature, or if there was some other sacrifice).

You yourself said that God programmed humans and creatures with the ability to eat meat. I read that earlier. Genetic code alone demands that some will resort to parasitic or carniverous behavior.

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Faith, posted 10-27-2018 8:11 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Faith, posted 10-29-2018 5:11 AM LamarkNewAge has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 125 of 232 (842345)
10-29-2018 8:49 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Faith
10-29-2018 5:11 AM


Re: Faith: "Scripture says death didn't enter until the Fall."
Romans 5:12 was quoted, by you Faith to support an idea of no death (I should point out that I do feel that Genesis does describe an ideal situation of non-carniverous humans AND animals before something went wrong).

Here is a quote of the verse and the following verses.

quote:

12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.


There is so much more (in the following chapters) I could quote to show an even better context of what Paul is saying.

Here is chapter 6

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+6&ver...

Chapter 7 of Romans.

quote:

4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.

6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.

9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.


Chapter 8

quote:

4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please Gog

....

13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.



This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Faith, posted 10-29-2018 5:11 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 126 of 232 (842346)
10-29-2018 9:33 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Faith
10-29-2018 5:11 AM


Re: Faith: "Scripture says death didn't enter until the Fall."
What does Romans 5:14 mean when it said death stopped reigning during Moses time?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Faith, posted 10-29-2018 5:11 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by Faith, posted 10-30-2018 3:13 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 130 of 232 (842404)
10-30-2018 10:38 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by Faith
10-30-2018 3:13 PM


Re: Faith: "Scripture says death didn't enter until the Fall."
quote:

But it doesn't say that. It is saying that we would expect sin to be imputed when the law was given through Moses, and that death would then enter with that law, but Paul is saying that as a matter of fact sin and death reigned from Adam to Moses before the Law was given. It didn't stop reigning when the Law was given, the point is just that it was already reigning before the Law was given, it began with the sin of Adam and continues to the present.

It seems that Paul is talking about consciousness of morals and rules.

The Law of Moses brought about a consciousness of sin.

(If people could follow all the laws, and be holy, then sin/death would not rule over the person)

Paul seems to be saying the Jesus allowed for people to abandon the law but be perfect.

(conscious of sin, and truly free of sin just by being free of the law WITH awareness of sin)

quote:

Although "sin is not imputed when there is no law," says Paul, "NEVERTHELESS death reigned from Adam to Moses..." that is, before the Law was given. He's talking about that period, not saying anything stopped when Moses came, just saying that although normally we'd expect sin to be imputed because law had been given, as a matter of fact it was already reigning, and death with it, before the Law was given by Moses.

And death could have been defeated, in theory, with the law.

Paul said it was defeated by people becoming Christian.

So death is another word for sin. It is semantic.

Death defeated.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by Faith, posted 10-30-2018 3:13 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by Faith, posted 10-31-2018 12:16 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: 12-22-2015


(1)
Message 132 of 232 (842456)
11-01-2018 12:58 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by Faith
10-31-2018 12:16 PM


Making sense of every last word/sentence/paragraph of Paul is complicated.
This whole issue of "original sin" is absent in the entire Bible (Except for 4 Ezra or 2 Esdras)

https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/...t-Sins-Of-The-Father

Faith, you said this:

quote:

We don't exactly "abandon" the Law, it simply does not condemn us any more if we are saved by Christ since He paid for our sins under the Law. The Law simply condemns everybody because all sin in Adam, but in Christ we are saved so it no longer condemns us.

Paul speaking against "The Law" might be the rub of this whole thing.

Paul said that we have responsibility for sins. See Romans 3:9-19

https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Romans-Chapter-3/

Here is 3:31

(all scriptural quotes will be taken from the above site)

quote:

31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.


Steve Mason's annotations, in Early Christian Reader, will be quoted throughout this post.

quote:

Mason
p.132

3:31 A natural question: if Jews and Gentiles are the same before God, what has become of the divine law...? For the moment Paul simply insists that he is not overthrowing the law, but he will not take up the matter until Romans 7.


Romans 4

quote:

1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?

2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.


Mason notes:

quote:

Mason
p.132

4:3 Gen15:6.MT “And because he put his trust in the Lord, He reckoned it to his merit.” The LXX reads exactly as Paul. “Believe” is the verb corresponding to the noun “faith”. In Genesis, the point seems to be that Abraham trusts God's promise of descendants although he is old and childless, and so God considers him righteous. Paul, however, wants to make Abraham's “faith” something absolute, in contrast to “works”.


The LXX is the Septuagint

The Hebrew text behind the King James Old Testament is MT.

Romans 4:4-11

quote:

4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.

5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.

8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.

10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.

