Let's study Romans-with Dr. Utley

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Johann

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2022
8,588
4,871
113
63
Durban South Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
CONTEXTUAL INSIGHTS

A. Rom. 1:1-7 forms the introduction to the letter. It is the longest introduction of any of Paul's letters. He was trying to introduce himself and his theology to a church who did not know him personally and may have heard negative information about him.



B. Rom. 1:8-12 is an opening prayer of thanksgiving. This was characteristic of Greek letters generally and of Paul's writings specifically.



C. Rom. 1:16-17 states the theme of the book.



D. Rom. 1:18 through 3:20 form the first literary unit and the first point of Paul's gospel; all humans (3 groups) are lost and need to be saved (cf. Genesis 3).

1. immoral pagans

2. moral pagans

3. Jews



E. Romans 1:18-3:20 reflects Genesis 3 (surprisingly the rabbis do not focus on this text, but Genesis 6, as the origin of sin). Humanity was created for fellowship with God, in His very image (cf. Gen. 1:26-27). However, mankind chose enlightenment and the promise of power and independence. In effect, humans exchanged the exaltation of God for the exaltation of themselves (atheistic humanism)!

God allowed this crisis. To be in God's image is to be responsible, to be morally accountable, to be volitionally free with consequences. God separates humans by both His choice and theirs (a covenant relationship)! He allows them to choose self with all its consequences. God is grieved (cf. Gen. 6:5-7), but humans are free moral agents with all the rights and responsibilities that brings. The repeated phrase "God gave them over" (cf. Rom. 1:24,26,28) is the recognition of that freedom, not a willful rejection by God. This was not God's choice. This is not the world that God intended (cf. Gen. 3:22; 6:5-7,11-13)!

F. The theological summary of Rom. 1:18-3:20 is found in Rom. 3:21-31. This is the first theological point of the "good news" of the gospel-all humans have sinned and have need of God's forgiveness. God graciously provides a way back to intimate fellowship (i.e., Eden experience, compare Genesis 1-2 with Revelation 21-22).



G. In this first literary unit of Paul's presentation of the gospel it is interesting to note that fallen mankind is held responsible for their rebellion and sin without any reference to Satan or the demonic (cf. Rom. 1:18-3:20).

This section certainly reflects the theology of Genesis 3, but without a personal tempter. God will not allow fallen mankind to blame Satan again (cf. Gen. 3:13) or God Himself (cf. Gen. 3:12). Humans are made in God's image (cf. Gen. 1:26; 5:1,3; 9:6). They have the right, power and obligation to choose. They are responsible for their choices both corporately in Adam and individually in personal sin (cf. Rom. 3:23).



WORD AND PHRASE STUDY

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: ROMANS 1:1-6
1Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, 2which He promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures, 3concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh, 4who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord, 5through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles for His name's sake, 6among whom you also are the called of Jesus Christ;

1:1 "Paul" Most Jews of Paul's day had two first names, one Jewish, one Roman (cf. Acts 13:9). Paul's Jewish name was Saul. He, like the ancient King of Israel, was of the tribe of Benjamin (cf. Rom. 11:1; Phil. 3:5). His Roman name in Greek form, Paul (Paulos), meant "little." This referred to

1. his physical stature which was alluded to in a second century non-canonical book, The Acts of Paul, in a chapter about Thessalonica called "Paul and Thekla"

2. his personal sense of being least of the saints because he originally persecuted the Church (cf. 1 Cor. 15:9; Eph. 3:8; 1 Tim. 1:15)

3. simply the name given by his parents at birth

Option #3 seems best.

"a bond-servant" NKJV, NRSV, TEV and JB translations read "servant." This concept was either

1. antithetical to Jesus as Lord

2. an OT honorific title (cf. Moses in Num. 12:7 and Jos. 1:1; Joshua in Jos. 24:29; and David in the Psalms (title), and Isaiah 42:1, 19; 52:13)



NASB, TEV,
NJB, REB"Christ Jesus"
NKJV, NRSV"Jesus Christ"

"Christ Jesus" is more unusual and, therefore, probably original (cf. MSS P10, B). The UBS4 gives it a "B" rating (almost certain).

However, the other form has really good attestation (cf. MSS P26, א, A, D, G, and most early church Fathers).

See Appendix Two on the assumptions of Textual Criticism. Most of the textual variants are like this one in the sense that they do not affect the basic meaning of the Greek text.

