C
The passage says: “For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”— ” (1 Corinthians 8:5)
The question is, are these actual gods? If so, the Paul taught polytheism and contradicted earlier Scripture. If not, then Paul is merely pointing out that people think there are many gods, they are "so-called gods."
Paul used this same expression at another point: “Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. ” (2 Thessalonians 2:3–4)
So are these "so-called gods" actual gods? If so, then doesn't the man of lawlessness become a god by exalting himself above them (how else could you exalt yourself an actual god unless you become "greater" than these gods?).
It should be obvious by the qualification "so-called" that these are only gods in the sense that people call them gods. Not that they are actual gods (or else how can there be only one God?).
It's not a matter of accepting what Paul says. It's a matter of understanding what Paul says.
I think I've demonstrated that your assertions lead to contradictions. Therefore, what you're saying must not be from the Spirit, by your own standard.
The question is, are these actual gods? If so, the Paul taught polytheism and contradicted earlier Scripture. If not, then Paul is merely pointing out that people think there are many gods, they are "so-called gods."
Paul used this same expression at another point: “Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. ” (2 Thessalonians 2:3–4)
So are these "so-called gods" actual gods? If so, then doesn't the man of lawlessness become a god by exalting himself above them (how else could you exalt yourself an actual god unless you become "greater" than these gods?).
It should be obvious by the qualification "so-called" that these are only gods in the sense that people call them gods. Not that they are actual gods (or else how can there be only one God?).
It's not a matter of accepting what Paul says. It's a matter of understanding what Paul says.
I think I've demonstrated that your assertions lead to contradictions. Therefore, what you're saying must not be from the Spirit, by your own standard.
“is used of both God and Jesus quite indiscriminately [in Acts], so that it is often hard to determine which Person is meant,” Marshall declares that in his Gospel Luke employs it particularly to introduce authoritative statements by Jesus and concludes that “Jesus … is for Luke the Lord [in the Yahwistic sense] during his earthly ministry” (295).