11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:


Mason notes:

quote:

4:11 Paul has considerably revamped the argument of Gal. 3:15-18, which drove a sharp wedge between the Abrahamic covenant (of faith alone) and the Mosaic covenant (of commandments/works). That argument overlooked the fact that circumcision (which Paul associates with law and works) was already commanded to Abraham (Gen 17:9-14); it did not originate with Moses. By contrast, Paul now distinguishes between Abraham's situation before and after the circumcision command: he is reckoned righteous in Genesis 15, but the circumcision command comes only in Genesis 17.

Paul had some difficulty pinning the exact origin of commandments, though his letters were probably written without knowledge of THE FUTURE Biblical Inerrancy and especially he must have not known his very words would somehow be "sacred scripture" one day.

Romans 4:12-18

quote:

12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised.

13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

14 For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:

15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.

18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be.


Mason notes:

quote:

Mason p.133

Paul now rightly interprets the “seed” of Gen 22:18 as a collective singular (descendants) rather than as a singular reference to Christ as he did in Gal 3:16; see note to 4:11


Romans 4:19-24

quote:

19 And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara's womb:

20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God;

21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.

22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.

23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;

24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;


Mason's verse 24 note:

quote:

Mason
p.133

4:24 Having established at length the importance of faith for Abraham, Paul now fills the term with Christian content. Note his distinction between the ancient sense of the passage (“not for his sake alone”), which Paul concedes, and its application to Paul's day. Paul generally considers scripture to relate ultimately to his own time – the end of the age (see 1 Cor. 9:9-10; 10:6).


I will skip 4:25

Now Romans 5:1-9

quote:

1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

3 And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience;

4 And patience, experience; and experience, hope:

5 And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.

6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.

8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.


Mason notes

quote:

Mason
p.133

5:9 Except for references to the Eucharist in 1 Corinthians (10:16; 11:25-27), Romans is the only letter in which Paul develops the idea of Jesus' death as a blood sacrifice, see 3:25. Perhaps this reflects Paul's Jewish audience


Romans 5:10-12

quote:

10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.

12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:


Mason notes:

quote:

Mason
p.133

5:12 A ruptured sentence that has caused endless discussion among commentators. Paul's view so far has been the typically Jewish one that all are sinners because all sin (3:9-19). He says this here also (because all have sinned), but the point does not fit perfectly with the argument that he now wishes to make concerning the legacy of Adam's sin for humanity. This tension may be the cause of the ruptured sentence.


Romans 5:13-14

quote:

13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.


Mason notes:

quote:

p. 133

5:14 That is, if people dies from Adam to Moses, as they did, even though their own sins were not counted (in the absence of any laws), they must have died because of Adam's sin. This passage would be used by the 5th-century teacher Augustine as the basis for his doctrine of original sin, which subsequently assumed an important place in Christian theology. The problem is that (a) Paul does not elsewhere develop such an idea, (b) his main view is that people are sinners because they themselves sin (see 3:9-19; 5:12), and (c) he is not out to prove anything new about Adam here. Rather, Paul assumes his readers knowledge of speculations about Adam (see 4 Ezra 1:21-27), which he uses as a basis for his claims about the universality of Christ's benefits (5:15-21), his main point.


2 Esdras 3:21-27 is what scholars call 4 Ezra chapter 1:21-27

It can be read on the King James site, and it is the only "Old Testament" book to find the Original Sin idea.

Romans 6

quote:

1
What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?

2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.

7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.

8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:

9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.

10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.

11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.

13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.

14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.

16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.

18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.

19 I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness.

20 For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness.

21 What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death.

22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.


Mason says this about verse 14

quote:

p.134

6:14 The first hint that Paul will turn the death/life theme against the regime of the Mosaic law.


Chapter 7 is odd.

verse 1

quote:

Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?


Mason notes

quote:

7:1 [know the law] Another indicator of the audience's Jewish background: they know Torah.

[lifetime] Paul now applies the death/life scheme to the fundamental question of Jewish law: all believers have died to the law (see Gal. 2:19-20).


verse 2

quote:

For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.


Mason notes:

quote:

7:2 This analogy presents a logical problem: If the woman represents the believer, why does the husband (= the law?) die?

7:3-7:7

quote:

3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.

6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.


Mason notes:

quote:

7:7 Is the equation of law with sin a natural consequence of Paul's argument? A more natural question might be whether the law is obsolete, to which Paul would presumably answer yes. Why does Paul, then, raise the extreme prospect that the law might be sin – a view that neither he nor his readers (as far as we know) has suggested? Perhaps so he can dismiss it for its obvious absurdity, in a reductio ad absurdium.

7:8-9 shows us the complications of taking Paul's words literally

quote:

But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.