"called as an apostle" This was God's choice, not his (cf. Acts 9:15; Gal. 1:15; Eph. 3:7). With this phrase Paul is asserting his spiritual qualifications and authority, as he does in 1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor. 1:1; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:1; Titus 1:1) to this church he had never met.

The Koine term "apostle" in Palestinian Jewish circles of the first century meant "one sent as an official representative" (cf. 2 Chr. 17:7-9). In the NT this term was used in two senses: (1) of the Twelve special disciples and Paul and (2) of a spiritual gift that continues in the church (cf. 1 Cor. 12:28-29; Eph. 4:11).



"set apart" This is a perfect passive participle, which implied that he was set apart by God in the past (cf. Jer. 1:5 and Gal. 1:15) and this continued as a state of being. This was a possible play on the Aramaic word for "Pharisee." They were separated to Jewish legalism (and Paul also [Phil. 3:5] before his Damascus Road encounter with Jesus), but now he was separated to the gospel.

It is related to the Hebrew word for "holy" (BDB 872), which meant "set apart for God's use" (cf. Exod. 19:6; 1 Pet. 2:5). The terms "saint," "sanctify," and "set apart" all had the same Greek root, "holy" (hagios).

"for the gospel of God" The preposition eis in this context (and Rom. 1:5) shows the purpose of Paul's "call" (Rom. 1:1b) and being "set apart" (Rom. 1:1c).

Gospel is a compound word from "good" (eu) and "message" (angellos). It became the term that described the doctrines revealed in the New Covenant (cf. Jer. 31:31-34; Ezek. 36:22-32) related to God's promised Messiah (cf. Rom. 1:3-4). It is the "gospel of His Son" (Rom. 1:2).

This is God's gospel, not Paul's (cf. Rom. 15:16; Mark 1:14; 2 Cor. 11:7; 1 Thess. 2:2,8,9; 1 Pet. 4:17). Paul was not an innovator or cultural adapter, but a proclaimer of the truth he received (cf. Acts 9; 1 Cor. 1:18-25).

1:2 "He promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures" This verb is an aorist middle (deponent) indicative. It is used only in Paul's writings (here and 2 Cor. 9:5). The gospel was no afterthought with God, but His eternal, purposeful plan (cf. Gen. 3:15; 12:3; Exod. 19:5; Isa. 53; Ps. 118; Mark 10:45; Luke. 2:22; Acts 2:23; 3:18; 4:28; Titus 1:2). The early sermons in Acts (the kerygma) present Jesus as the fulfillment of OT promises and prophecies.

The OT is referred to in the NT in two common ways.

1. "it is written" (or "writings," i.e., 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 3:16)

2. Scripture(s)

It is also referred to in connection with the prophets. In the Jewish mind prophets wrote Scripture.

1. "the Law or the Prophets," Matt. 5:17-18; also note Luke 24:44

2. "prophecy," Luke 24:27

3. "writings of the prophets," Matt. 26:56

4. "prophetic writings," Rom. 16:26 (Rom. 1:2 also mentions "prophets")

5. "prophecy of Scripture," 2 Pet. 1:20

There are two instances of the adjective "holy" attached.

1. "holy Scriptures" (full clause also mentions "prophets"), Rom. 1:2

2. "sacred writings," 2 Tim. 3:15




1:3 "concerning His Son" The central message of the Good News is a person, Jesus of Nazareth, virgin-born son of Mary. In the OT the nation, the king, and the Messiah were called "son" (cf. 2 Sam. 7:14; Hos. 11:1; Ps. 2:7; Matt. 2:15).

In the OT God spoke through servants and prophets. Jesus was not a servant of God. He was a family member (cf. Heb.1:1-2; 3:6; 5:8; 7:28). Surprisingly this is the only place in the book where Paul focuses on Christology. Romans is not a complete systematic theology.



"who was born a descendant of David" This relates to the prophecy of 2 Samuel 7. The Messiah was of the royal line of David (cf. Isa. 9:7; 11:1,10; Jer. 23:5; 30:9; 33:15) from the tribe of Judah (cf. Gen. 49:4-12; Isa. 65:9). In Matthew's Gospel Jesus is acknowledged as David's descendant several times (cf. Rom. 1:6; 9:27; 12:23; 15:22; 20:30,31; 21:9,15; 22:42), which reflected the Jewish hope of a coming Davidic savior.

