Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Is sinless perfection possible on earth? | 1 John 1:8 | biblicalman | 228662 | ||
Well Beja, you can obviously see it as you like. But if that was all Paul was doing he did not need to change the tense. Normally I would not comment on another teacher's post but as you have addressed this one directly to me I feel it necessary to do so. The impression given by the passage is that what he had said in verses 7-13 leads on to his then describing his current position. Quite frankly I have no hesitation in saying that if he changed to an historic present he was not very wise. He could only confuse everyone. And as I believe God was behind his words I know that God is very wise. In this passage confusion arises simply because, not being willing to accept it at face value, people try to find ways of getting round it. Thus I cannot accept in this context that he used a deceptive historic present. And this is especially so as the actual present makes good sense, except to those who want to see Paul as perfect. Paul lived so near to God that he was deeply conscious of sin. He saw as sin what we simply pass by. And he was thus aware more than we are of its power within him. He knew that day by day he could only overcome it in the power of Christ. And he knew that that was true for all his listeners. He was not of course talking about what most people see as sins. He did not lead a defeated life. That is where we go astray. He was talking of his awareness that he fell short of Christlikeness. His testimony here is an essential part of Romans 6-8. Having made clear how he saw doctrine affecting the Christian's approach to living in chapter 6 he wanted to make clear that that did not provide an easy ride. Being dead to sin did not mean that sin was dead. It led indeed to facing up to sin within and responding to it in the power of Christ, and he therefore demonstrates this from his own life, explaining as he did so the workings of the Christian mind and heart. The mistake most people make is in ending his words at 7.25. But as the use of 'I, me' demonstrates it ends at 8.2 (or 8.4). It ended in triumph. That Paul did have this sense of the battle within comes out in such verses as 1 Corinthians 9.26-27; Philippians 3.11-13. Or are these historic presents as well? You may think so, I couldn't possibly say so. Best wishes |
||||||
2 | Is sinless perfection possible on earth? | 1 John 1:8 | Beja | 228663 | ||
Biblicalman, In an admitedly long and complex thread, I think you've failed to follow my posts. No blame there, as they may not be worth following. I say this because you are proceeding as if you think I am suggesting Paul was perfect. This is not at all what I believe. I do not think Paul was sinless. And I do not think the point of Rom 7 is to describe a lost man. I think Paul battled sin like every other man. I have even argued as much in this thread from Philippians 3. I simply do not agree that Romans 7's point is whether it is describing lost or savedd. And this ofcourse debunks your entire theory that I am interpreting it due to "wanting to see Paul as perfect." I disagree with you because I think your tense shift arguement holds no water. See post 228649 if you want to see my thoughts on what Romans 7 is actually trying to say. Also, I urge you to have no hesitancy to reply to my posts due to me being "another teacher." I ask nobody to be a respector of persons, I only ask hesitency to reply if they haven't actually read what I have said. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
3 | Is sinless perfection possible on earth? | 1 John 1:8 | biblicalman | 228664 | ||
Beja In my post I said nothing about your views whatsoever. May I suggest that you are a little over-senstive? You have simply taken to heart a general comment which cannot be denied. Read it again and see if you can deny it. It says nothing about you. Now you are giving the casual viewer the impression that I accused you of something when it is not true. Well in my view Scripture teaches us to be a respecter of persons, 'honour to whom honour is due'. I am not on the forum to argue, or even to seek to win my case as against other teachers. I present what I see to be the truth and allow the reader to judge. Of course if you proclaimed heresy I would certainly citicise your posts. But I do not think it helpful to nitpick at someone else's posts simply because they present a different point of view (I am not suggesting you do so please don't take that personally). Each person's presentation should stand on its own. The reader can then judge for himself what to make of it. Some will be helped by one way of presenting it, others will be helped by another way. Each person is different. I will take into account what has been said, and if necessary point out what my view is, but not by making it personal. The only reason that I addressed you personally was because you wrote to me personally. But i presented a general argument, not an attack on your views. Best wishes |
||||||