9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.


The "I" is interesting.

Mason notes:

quote:

7:9 A puzzling order, since Paul was born a Jew (Phil. 3:5). When was he alive before the commandment came? The order does fit, however, with his scheme of salvation history: Adam, Abraham (promise), Moses (law), Christ (faith). See Gal. 3:15-29; Rom. 5:13-14, 20. This correspondence suggests that Paul is talking about the history of salvation, using I as a symbol of humanity, not about his own life.

7:12-18

quote:

.

12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.

16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.

17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.


Here are a slew of Mason notes.

quote:

7:12 As in 3:31, Paul insists that he has nothing negative to say about the law per se.

7:13 Again, the negative consequences of the law were not the law's fault; sin used the law.

7:14 Paul assumes his readers agreement: We [Jews?] know that the law is spiritual. But compare his statements elsewhere, which seem indeed to connect the law with flesh and sin (Phil. 3:2-20; 2 Cor. 3:7-18; Gal. 3:1-5; Rom. 6:1-7:4; 8:1-8). It seems likely that the Roman Christians had heard of his remarks about Judaism and its code, which places him on the defensive.

7:18 Paul regularly appeals, as here, to a dichotomy, common in Greco-Roman antiquity, between the world of constantly decaying matter (including “flesh”) and the world of unchanging truth (“spirit”). This distinction was fundamental to Plato's thought.


Romans 8 is something else

verses 1-12

quote:

There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.


Mason notes:

quote:

8:3

could not do See Gal. 3:21. Paul effectively links the law with flesh and sin, even though he is careful not to blame the law itself. The law has now been supplanted by the coming of Christ.

….

8:8 Paul consistently associates observance of the law with the inferior, transient world of the flesh, as opposed to the enduring work of the Spirit; see Phil. 3:2-6, 19-20; Gal 3:3 …. see 6:1-6

….

8:12 Evidently, then, in spite of Paul's careful attempt to avoid criticizing the law, for him the law is finished. This is the view he expressed more directly in Gal. 3:23-25; 4:4-7, 21


the rest of chapter 8

quote:

13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

16 The Spirit itself beareth 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.

18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.

19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.

24 For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?

25 But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it.

26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

27 And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.

28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

31 What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?

32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?

33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.

34 Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.

35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?

36 As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.

37 Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.

38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,

39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.


The most relevant verses in Romans perhaps these?

6:14

7:1-4

7:14

8:1-4

8:12-13 or 8:12-17

8:18-25

Other relevant verses

1 Cor 15:20-22

15:42-49

15:56

As for the spiritual issues.

Romans 2:28 had a note by Mason

quote:

p.130

Other Jews could easily agree with what Paul says about the importance of sincerity. But his claim that circumcision is spiritual and not physical was a problem, since the Torah makes it clear that circumcision is “in the flesh of the foreskin” (see Gen. 17:11, 14).


Do you have any issues with Mason's notes?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Faith, posted 10-31-2018 12:16 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by Faith, posted 11-01-2018 3:57 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 150 of 232 (842571)
11-02-2018 11:24 PM
Reply to: Message 142 by Faith
11-01-2018 3:57 PM


Re: Making sense of every last word/sentence/paragraph of Paul is complicated.
quote:

If this does not answer what you think you are saying, please be very specific in your answer, and much briefer if you can, and please spell it out in your own words, don't just throw a lot of quotes at me, and please no bare links. Thanks.

I noticed that you have typed alot of paragraphs (in your various responces to me), I feared that (my)quoting and responding to them might get lost in the discussion, especially if it got to the point where the discussion would be considered cluttered and bloated.

That is why I decided to skip them, but I wouldn't mind responding to all of them.

(At the risk of leaving several more of your paragraphs without a response, I will try to get to one of my main points, though there were several I was working on)

HERE I WILL MAKE ONE ARGUMENT.

The argument is whether Paul felt that the SIN OF ADAM was the reason for (literal)death, or if people and animals becoming dead (through old age or whatever) was part of the creation.

I argue that Paul could have felt that death existed before "sin".

1 cor 15

https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/...rinthians-Chapter-15

quote:

20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.

22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.


The body is discussed.

quote:

glory.

42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:

43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:

44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.

48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.

49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.


Paul seems to see nature itself as responsible for death,right?

Paul never ceases to attack the law (perhaps he feels that there was a natural law that required death)

quote:

56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.

The existence of (literal) death (of the body) was part of creation itself.

Romans 8

quote:

18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.

19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.

22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.


Created to die (though commanded, from the beginning, not eat meat and to not kill)?

What about sin/death being connected?

That was spiritual talk, not literal.