It is surprising that Paul did not emphasize this aspect of Jesus. He mentioned it only here and in 2 Tim. 2:8; both passages may have been quotes from an early church's creedal formula. The NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 61, lists several NT Scripture texts which may reflect early Christological creeds/hymns/liturgy (i.e., Rom. 1:3-4; 8:34; 1 Cor. 15:3-4; Phil. 2:6-11; 1 Tim. 3:16; 2 Tim. 2:8; 1 Pet. 3:18-20).




































Thanks
Johann.
 

Robert Gwin

Well-Known Member
Mar 19, 2021
6,888
1,587
113
69
Central Il
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
CONTEXTUAL INSIGHTS

A. Rom. 1:1-7 forms the introduction to the letter. It is the longest introduction of any of Paul's letters. He was trying to introduce himself and his theology to a church who did not know him personally and may have heard negative information about him.



B. Rom. 1:8-12 is an opening prayer of thanksgiving. This was characteristic of Greek letters generally and of Paul's writings specifically.



C. Rom. 1:16-17 states the theme of the book.



D. Rom. 1:18 through 3:20 form the first literary unit and the first point of Paul's gospel; all humans (3 groups) are lost and need to be saved (cf. Genesis 3).

1. immoral pagans

2. moral pagans

3. Jews



E. Romans 1:18-3:20 reflects Genesis 3 (surprisingly the rabbis do not focus on this text, but Genesis 6, as the origin of sin). Humanity was created for fellowship with God, in His very image (cf. Gen. 1:26-27). However, mankind chose enlightenment and the promise of power and independence. In effect, humans exchanged the exaltation of God for the exaltation of themselves (atheistic humanism)!

God allowed this crisis. To be in God's image is to be responsible, to be morally accountable, to be volitionally free with consequences. God separates humans by both His choice and theirs (a covenant relationship)! He allows them to choose self with all its consequences. God is grieved (cf. Gen. 6:5-7), but humans are free moral agents with all the rights and responsibilities that brings. The repeated phrase "God gave them over" (cf. Rom. 1:24,26,28) is the recognition of that freedom, not a willful rejection by God. This was not God's choice. This is not the world that God intended (cf. Gen. 3:22; 6:5-7,11-13)!

F. The theological summary of Rom. 1:18-3:20 is found in Rom. 3:21-31. This is the first theological point of the "good news" of the gospel-all humans have sinned and have need of God's forgiveness. God graciously provides a way back to intimate fellowship (i.e., Eden experience, compare Genesis 1-2 with Revelation 21-22).



G. In this first literary unit of Paul's presentation of the gospel it is interesting to note that fallen mankind is held responsible for their rebellion and sin without any reference to Satan or the demonic (cf. Rom. 1:18-3:20).

This section certainly reflects the theology of Genesis 3, but without a personal tempter. God will not allow fallen mankind to blame Satan again (cf. Gen. 3:13) or God Himself (cf. Gen. 3:12). Humans are made in God's image (cf. Gen. 1:26; 5:1,3; 9:6). They have the right, power and obligation to choose. They are responsible for their choices both corporately in Adam and individually in personal sin (cf. Rom. 3:23).



WORD AND PHRASE STUDY

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: ROMANS 1:1-6
1Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, 2which He promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures, 3concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh, 4who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord, 5through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles for His name's sake, 6among whom you also are the called of Jesus Christ;

1:1 "Paul" Most Jews of Paul's day had two first names, one Jewish, one Roman (cf. Acts 13:9). Paul's Jewish name was Saul. He, like the ancient King of Israel, was of the tribe of Benjamin (cf. Rom. 11:1; Phil. 3:5). His Roman name in Greek form, Paul (Paulos), meant "little." This referred to

1. his physical stature which was alluded to in a second century non-canonical book, The Acts of Paul, in a chapter about Thessalonica called "Paul and Thekla"

2. his personal sense of being least of the saints because he originally persecuted the Church (cf. 1 Cor. 15:9; Eph. 3:8; 1 Tim. 1:15)

3. simply the name given by his parents at birth

Option #3 seems best.

