Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

10

The answer is perhaps best given in 1 Corinthians 9:20-23 (emphasis added): To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but ...


5

Oaths generally refer to something you will/won't do. We are unable to control what will happen in the future, and therefore don't know if we will be able to keep that oath ("you cannot make even one hair white or black"). Paul, in this situation, was writing about what already happened. He already experienced it so he knows it is true. He doesn't need to ...


5

The letter to the Galatians is written to Gentiles; as a Jew (half-Jewish by birth, and presumably taught Judaic--and later Christian--beliefs by his mother) he would have been expected by his fellow Jews to have been circumcised ("for they all knew that his father was a Greek"). The Jews would never have listened to him if he was in disobedience to the law. ...


3

I think it interesting to point out that Paul specifically had Titus remain uncircumcised, ...so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you. - Gal. 2:5b See the beginning of Gal. 2 for the background to that. If the gospel had been at stake with Timothy, I highly doubt that Paul would have circumcised him. But, since it apparently was not, ...


3

I think the key thing here is understanding what it means to "sow to flesh" and "sow to the Spirit". The difference (referencing Bob Utley's commentary) is the key difference between the two basic approaches to being right with God: our own effort, or God's free grace. The former (sowing to flesh) refers to trying to be right by God by trying to work ...


2

Simple answer - You are reading too much into it. Romans 7:19 For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do--this I keep on doing. Paul couldn't possibly have meant that Christians could never commit acts of flesh when he himself admits doing the same. The principle of interpretation you are using is called ...


1

Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Gal 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, ...


1

Paul said, Romans 8:2 (AMP) 2  For the law of the Spirit of life [which is] in Christ Jesus [the law of our new being] has freed me from the law of sin and of death. Galatians 2:20 (AMP) 20  I have been crucified with Christ [in Him I have shared His crucifixion]; it is no longer I who live, but Christ (the Messiah) lives in me; and ...


1

While there are some traditions that teach that after being saved, Christians no longer sin (Wesleyan, and some strains of fundamentalist tradition, for example), most Protestant theologies, and also the Roman Catholics, teach that believers necessarily continue to sin. AFAIK, Eastern Orthodox also recognize sin in saved believers. See Mt 5:21-30. See the ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible