Comments requested, questions given.

[Bartholomew]

2 Corinthians 3 (NASB):

5 Not that we are adequate in ourselves to consider anything as coming from ourselves, but our adequacy is from God,

6 who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

I was wondering...what exactly is being discussed here?

Thank you for your time,
~Matt

[Sozo]

InquisitorKind:
2 Corinthians 3 (NASB):



I was wondering...what exactly is being discussed here?

Thank you for your time,
~Matt

That the gospel is contrary to the Law, and that it is presented by inadequate men who are made adequate through the power of God.

[Bartholomew]

-edited for spleeing mistakes and to add a reference

Sozo:


That the gospel is contrary to the Law, and that it is presented by inadequate men who are made adequate through the power of God.

The Gospel is contrary to the Law? In what way? And how do you reconcile that with Matthew 5:17?

Thanks for your thoughts,
~Matt

[Sozo]

InquisitorKind:
-edited for spleeing mistakes and to add a reference



The Gospel is contrary to the Law? In what way? And how do you reconcile that with Matthew 5:17?

Thanks for your thoughts,
~Matt

Before I comment on that, continue to read on in 2 Cor 3, as Paul contrasts the gospel and the Law...

"But if the ministry of death (The Law), in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading [as] it was, how shall the ministry of the Spirit (The Gospel) fail to be even more with glory? For if the ministry of condemnation (The Law) has glory, much more does the ministry of righteousness (The Gospel) abound in glory. For indeed what had glory (The Law), in this case has no glory on account of the glory that surpasses [it]. For if that which fades away [was] with glory, much more that which remains [is] in glory. Having therefore such a hope, we use great boldness in [our] speech, and [are] not as Moses, [who] used to put a veil over his face that the sons of Israel might not look intently at the end of what was fading away. But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant (The Law) the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ. But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart; but whenever a man turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.

and...

Hebrews 8:12-13

"For I will be merciful to their iniquities, And I will remember their sins no more." When He said, "A new [covenant]," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear."

Now regarding Matthew 5:17, I first have a question...

Do you believe that Christians are required to keep all of the Law?
Are we still required to be circumcised, keep the Sabbath, etc.?

[Bartholomew]

Sozo:


Before I comment on that, continue to read on in 2 Cor 3, as Paul contrasts the gospel and the Law...

"But if the ministry of death (The Law), in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading [as] it was, how shall the ministry of the Spirit (The Gospel) fail to be even more with glory? For if the ministry of condemnation (The Law) has glory, much more does the ministry of righteousness (The Gospel) abound in glory. For indeed what had glory (The Law), in this case has no glory on account of the glory that surpasses [it]. For if that which fades away [was] with glory, much more that which remains [is] in glory. Having therefore such a hope, we use great boldness in [our] speech, and [are] not as Moses, [who] used to put a veil over his face that the sons of Israel might not look intently at the end of what was fading away. But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant (The Law) the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ. But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart; but whenever a man turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.

and...

Hebrews 8:12-13

"For I will be merciful to their iniquities, And I will remember their sins no more." When He said, "A new [covenant]," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear."


Perhaps I was just thrown off by your use of the word "contrary." I still, after rereading those passages, find it difficult to read it as "contrary." (Just because something becomes "obsolete" or no longer contains its previous "glory" doesn't make it contrary, IMHO.)


Now regarding Matthew 5:17, I first have a question...

Do you believe that Christians are required to keep all of the Law?
Are we still required to be circumcised, keep the Sabbath, etc.?

Why do you ask? If it's pertainent to the discussion, I will answer. Otherwise, I'm just looking to engage other people's analysis of this passage.

Thanks again for your time,
~Matt

[Sozo]

InquisitorKind:

Why do you ask? If it's pertainent to the discussion, I will answer. Otherwise, I'm just looking to engage other people's analysis of this passage.

Thanks again for your time,
~Matt

I ask because Jesus claims that not one portion of the Law would pass till all was fulfilled.

The Law has been fulfilled, or we are required to keep all of it.

They are contrary because one produces death, and the other brings life.

[Bartholomew]

Sozo:


I ask because Jesus claims that not one portion of the Law would pass till all was fulfilled.

The Law has been fulfilled, or we are required to keep all of it.