"a bond-servant" NKJV, NRSV, TEV and JB translations read "servant." This concept was either

1. antithetical to Jesus as Lord

2. an OT honorific title (cf. Moses in Num. 12:7 and Jos. 1:1; Joshua in Jos. 24:29; and David in the Psalms (title), and Isaiah 42:1, 19; 52:13)



NASB, TEV,
NJB, REB"Christ Jesus"
NKJV, NRSV"Jesus Christ"

"Christ Jesus" is more unusual and, therefore, probably original (cf. MSS P10, B). The UBS4 gives it a "B" rating (almost certain).

However, the other form has really good attestation (cf. MSS P26, א, A, D, G, and most early church Fathers).

See Appendix Two on the assumptions of Textual Criticism. Most of the textual variants are like this one in the sense that they do not affect the basic meaning of the Greek text.

"called as an apostle" This was God's choice, not his (cf. Acts 9:15; Gal. 1:15; Eph. 3:7). With this phrase Paul is asserting his spiritual qualifications and authority, as he does in 1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor. 1:1; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:1; Titus 1:1) to this church he had never met.

The Koine term "apostle" in Palestinian Jewish circles of the first century meant "one sent as an official representative" (cf. 2 Chr. 17:7-9). In the NT this term was used in two senses: (1) of the Twelve special disciples and Paul and (2) of a spiritual gift that continues in the church (cf. 1 Cor. 12:28-29; Eph. 4:11).



"set apart" This is a perfect passive participle, which implied that he was set apart by God in the past (cf. Jer. 1:5 and Gal. 1:15) and this continued as a state of being. This was a possible play on the Aramaic word for "Pharisee." They were separated to Jewish legalism (and Paul also [Phil. 3:5] before his Damascus Road encounter with Jesus), but now he was separated to the gospel.

It is related to the Hebrew word for "holy" (BDB 872), which meant "set apart for God's use" (cf. Exod. 19:6; 1 Pet. 2:5). The terms "saint," "sanctify," and "set apart" all had the same Greek root, "holy" (hagios).

"for the gospel of God" The preposition eis in this context (and Rom. 1:5) shows the purpose of Paul's "call" (Rom. 1:1b) and being "set apart" (Rom. 1:1c).

Gospel is a compound word from "good" (eu) and "message" (angellos). It became the term that described the doctrines revealed in the New Covenant (cf. Jer. 31:31-34; Ezek. 36:22-32) related to God's promised Messiah (cf. Rom. 1:3-4). It is the "gospel of His Son" (Rom. 1:2).

This is God's gospel, not Paul's (cf. Rom. 15:16; Mark 1:14; 2 Cor. 11:7; 1 Thess. 2:2,8,9; 1 Pet. 4:17). Paul was not an innovator or cultural adapter, but a proclaimer of the truth he received (cf. Acts 9; 1 Cor. 1:18-25).

1:2 "He promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures" This verb is an aorist middle (deponent) indicative. It is used only in Paul's writings (here and 2 Cor. 9:5). The gospel was no afterthought with God, but His eternal, purposeful plan (cf. Gen. 3:15; 12:3; Exod. 19:5; Isa. 53; Ps. 118; Mark 10:45; Luke. 2:22; Acts 2:23; 3:18; 4:28; Titus 1:2). The early sermons in Acts (the kerygma) present Jesus as the fulfillment of OT promises and prophecies.

The OT is referred to in the NT in two common ways.

1. "it is written" (or "writings," i.e., 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 3:16)

2. Scripture(s)

It is also referred to in connection with the prophets. In the Jewish mind prophets wrote Scripture.

1. "the Law or the Prophets," Matt. 5:17-18; also note Luke 24:44

2. "prophecy," Luke 24:27

3. "writings of the prophets," Matt. 26:56

4. "prophetic writings," Rom. 16:26 (Rom. 1:2 also mentions "prophets")

5. "prophecy of Scripture," 2 Pet. 1:20

There are two instances of the adjective "holy" attached.

1. "holy Scriptures" (full clause also mentions "prophets"), Rom. 1:2

2. "sacred writings," 2 Tim. 3:15




1:3 "concerning His Son" The central message of the Good News is a person, Jesus of Nazareth, virgin-born son of Mary. In the OT the nation, the king, and the Messiah were called "son" (cf. 2 Sam. 7:14; Hos. 11:1; Ps. 2:7; Matt. 2:15).

In the OT God spoke through servants and prophets. Jesus was not a servant of God. He was a family member (cf. Heb.1:1-2; 3:6; 5:8; 7:28). Surprisingly this is the only place in the book where Paul focuses on Christology. Romans is not a complete systematic theology.