Paul felt that sin kept a person from heaven. (naturally he wasn't usually looking at the "sins" according to the Law of Moses but was eyeing Christian rules generally)

Paul wanted conversion to Christianity

Romans 8

quote:

13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.


After Paul called Law of Moses followers "carnally minded" and saying they are among those "who after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh", Paul said:

(Romans 8)

quote:

10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.


You are spiritual and destined for eternal life if you become Christian.

All those "Biblical people" (Israelites, Jews, pagans) before the time of Christ are dead meat (though Paul, in Romans 2, said they might be judged as good followers of The Law).

Or were the followers of THE LAW spiritual?

Paul said this (Romans 7):

quote:

5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.

6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.

9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.


Sin kills if you are follower of the Law of Moses.

But you live if you are a Christian?

Literally, no?

Paul, in verse 9, said he was alive (when he was a lawless sinner?) then he became a practizing Jew, and died?

Now, he argues that he will live forever.

Romans 5

quote:

17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.


But, Adam was the only man that existed from the beginning.

Everybody dies.

Christianity promises eternal life to its followers.

So why not present non-Christians as representing sin and death?

Why not present the ages before Jesus Christ as full of death?

It might be figurative.

(Paul seemed to present death as a consequence of nature and that means the creative works of God, which were existing BEFORE ADAM WAS)

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by Faith, posted 11-01-2018 3:57 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 151 of 232 (842573)
11-03-2018 12:54 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by Faith
10-29-2018 5:11 AM


Adam was created as he was. Perishable
Romans 8:20

quote:

20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.


https://biblehub.com/commentaries/romans/8-20.htm

Here is Barnes notes

quote:

But by reason - By him διά dia. It is the appointment of God, who has chosen to place his people in this condition; and who for wise purposes retains them in it.


Vanity is another word for death, right?

quote:

Ecclesiastes 1-12 English Standard Version (ESV)

All Is Vanity

1 The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem.

2 Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher,
vanity of vanities! All is vanity.

3 What does man gain by all the toil
at which he toils under the sun?

4 A generation goes, and a generation comes,
but the earth remains forever.

5 The sun rises, and the sun goes down,
and hastens to the place where it rises.

6 The wind blows to the south
and goes around to the north;

around and around goes the wind,
and on its circuits the wind returns.

7 All streams run to the sea,
but the sea is not full;

to the place where the streams flow,
there they flow again.

8 All things are full of weariness;
a man cannot utter it;

the eye is not satisfied with seeing,
nor the ear filled with hearing.

9 What has been is what will be,
and what has been done is what will be done,
and there is nothing new under the sun.

10 Is there a thing of which it is said,
“See, this is new”?

It has been already
in the ages before us.

11 There is no remembrance of former things,
nor will there be any remembrance

of later things yet to be
among those who come after.


1 Cor 15 again

King James

quote:

It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:

43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:

44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.


Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Faith, posted 10-29-2018 5:11 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by Phat, posted 11-03-2018 1:13 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded
 Message 157 by Faith, posted 11-04-2018 5:18 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 158 of 232 (842675)
11-04-2018 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by Faith
11-04-2018 5:18 PM


Re: Adam was created as he was. Perishable
I was arguing for a (very real) possibility that Paul actually felt Adam was created, from the beginning, as mortal.

The Romans 5:12 (literal death from sin) issue might not mean exactly what it sounds like.

I base that on the rest of Paul's comments on creation and death, plus the fact that he was a little metaphorical when he made his points.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by Faith, posted 11-04-2018 5:18 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by Paboss, posted 11-05-2018 2:24 AM LamarkNewAge has responded
 Message 162 by Faith, posted 11-06-2018 2:59 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 167 of 232 (847787)
01-26-2019 10:55 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by Paboss
11-05-2018 2:24 AM


Re: Adam was created as he was. Perishable
quote:

The book of Genesis agrees with you. If you look at the story of Adam and Eve, when they ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil they didn't die nor became mortal. What happened to them was the exact thing the snake said. God kicked them off Eden so that they wouldn't eat from the Tree of Life and live forever. This means they weren't immortal, but if they had eaten from the Tree of Life they would have become. Hence, they were created mortal.

Maybe that's how Paul and the people of his time saw this story, but as time went on the meaning was altered to suit a different audience.


The gnostics felt the whole material creation was something of an evil act.

"Dualism" means something to the effect that (perhaps) EVERYTHING IN THE PRESENT was in existence from some "beginning" and good and evil are simply products of all all existing from "the beginning".

Augustine certainly did not want to support this type of theology.

(Paul, of course, pre-dated Augustine, but it is not 100% certain what Paul believed)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by Paboss, posted 11-05-2018 2:24 AM Paboss has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020