They are contrary because one produces death, and the other brings life.

One question: what then are we doing when we keep the commandments, such as "Love thy neighbor as thyself" or "Love the Lord your God will all your heart, mind..."? Is this fulfilling the Law, or is this something entirely different?

Also, I now see how the word "contrary" could be used to contrast the Law and the Gospel.

Anyway...

Thanks for your thoughts on this,
~Matt

[Sozo]

InquisitorKind:


One question: what then are we doing when we keep the commandments, such as "Love thy neighbor as thyself" or "Love the Lord your God will all your heart, mind..."? Is this fulfilling the Law, or is this something entirely different?

Thanks for your thoughts on this,
~Matt We are to reveal to others what great love God has for us and what great love He has for them. This is the only possible way to "love others". If it is an action towards others, (patience, kindness, etc.) it would need to be perfect.
Anything less would not be love. You cannot "almost" love someone."

I will also add this: "To love God is to accept who He is and what He has done for us. We only bear the fruit of the Spirit, we do not produce it."

What is the love of God?

Love is defined by what God does.

God sacrifices His Son for us...

"We know love by this, that He laid down His life for us..."

"God so loved the world, that He gave..."

"In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins."

God gives us hope

"...hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us. "

"By this the love of God was manifested in us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world so that we might live through Him."


He gives His life for His enemies...

"But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us"

"For if while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life."

"But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved)."

The love of God provides us with security...

"Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? Just as it is written, "For Thy sake we are being put to death all day long; We were considered as sheep to be slaughtered." But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."

God's love is perfect, and never fails...

"Love is patient, love is kind, and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails;"

The fulness of God's love surpasses knowledge, and yet it fills us with all God's fulness

"...know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled up to all the fulness of God."

It makes us like Him, and removes us from judgement

"By this, love is perfected with us, that we may have confidence in the day of judgment; because as He is, so also are we in this world."

God's love removes our fear

"There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love."

He gives us His love!

"And we have come to know and have believed the love which God has for us. God is love, and the one who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him."

[Bartholomew]

Thanks for the info about love.

Basically you're saying that our response to it (and obedience to it) doesn't have much to do with the law in terms of being fulfilled or not.

Right? (Just checking.)

~Matt

[Sozo]

InquisitorKind:
Thanks for the info about love.

Basically you're saying that our response to it (and obedience to it) doesn't have much to do with the law in terms of being fulfilled or not.

Right? (Just checking.)

~Matt

I believe I am saying it has everything to do with the Law being fulfilled by Christ, and in us! As Romans 8:3-4 confirms...

For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.

[Bartholomew]

Sozo:


I believe I am saying it has everything to do with the Law being fulfilled by Christ, and in us! As Romans 8:3-4 confirms...

For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.

<--------working on getting it.

I'll be rereading and I'll let you know if I have any more questions.

Thanks for the info,
~Matt

[George Blaisdell]

Matt writes:

2 Corinthians 3 (NASB):

quote:5 "Not that we are adequate in ourselves to consider anything as coming from ourselves, but our adequacy is from God,

6 who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

"I was wondering...what exactly is being discussed here?"

I love to begin reading at 3:2:
"Ye are our epistle, which hath been inscribed in our hearts, known and read by all men, since it is manifest that ye are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, which hath not been inscribed with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God, not in stony tablets, but in fleshy tablets of the heart."

This is what is being discussed: Epistles... meaning the faithful, and how it is that each of us is an epistle written in the fleshy tablets of our heart. Not our words, particularly, although these come indeed from the heart, but our actions in the flesh.

And he continues at 4:
"And we have such trust through Christ toward God: Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to reckon anything as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God, Who also made us fit ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter, but of the Spirit, for the letter killeth, but the Spirit maketh alive."

And here he affirms the spiritual nature of a Christian's existence in the flesh, and the dependency of us upon God and Christ, and not our self-sufficiency, not even our reckoning of it.

And what is meant by "the letter killeth"? 3:9 "For if the ministration of condemnation is glory [eg the giving of the law that convicts us of sin], much rather the ministration of righteousness [the Life of Christ written in the fleshy tablets of the heart] aboundeth in glory."

Chrysostom writes: "For those tablets indeed showed the sinners and punished them, but this not only did not punish the sinners, but even made them righteous; for this did Baptism graciously give."

So that what is being discussed is the new man in Christ established in Baptism, upon whose repentant and fleshy heart is written in deeds the living epistle of the Lord by the Spirit.

And it is writing about humility, and the confidence we have therein, in Christ toward God...

I hope this muddies not the waters too deepish... :-)

geo

[GrayPilgrim]

Thanks for the input Geroge! Hope to hear more from you as your posts so far have really added to the discussions!

[George Blaisdell]

Sozo writes:

> I believe I am saying it has everything to do with the Law being > fulfilled by Christ, and in us! As Romans 8:3-4 confirms...

> For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, > God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and > as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, in order that > the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not > walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.

I am a little shy of this translation, Sozo [is that related to the Greek for 'save'?]... I'm headed over to 3rd Millenium to retrieve the Greek...

to gar adunaton tou nomou en w hsqenei dia th sarkos, o qeos ton eautou uion pemyas en omoiwmati sarkos amartias kai peri amartias katekrinen thn amartian en th sarki

For the powerlessness of the law, in which it was weak through the flesh, God His own Son sent in likeness of [the] flesh of sin, and concerning sin, He condemned sin in the flesh.

This is a wooden translation to the extreme, yet seems clearly to be saying that the law was unable to do great good, because of the weakness of the flesh under the law. And it further states that Christ's flesh was real flesh, but had the likeness of flesh that has sinned. And that it was in His sinless flesh that He condemned sin in the flesh.

This is why we can now in Him walk according to the Spirit, and not according to the flesh, and thereby walk sinlessly, we who are so sinful, minding the things of the Spirit, and 'making no provision for the [mind of the] flesh"...

The important point being that it is not the flesh that is condemned, but sin - The flesh is not sinful, which can be inferred from your translation "in the likeness of sinful flesh" above. It is we who are sinful, not our flesh... It is the fulfilling of the desires and the lusts of the flesh that is sin, the tolerating of the presence of these fleshly lusts and desires in our hearts.

The great ascetics, who live in constant ongoing pain, do so not to punish the flesh, but to cleanse the heart, and defeat the dark principalities that seek our souls... Paul talks about this a little, describing how his suffering for the Colossians [I think it was them] was his joy, in which he filled up in the afflictions of his own flesh the things lacking of the afflictions of Christ. [Col 1:24]

It was sinless flesh, Christ's, that condemned sin in the world, and it is ascetic flesh that triumphs in that condemnation. [Nor am I very triumphant!]

So that we can say that it is the sinless flesh of Christ that condemns sin, for this sin killed the sinless one, condemning itself... The powers ruling the earth, the spirits of the air, all had some sin in every person who died and was imprisoned in Gehenna, and so reigned, until Christ... There is great mystery here... For the flesh that is not conquered by sin continues to condemn evil... We have flesh for a purpose...

Enough of this meandering...

geo

[Sozo]

geo...

What planet are you from? :huh:

[Ishmael]

:huh:

[George Blaisdell]

geo wrote:
"Enough of this meandering."

Sozo wondered:
"geo... What planet are you from?"

And then, turning from his wondering about the meanderer, he began to scratch that particularly itchy spot on the very topmost part of his head, and scowled leftward and rightward, back and forth, and looking to his left, lo and behold, there wondered another, in similar vexatious consternation, quoting a whale decocting Seneca, and calling himself the volatile Calvinist, King of Battle!

And with the passage of time, the itching ceased, and the scowling leftward and rightward eyes settled into peace, and the battle moved on from a battle tested Calvinist King to a Risen King, and the planet of geo's meandertholic origin became moot...

So how can I respond? I look at the Greek, I look at the text, I look at the translation, I quote the Bible, I write as best I can given my obvious limitations about issues raised.

In this case, Christ came in the flesh, the only sinless one, and by his sinless and divine death destroyed the power of death in His resurrection... His flesh was glorified and sits at the right hand of the Father, and in this, He has elevated the fallen nature of humanity to the Godhead of the Trinity, and in Him we find holiness and salvation in His holy Body, and we turn away from the world of the concerns of the flesh and turn toward Christ, and die together with Him to the world in Baptism, and having so turned, live unto Him in the Spirit - Working out salvation in fear and trembling, washed in the daily tears of repentance. This is all Biblical...