"who was born a descendant of David" This relates to the prophecy of 2 Samuel 7. The Messiah was of the royal line of David (cf. Isa. 9:7; 11:1,10; Jer. 23:5; 30:9; 33:15) from the tribe of Judah (cf. Gen. 49:4-12; Isa. 65:9). In Matthew's Gospel Jesus is acknowledged as David's descendant several times (cf. Rom. 1:6; 9:27; 12:23; 15:22; 20:30,31; 21:9,15; 22:42), which reflected the Jewish hope of a coming Davidic savior.

It is surprising that Paul did not emphasize this aspect of Jesus. He mentioned it only here and in 2 Tim. 2:8; both passages may have been quotes from an early church's creedal formula. The NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 61, lists several NT Scripture texts which may reflect early Christological creeds/hymns/liturgy (i.e., Rom. 1:3-4; 8:34; 1 Cor. 15:3-4; Phil. 2:6-11; 1 Tim. 3:16; 2 Tim. 2:8; 1 Pet. 3:18-20).




































Thanks
Johann.
The Book of Romans is quite informative and beneficial for Christians Joe. One profound teaching that was history altering is found at Rom 10:4. And who could forget the no excuse statement of Chap 1 verse 20.

It also brings out the most important requirement of salvation 10:13 as well as some identity to Jesus disciples verse 14,15. Yes sir I agree, it is a very valuable book for us Christians, and for those wanting to learn about God.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johann

Johann

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2022
8,588
4,871
113
63
Durban South Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
THE SON OF GOD

This is one of the major NT titles for Jesus. It surely has divine connotations. It included Jesus as "the Son" or "My Son," also God addressed as "Father" (see Special Topic: The Fatherhood of God). It occurs in the NT over 124 times. Even Jesus' self-designation as "Son of Man" has a divine connotation from Dan. 7:13-14.

In the OT the designation "son" could refer to four specific groups (see Special Topic: "Sons of. . .").

A. angels (usually in the plural, cf. Gen. 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1)

B. the King of Israel (cf.2 Sam. 7:14; Ps. 2:7; 89:26-27)

C. the nation of Israel as a whole (cf. Exod. 4:22-23; Deut. 14:1; Hos. 11:1; Mal. 2:10)

D. Israeli judges (cf. Ps. 82:6)



It is the second usage that is linked to Jesus. In this way "son of David" and "son of God" both relate to 2 Samuel 7; Psalm 2 and 89. In the OT "son of God" is never used specifically of the Messiah, except as the eschatological king as one of the "anointed offices" of Israel. However, in the Dead Sea Scrolls the title with Messianic implications is common (see specific references in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, p. 770). Also "Son of God" is a Messianic title in two interbiblical Jewish apocalyptic works (cf. II Esdras 7:28; 13:32,37,52; 14:9 and I Enoch 105:2).

Its NT background as it refers to Jesus is best summarized by several categories.

1. His pre-existence (cf. John 1:15-30; 8:56-59; 16:28; 17:5; 2 Cor. 8:9; Phil. 2:6-7; Col. 1:17; Heb. 1:3; 10:5-8)

2. His unique (virgin) birth (cf. Isa. 7:14; Matt. 1:23; Luke 1:31-35)

3. His baptism (cf. Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22. God's voice from heaven unites the royal king of Psalm 2 with the suffering servant of Isaiah 53).

4. His satanic temptation (cf. Matt. 4:1-11; Mark 1:12,13; Luke 4:1-13. He is tempted to doubt His sonship or at least to accomplish its purpose by different means than the cross).

5. His affirmation by unacceptable confessors

a. demons (cf. Mark 1:23-25; Luke 4:31-37,41; Mark 3:11-12; 5:7; see Special Topic: The Demon [unclean spirits])

b. unbelievers (cf. Matt. 27:43; Mark 14:61; John 19:7)

6. His affirmation by His disciples

a. Matt. 14:33; 16:16

b. John 1:34,49; 6:69; 11:27

7. His self affirmation

a. Matthew 11:25-27

b. John 10:36

8. His use of the familial metaphor of God as Father

a. His use of abba for God

1) Mark 14:36

2) Romans 8:15

3) Galatians 4:6

b. His recurrent use of Father (patēr) to describe His relationship to Deity



In summary, the title "Son of God" had great theological meaning for those who knew the OT and its promises and categories, but the NT writers were nervous about its use with Gentiles because of their pagan background of "the gods" taking women with the resulting offspring being "the titans" or "giants."

http://www.freebiblecommentary.org/mp3/32-16/romans/rom32k-02.mp3
 

Behold

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2020
15,647
6,442
113
Netanya or Pensacola
Faith
Christian
Country
Israel
It is surprising that Paul did not emphasize this aspect of Jesus.

