Does anyone know of....

That's the kind of eisegesis I would expect from you, friend.

I guess you're starting to rub off on me. You're the king of esiegesis around here.

Logic is really not your strong suit, friend. Thete are so many fallacies in your leap-frogging from premise M to conclusion Z that it seems like a lost cause to try to reason with you. You just pluck idras out of the air and assume they correspond to reality. Where does "A is ALWAYS A and can NEVER be B" come from? Where does " Therefpre, the will of man has NO power to become something it isn't" come from?
Where does " Since man is evil to the core" come from?

Look up the Law of Identity, Mr. Wanna-be-Expert on logic. Then compare that to Jer 13:23.

Man is evil to the core. There is no spiritual soundness in fallen mankind (Isa 1:5-6). This is one text from which "man is evil to the core" comes. And another is that man's hearts are FULL of EVIL (Eccl 9:3). Or another is that the the thoughts and intentions of men's hearts are evil CONTINUALLY (Gen 6:5). And with the Isa 1 passage, you read "hardness of hearts into it", remember? You were trying to say that this passage only applied to Israel at that particular time under their particular circumstances, and that the passage has no relevance to man today. But LOGICALLY, how could that be true? Since Israel became an apostate nation in spite of all its covenant privileges, in spite of all the divine revelation it received, in spite of all its historical encounters with YHWH, in spite of all the signs and wonders of God that its ancestors witnessed and recorded for their posterity, etc., then what in the world would make you think for a nanosecond that the pagan Gentiles, who were not a party to the above mentioned privileges, would be spiritually superior to Israel!? Again, see Psalm 2 regarding the Gentile Nations and just how much they all love God to death.

90% of what the religious communities call "Faith" isn't FAITH at all - just intellectual assent. The Biblical definition is Heb 11:1, specifically FAITH has "Substance". "Belief" has no "substance" at all. FAITH is an EVIDENCE of the existence of what you don't see - yet. "Belief" is an "evidence" of nothing at all.

When God spoke to Abram about leaving everything, and going to a place He'd show him, THAT WAS THE HEARING OF FAITH.

When the Holy SPirit tells you in a manner you can understand to DO SOMETHING (pray for somebody, help somebody, give somebody money-etc., speak healing over somebody )- that's the "Hearing of faith". When the Holy Spirit CONVICTS YOU OF YOUR SIN, and lets you know about approaching judgement, that's the "hearing of faith".

Biblically (Rom 10:17) reveals how FAITH comes - by hearing God's WORD TO YOU. READING the Word is one thing but now and again God will "Make the word come alive TO YOU - that's the "Hearing of faith.

Methodist, Baptist, Catholic, etc. are NOT FAITHS - they're just "Theological systems"/Church corporations.

It is you who is bringing up "sinless" and "morally perfect human beings". No one is making these claims.

Again, in your zeal to defend that mankind was created without the ability to freely chose right from wrong you have lost sight of reason. 2nd Kings 22:2 was not being used to promote King Josiah as sinless or a morally perfect human being. This notion is simply living in your head. Anyone reading these posts will see this.

Neither Nehemiah6 or myself were making any such claim.

Good grief, man, you have a real problem reading. Neh6 said that Josiah obeyed God's law perfectly! Tell me what part of the bolded text you can't understand. Anyone reading these posts know that Neh6 made that wild, insane claim! And then you come along like his good little lap dog to defend him. What a cute pup you must be.

But Neh6 was dead wrong. No man alive, save for Jesus Christ, ever obeyed God's law PERFECTLY! Josiah was a sinner just as his father David was. Having said that...both of them were also righteous -- not inherently -- but because God reckoned their faith in Him as righteousness just as He did with Abraham centuries before. Also, both their lives were characterized by godly living. But godliness or righteousness in this age does not equate to perfection or sinlessness.

Again, this is the verse:

2 Kings 22:2 English Standard Version
2 And he did what was right in the eyes of the Lord and walked in all the way of David his father, and he did not turn aside to the right or to the left.

King Josiah did not turn aside to the right or to the left.

This phrase states that he followed the commands of God without fault in the context of the verse. King Josiah perfectly obeyed the commands of God. King Josiah was flawless on this issue. Your confusion is not with me but the verbiage of the Bible.

"But Neh6 was dead wrong. No man alive, save for Jesus Christ, ever obeyed God's law PERFECTLY!"

It is comments like this above that make you look silly.

What makes you look silly is you implicitly deny that both David and Josiah were sinners because you insist on interpreting the text as saying that they both obeyed God flawlessly. But how can any sinner obey God perfectly or flawlessly? Scripture says no one is inherently righteous. And that ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, etc. So answer the question I have highlighted.

Matthew 19:26 New International Version
26 Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

8
You should look at the context of Is. 1:5-6. Who is Yahweh addressing? Is it all mankind, or one particular nation that was at a zenith in its morality? Is the immediate genre of the passage historical narrative, or a lament expressing dismay at the fallen state of Israel? Is the intensity of Yahweh's grief possibly expressed employing some hyperbole? Was Isaiah himself included in this broad-brush general indictment?

