Search results

I admit that I did not read the entire opening post, but I read enough to get the gist of it. I can try to help you understand something about why demands for obedience for salvation are seen as relying on oneself instead of Christ. The answer has two parts. First, obedience is good as far as...

I am glad to find some agreement. We both see, view, and consider the flesh, its works, and its longings to be evil. And I would say that everyone who is in Christ sees their own flesh the same way. James describes the lifecycle of sin this way... 14 But each one is tempted when he is drawn...

It seems like we may have some common ground here, though on the surface we appear to be at odds. Are you saying the flesh is part of the "whole man" but is ineffective at inticing us with its lusts when we walk as the Spirit leads (per Galatians 5:16-18)?

True for the new man. Impossible for the flesh. Do you not distinguish between the the spirit and the flesh? Or, do you think we are training the flesh to be good? "For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh" (Php 3:3).

I can see that POV in the verse. But I can also see an alternate meaning... 3 For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, 4 that the righteous requirement...

True. The oldest and most reliable manuscripts do not contain it. But the phrase must be addressed because it appears in verse 4. If the phrase limits the blessings in verses 3 and 4 to those who are fulfilling their obligations, then it does no damage to add the phrase to every other blessing...

I can't relate to what you're saying. Maybe you can be more clear on your objection to my statement. There has never been any condemnation for obedience. So how would the statement make sense that "Now" (after some intervening event) there is no condemnation for obedience? I don't think you can...

I don't know what you mean by this statement. I take it that you follow the interpretations of "Some scholars" below? I think Justification in Romans 4:5 fits Louw-Nida's definition better... God makes right (and ends the enmity in) our relationship with Him on the basis of our faith in Christ...

Your interpretation turns Romans 8:4 into works. Do you do the same thing with Romans 8:1, saying there is now no condemnation if you are obedient? That is nonsensical because there is never any condemnation for obedience. The identity of the people group that walks after the Spirit and not...

I see both aspects. The first is God's judgement about one's relationship to a standard, and the other is a moral attribute of the new man... "Righteousness" has a standard in mind, an arbiter, and a judgement about conformity to the standard. When we talk about "righteousness by the law", for...

I almost totally agree with you. After I sent my previous post, I realized it could lead a person to think that rightness with God is achieved by hearing and doing what God says. While it is true in one sense (i.e., we must trust God's testimony that we are sinners in need of a Savior and we...

Again, TDNT says, If we ignore these passages, and postpone for the moment our consideration of the distinctive Pauline formula δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ, we may first maintain that δικαιοσύνη is almost always used in the NT for the right conduct of man which follows the will of God and is pleasing to...

Sure, no problem. The one above was 34.46. Louw-Nida has its problems as does every other work, but it is generally very good. And their primary definition is very close in concept to the definition I provided earlier from the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, repeated here for ease...

Certainly we are blessed with being new creatures in Christ, with the new man enjoying true righteousness and holiness by way being joined to the Lord. But God caused this to happen to ungodly people on the basis of their faith, not on the basis of their righteousness. We agree on that, right...

Louw Nida points to Matthew 6:1, "Take heed that you do not do your charitable deeds before men, to be seen by them." But TDNT says the following... If we ignore these passages, and postpone for the moment our consideration of the distinctive Pauline formula δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ, we may first...

It means that the same word can mean different things depending on context. Here is part of a discussion from TDNT on the root word... Even if δίκη were linked with both δικεῖν and δεικνύναι, or if it were understood in terms of “to stretch out” (the daemon Dike, with the gesture of the...

There are different semantic distinctions in NT usage... δικαιοσύνη, ης f a righteousness: 88.13 the act of doing what God requires—‘righteousness, doing what God requires, doing what is right.’ b be put right with: 34.46 to cause someone to be in a proper or right relation with someone...

We have true righteousness and holiness in the new man (Eph 4:24). And 2 Cor 5:21 points to us being made the righteousness of God in Christ. These two things point to the righteousness of the new creature that God created when He came to live in our hearts. This is not the same as imputing the...

And in the example below, certainly it is implied that the subjunctive purpose clause is being fullfilled... Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You, as You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him. (Jn 17:1–2)

It says "true righteousness" and "holiness". They exist in tandem.