More on Skirts

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Bro, are yo saying that Paul was blameless before his conversion?

I'm saying that before his conversion, Paul regarded himself as being so. Isn't that part of Paul's polemic?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Aquila, I just thought to ask you this, what is the word in the Greek for the English word obeyed found in your ESV? Could you show me where that Greek word which is translated as "obeyed" is found in the verse?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I'm saying that before his conversion, he regarded himself as being so, yes. Isn't that part of Paul's polemic?

Was he telling the truth? Was he blameless concerning the law? Yes, or no?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Aquila, I just thought to ask you this, what is the word in the Greek for the English word obeyed found in your ESV? Could you show me where that Greek word which is translated as "obeyed" is found in the verse?

I'm no Greek scholar. And I'm on a cell phone because I'm out of town doing something you'd argue isn't true. Could you share your insight? I'll look deeper into it.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Was he telling the truth? Was he blameless concerning the law? Yes, or no?

According to the Phariseeism he practiced, yes.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I'm no Greek scholar. And I'm on a cell phone because I'm out of town doing something you'd argue isn't true. Could you share your insight. I'll look deeper into it.

Ok, go and look at the exact interliner of the verse. Paul is telling law keepers that he kept the law without fault. The ESV doesn't translate the verse, they interpret the verse. Interpretation isn't just words, but thoughts. So, the interpreter places his thoughts within the verse. Since we understand the Greek text, we can see the interpreter does a decent job. Yet, he isn't giving you a direct translation.

Again, no matter who you choose, Paul was a faultless law keeper. Therefore in Romans 7 he isn't using himself as an example. He is speaking about those who were trying to keep Torah, but through human discipline they were failing miserably.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Aquila

According to the Phariseeism he practiced, yes.

According to the practice of Talmudic schools?

Do you have any idea what THAT would entail?

[Esaias]

So Paul was able to obey the halachah of the Talmud without fail, but once he became a Christian, he couldn't stop sinning?

That's what American Churchianity has come down to nowadays.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Ok, go and look at the exact interliner of the verse. Paul is telling law keepers that he kept the law without fault. The ESV doesn't translate the verse, they interpret the verse. Interpretation isn't just words, but thoughts. So, the interpreter places his thoughts within the verse. Since we understand the Greek text, we can see the interpreter does a decent job. Yet, he isn't giving you a direct translation.

Again, no matter who you choose, Paul was a faultless law keeper. Therefore in Romans 7 he isn't using himself as an example. He is speaking about those who were trying to keep Torah, but through human discipline they were failing miserably.

Which is why, in my opinion, one doesn't get a true picture of what Paul is talking about in Romans 7 unless they continue through Romans 8. If we walk after the Spirit, we have victory over the flesh. Is that your take too?

In all honesty, whenever I've sinned, after being born again, I was in the flesh, thinking with the carnal mind, allowing myself to act on the desires of the flesh. The only way victory was gained was to put on the mind if Christ, and yield to the Spirit.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

According to the practice of Talmudic schools?

Do you have any idea what THAT would entail?

A lot. But the Pharisees were experts at thinking they were faultless.