Paul was not Chosen By Jesus to teach the History of Jewish OT Prophecy. Tho He did teach this Torah family Tree.

He was called to be the "Apostle to the Gentiles" and Deliver "The Gospel of the Grace of God", that defines the 'time of the Gentiles".
 

Johann

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2022
8,588
4,871
113
63
Durban South Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
The Book of Romans is quite informative and beneficial for Christians Joe. One profound teaching that was history altering is found at Rom 10:4. And who could forget the no excuse statement of Chap 1 verse 20.

It also brings out the most important requirement of salvation 10:13 as well as some identity to Jesus disciples verse 14,15. Yes sir I agree, it is a very valuable book for us Christians, and for those wanting to learn about God.
I am making an attempt here to see if we can go through the book of Romans with Dr. Utley with some valuable input from members-that's all I want
Thanks Robert
Johann.
 

Robert Gwin

Well-Known Member
Mar 19, 2021
6,888
1,587
113
69
Central Il
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I am making an attempt here to see if we can go through the book of Romans with Dr. Utley with some valuable input from members-that's all I want
Thanks Robert
Johann.
You are very welcome Joe, keep in mind however Romans is a book in the Bible, so that kind of makes it a Christian thing sir.
 

face2face

Well-Known Member
Jun 22, 2015
4,777
636
113
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
"who was born a descendant of David" This relates to the prophecy of 2 Samuel 7. The Messiah was of the royal line of David (cf. Isa. 9:7; 11:1,10; Jer. 23:5; 30:9; 33:15) from the tribe of Judah (cf. Gen. 49:4-12; Isa. 65:9). In Matthew's Gospel Jesus is acknowledged as David's descendant several times (cf. Rom. 1:6; 9:27; 12:23; 15:22; 20:30,31; 21:9,15; 22:42), which reflected the Jewish hope of a coming Davidic savior.
This teaching of Paul is absolutely essential in understanding that Christ came in the line of David, after the flesh. Christ himself in his final words states:

"I am the root and offspring of David" Rev 22

Johann, if you could put away your commentaries just for a few weeks and study the importance of this teaching (for yourself) I am sure you would find the true Christ. Christ is Yahweh manifest in flesh as per 2 Cor. 5:19; 1 Tim. 3:16. However, your commentaries will as above, simply explain away this truth without a second thought.

Jesus (not God) is the "root" of David, because David's greatness stemmed from the divine purpose and promise to reveal Himself in and through a redeemer (Isa 11:1,10).

He is the "offspring" of David, inasmuch as he came in the line of David (Luke 1:32-33; Rom. 1:3-4).

It's this line which God saved through His Son.

F2F
 

Johann

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2022
8,588
4,871
113
63
Durban South Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
This teaching of Paul is absolutely essential in understanding that Christ came in the line of David, after the flesh. Christ himself in his final words states:

"I am the root and offspring of David" Rev 22

Johann, if you could put away your commentaries just for a few weeks and study the importance of this teaching (for yourself) I am sure you would find the true Christ. Christ is Yahweh manifest in flesh as per 2 Cor. 5:19; 1 Tim. 3:16. However, your commentaries will as above, simply explain away this truth without a second thought.

Jesus (not God) is the "root" of David, because David's greatness stemmed from the divine purpose and promise to reveal Himself in and through a redeemer (Isa 11:1,10).

He is the "offspring" of David, inasmuch as he came in the line of David (Luke 1:32-33; Rom. 1:3-4).

It's this line which God saved through His Son.

F2F

Johann, if you could put away your commentaries just for a few weeks and study the importance of this teaching (for yourself) I am sure you would find the true Christ. Christ is Yahweh manifest in flesh as per 2 Cor. 5:19; 1 Tim. 3:16. However, your commentaries will as above, simply explain away this truth without a second thought.
Oh boy-
 

Johann

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2022
8,588
4,871
113
63
Durban South Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
Jesus (not God) is the "root" of David, because David's greatness stemmed from the divine purpose and promise to reveal Himself in and through a redeemer (Isa 11:1,10).
Of course-did Utley said otherwise?
@face2face -you just persuaded me NOT to continue on this thread.