And our friend Matt wanted to know what is being discussed when Paul writes of our adequacy only in God, and the new covenant of the Spirit, written in our hearts, and not just words written in ink on parchment... He asked "What exactly is being discussed here? [in 2Cor3:5-6] and the replies seemed to focus on Christ fulfilling the Law, and not on us living according to the Spirit, wherein can be written the new covenant upon the fleshy parchment of our hearts by the Holy Spirit...

I am saying nothing new here at all. This has been the teaching of the Church from the time of Christ. My constant companion in exegetical matters of Paul is a modern guy of 1500 years ago, John Chrysostom, who wrote a fabulous series of homilies on the whole of the Pauline corpus, that is without compare anywhere ever...

Maybe it is just that we share different traditions? Perhaps we could discuss particular matters, rather than make planetary inquisitions with headscratchings and scowling eyes? I mean, granted, I am a tawdry and suspicious rogue and scoundrel, and have no share of the glory of the venerable Seneca, but yet even so, though I should share the thump passed 'round, is not there a friendly nod e'en from the great and humble cottonwood, venerating the wind?

geo

[GrayPilgrim]

:rofl: :lol: That was hillarious!

I propose an even further option for you to ponder George:

Maybe you are now acquainted with one of our resident curmudgeons named Sozo.


[No offense Sozo ;)]

[Sozo]

GrayPilgrim:
:rofl: :lol: That was hillarious!

I propose an even further option for you to ponder George:

Maybe you are now acquainted with one of our resident curmudgeons named Sozo.


[No offense Sozo ;)]

I am tenacious, but I still have no idea what geo is babbling about.

[George Blaisdell]

Sozo writes:

>quote:GrayPilgrim:

>That was hillarious!

> I propose an even further option for you to ponder George:

> Maybe you are now acquainted with one of our resident curmudgeons named Sozo.

I should imagine that Sozo knows me better than I him, for I have written a great deal already, and his interest in me seems to be restricted to the establishment of my planetary origins...

> I am tenacious, but I still have no idea what geo is babbling about.

I can appreciate your candor, Sozo, but without anything more specific, it is really just trerrifically hard to know how to respond to the enigma of planets... I thought we were talking about 2Cor3:5-6, or thereabouts - We have an NASB translation, the KJV one, and I think I translated it woodenly myself, just to get the bones of it laid out in order, and we were trying to answer the question of what it was about... The living epistles...

Is it my quoting Chrysostom that is giving my words the brookish babble you are hearing? Or the idea that Christ destroyed the power of death by His death on the Cross and His holy resurrection? Or the idea that it is the resurrected flesh of our Lord seated in the communion of the Godhead in the Second Person thereof that makes babble of my words the babble that you only seem to be making out. I am trying to be fairly specific, and yet I seem to be speaking as if from another planet... I really am not a mind-reader, and if you would be so kind as to clue me in on what it is that is babblish and other-planetarish to you in my words, perhaps I can be more clear. I may lack that art, but I will try, if you can help me out...

My frame of reference is mainline apostolic Christianity, the unbroken chain of faith and teaching from the very beginnings, passed on from generation to generation by the Holy Fathers of Christianity, beginning with Paul and the holy apostles... Hence I can quote the Fathers, pre and post Nicene, as freely as others do the post-moderns...

That is probably why I sound so other-worldly to you... But the faith is no orbital rocket science, Sozo... Even rascalish scoundrels like me can understand a lot of it... And I do mostly post in English... But not always 100%, granted. My Bible is the Majority Text and the LXX... Does this help?

geo

[Pereynol of Sheer Dread]

Geo seems both clever and orthodox, and though the hairs bristle on the back of my neck, and though the itch tingles on my head too, I----refrain from scratching.

[Socrates]

My Bible is the Majority Text and the LXX... Does this help?

Definitely. I don't think either of those are original though -- I think that the Masoretic Text is more likely to be closer to the original in the Hebrew as explained in another post, and that the Critical Text is more likely to be closer to the original, and Jaltus agrees (and he knows a lot more than I). The Majority isn't bad or anything, but seems to have a lot of expansion of piety, harmonization, copying passages from one place to another, filling out OT quotes, etc. as well as being based on very late manuscripts.