The law of identity says that something is identical with itself: A = A

You may have meant the law of non-contradiction, which says that contradictory propositions cannot be both true and not true at the same time in the same sense.

Neither of these apply to your argument that "A is always A and can never be B". What about in a code, where A is a substitute for B? Then A = B.

Unless pagan Gentiles are not of the human species as the Israelites are, then the Law of Identity applies to the passage and should be interpreted in light of that Law and, even more importantly, in light of other biblical passages. Both groups have the same essence (sin nature); therefore, the passage applies to all mankind; and I proved this earlier with Psalm 2 which speaks to the hostile, ungodly, wicked attitude the Gentile nations have with God -- which was identical to Israel's attitude.
Secondly, OT teachings are still relevant to all mankind today. The things of the OT weren't written so that we can rip them out of the pages scripture and make them irrelevant to us today when their teachings conflict with wicked personal theological agendas; for all that was written served as examples to the Church and was for her instruction (Rom 15:4;1Cor 10:6, 11; Heb 4:11; 2Pet 2:6; Jude 7).

And no, I meant the Law of Identity. A always = A, and cannot be identical with B. And we're not talking about codes. I'm talking about the essence of man. Man doesn't have different essences. If man had different essences, then it could not be said that all men are created in the image of God.

Irony. Man is so sinful who then can be saved? Left up to man? Impossible. Left up to God? Possible.


Matthew 19:26b

But God cannot lie, so he cannot contradict himself either. Therefore, "all" must be understood in the limited sense. There's not one verse in scripture that teaches that anyone, other than Jesus, perfectly obeyed God all the time. Your lame interpretation of 2Ki 22:2 presents numerous contradictions.

1. Scripture teaches that all men are sinners (Rom 3:23; Eccl 7:20; 1Ki 8:46; 2Chron 6:36; Job 15:14-16; Gal 3:9, 19,22; 1Jn 1:8-10). The only explicit exception to this truth in scripture is the man Jesus Christ.

2. Josiah's perfect obedience is compared to king David's, yet scripture teaches that David sinned grievously against God; therefore, it's not possible for David to have obeyed God's laws perfectly. He committed adultery with Bathsheba, ordered the murder of her husband Uriah to cover up his sin, and ordered a census of Israel which so greatly angered God that he brought a great plague upon Israel. Therefore, since David was not sin-free, then logically neither could Josiah have been. In order for Josiah to have been a perfect law-keeper, he would have had to been compared to the Son of David instead of David.

3. But if you insist that David and Josiah were not sinners but righteous men, then you still hit a brick wall with Eccl 7:20; Job 15:14-16, etc. Another contradiction.

4. Sin by definition is violation of the law. It is lawlessness (1Jn 3:4). Because king David was a sinner, this means he was not sin-free, he did not abstain from all sin perfectly. David, nothwithstanding his righteous life was nevertheless morally and spiritually imperfect, so logically Josiah could not be a perfect law-keeper since he's being compared to an imperfect human being. This is akin to comparing apples to cucumbers. It's totally illogical and contradictory to compare a supposed perfect moral-spiritual man (Josiah) to a known imperfect moral-spiritual man. Common sense should tell everyone this.

5. To be a sinner means one sins. One does what one is. It's a total contradiction in terms to say a sinner obeys God's laws perfectly. Only someone morally- spiritually perfect, faultless, flawless, without spot or blemish and without sin can keep God's law perfectly all the time. And Jesus Christ does not share his glorious spotlight or his glory with any mere sinful mortal.

As stated earlier, the biblical and logical way to understand the hyperbolic language in 2Ki 22:2, within the larger context of all scripture, and avoid all confusion, all inconsistencies and all contradictions is to understand the passage as saying that both kings substantially and essentially led godly, righteous lives -- but not faultless lives, not perfect lives, not flawless lives. For if any mere mortal could live a perfectly moral-spiritual life, that person would be as sinless as Jesus was.

Paul is Paul. i.e. A = A (Law of Identity)
Paul is a husband. i.e. A = B

I dont think the law of identity says that A cannot equal B.

come on, now, that was the "ripped out of context award of the day".

What is silly is arguing dogmatically from Emglish translations without considering the sense conveyed by the Hebrew text and the LXX Greek text.
The verb forms used convey that Josiah's action of reigning on 2 Kings 22 verse 1 was completed (Qal perfect).
And he had completed doing (waw consecutive Qal imperfect) that which was right in the sight of the Lord; and he had completed walking (waw consecutive Qal imperfect) in the way of David, his father. He did not complete turning aside (Qal perfect) to the right or the left.

The text indicates that if and when Josiah began to wander to the left or right he did not keep on doing that action to completion. In other words, he returned to the Lord and did not remain turning away. What he did complete was walking in the way of David, i.e. obeying the Lord and repenting and returning when going astray.

Look up the definition of "essence".

Did the Son of David ever wander to the left or the right? A mere stumble = imperfection. Thanks for making my case that Josiah was an imperfect moral being.