IF I put my "commentaries" aside I'll find "the true Christ?"

And again, HALELU ES ADONOI KOL GOYIM SHABBECHUHU KOL HAUMMIM ("Baruch Hashem, Praise the L-rd, all you Goyim, and let all the peoples praise him" )[TEHILLIM 117:1].
And again Yeshayah says, "The SHORESH OF YISHAI (the Root of Jesse, i.e., Moshiach) shall come forth, even the one who arises to rule the GOYIM; in him (the Gentiles, the nations) shall put their TIKVAH (hope)" [YESHAYAH 11:10; 42:4].



And again Yeshayah says, "The SHORESH OF YISHAI (the Root of Jesse, i.e., Moshiach) shall come forth, even the one who arises to rule the GOYIM; in him (the Gentiles, the nations) shall put their TIKVAH (hope)" [YESHAYAH 11:10; 42:4].
Davka (specifically), that Hashem was in Moshiach reconciling the Olam to himself, [Ro 3:24-25; Co 1:19-20) Not reckoning their avonot against them and putting in us the Dvar HaRitztzuy (Message of Reconciliation).

And confessedly great is the sod of chasidus [in Moshiach 3:9], who was manifested in basar, was vindicated [proven just] by the Ruach HaKodesh, was seen by malachim, was proclaimed among the Nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in kavod.

I'll leave you with a Pardesh-or maybe a Sod


I think I have said it elsewhere-I don't use "commentaries" to help me-I have studied the Scriptures for over 40 years-still studying and use 3 selective-scholarly resources.
I appreciate scholarly work-and personally-my opinion-the teaching of my pastor Utley is way over your head-now notice @face2face I say this in love



“The thought of personal Bible study frightens most Christians. It seems to be so
difficult without any formal training. Yet Psalm 119 persistently beckons every Christian
to feed on the spiritual nourishment of Scripture” (Mayhue 1986, 45).
“The Bible is so simple that the least educated can understand its basic message and
yet so profound that the best scholar can never exhaust its full meaning” (Schultz and Inch
1976, 9).

“Most people probably think that reference books, like commentaries and Bible
dictionaries, are necessary tools for Bible study. No doubt they are helpful, for they give
us the insights of Bible scholars.
But many Christians, especially those in poorer
circumstances, cannot have these helps. Must they wait to study the Bible until they can
get them? If so, many would have to wait forever” (Sterrett 1973, 33).


“It might seem up to this point that I am advocating a non-intellectual approach to
Bible interpretation. This is certainly not the case. Spurgeon warns us of this when he
says, ‘It seems odd that certain men who talk so much of what the Holy Spirit reveals to

them should think so little of what He revealed to others’” (Henricksen 1973, 41).

“Saying that we understand God’s Word does not mean we can understand
everything in it, solve all problems of interpretation and get answers to all our questions.
The precise meaning of some things seems to be still secret” (Sterrett 1973, 16).

“Let the no expert not despair; but let him also be prepared to study, not simply to
devotionalize.

To study he should use these basic tools: (a) More than one good
contemporary translation. This should point out at times where some of the problems lie.
He should be sure to use translations which recognize the differences between prose and
poetry and are aware of paragraphs. (b) At least one good commentary, especially one
that takes into account the hermeneutical principles offered in this paper (e.g., C. K.
Barrett, on I Cor.; F. F. Bruce, on Hebrews; R. D. Brown on John). Again, consulting
several will usually apprise one of various options. (c) His own common sense. Scripture
is not filled with hidden meanings to be dug out by miners in dark caves. Try to discover
what is plainly intended by the biblical author. This intention usually lies close to the
surface and needs only a little insight into grammar or history to become visible. Very
often it lies right on the surface and the expert misses it because he is too prone to dig first
and look later. At this point the no expert has much to teach the expert (Gordon Fee in
Interpreting the Word of God,” quoted in Schultz and Inch 1976, 127).
Johann
 
Last edited:

Johann

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2022
8,588
4,871
113
63
Durban South Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
@face2face

The Need for Non-technical Hermeneutical Procedures
A. Apathy Among Believers
This problem has been on my heart as a pastor and professor for several years. I have
been made painfully aware of the decline in general biblical knowledge among believers in our
14
day. This lack of knowledge has been the root cause of many of the problems in the
contemporary church. I know that modern believers love God as much as past generations have
loved Him and His Word, so what is the cause of the degeneration in our understanding, not
only of the content of Scripture, but what it means and how it is applicable today?
In my opinion a sense of frustration has caused the majority of Christians to become
indifferent and apathetic about studying and interpreting the Bible. This apathy is discernible
in several areas of modern life. One of the major problems is our cultural attitude of
consumerism. We as a people are accustomed to instant gratification of our every need. Our
culture has turned the “fast food” industry’s mentality into a cultural norm. We are accustomed
to a product being readily available and instantaneously consumed. Christian maturity based
on Bible knowledge and daily lifestyle cannot accommodate this cultural expectation. Bible
knowledge is only available by paying a personal price of prayer, persistence, training, regular
study, and personal application. In reality, most modern believers are on the fast track of
twenty-first century, materialistic America and are not willing to pay such a personal price.
Also, the non-biblical dichotomy between clergy and laity has accentuated the problem.
It almost seems that our “hired gun” mentality has relieved most lay persons of the sense of need
to study and understand the Bible personally. “Let the preacher do it” has become our mind set.
The problem with this mentality is, “What if the pastor misinterprets?” or “What if you change
pastors?” This apathetic attitude circumvents the biblical truth and the Reformation reemphasis
(Luther) of the doctrine of “soul competency” (1 Pet. 2:5,9; Rev. 1:6). It reinforces our “herd
society” tendency. It tends to focus spiritual responsibility away from ourselves and onto others.
Church leaders become intermediaries or gurus instead of “player coaches” (Eph. 4:11-12). Not
only have we as a culture divided life into the secular and the sacred, but we have delegated the
sacred to surrogates.
Another major cause for apathy among the majority of modern believers in the area of
Bible study is our growing modern trend toward specialization. Bible study has become the
technical domain of trained specialists. The principles and procedures are so complicated and
involved that one feels incompetent unless he has several PhD. degrees: linguistics, Greek,
Hebrew, hermeneutics, and theology. This introduces the danger of “modern gnosticism,”
which is spiritual truth available only from an intellectual elite. Of course, even the elite do not
agree. It seems that even technical skills do not bring consensus.
This brings us to the next reason for apathy, which is the multiplicity of interpretations.
Not only is one confronted with denominational differences, but even within denominations
there is a divergence of opinion. It is no wonder that the majority of believers are confused in
the face of such disagreement, which is usually presented in such a forceful, dogmatic fashion.
B. Dogmatism Among Believers
Is it any wonder that there is confusion and reluctance to become involved in the
interpretive process? Besides these previously mentioned external factors, there are several
15
internal ones. If there is an apathy about getting involved in Bible study, it almost seems that
once the decision is made to overcome that apathy, immediate polarization and exclusivism
results. The level of dogmatism among modern western Bible students is very high.
This seems to involve several factors. The first is often related to the spiritual tradition
in which one is raised. Often dogmatism is a learned response from our parents or church
teachers. This can be either a complete identification with their views and practices or the
complete rejection of their position. This transference, assimilation, or negative reaction is
usually unrelated to personal Bible study. Often our biases, presuppositions, and á priories are
passed on through families.
If parents do not stamp us with their spiritual views, then most assuredly our
denomination will. Much that we believe is not a result of personal Bible study, but of
denominational indoctrination. Today very few churches systematically teach what they believe
and why. This problem is affected not only by denominationalism, but by the geographical
location of the denominational church. As it is obvious that the age (post-modernity) in which
we live affects our belief system, so too, does our geographical location. Parochialism is as
significant as parental or denominational tradition. For over thirty years I have been involved
in Partnership Evangelism and have taken church members and students on mission trips to
work with my denomination’s churches in foreign countries. I have been amazed how
differently churches from the same denominational tradition practice their faith! This really
opened my eyes to the denominational, parochial indoctrination (not Bible reading) that has
affected all of us.
The second major cause of dogmatism among believers is related to personal factors. As
we are affected by time, place, and parents, so too, are we equally impacted by our own
personhood. This concept will be developed in some detail in a later section of this Textbook,
but it needs to be mentioned at the beginning how much our personality type, personal
experience, and spiritual gift affect our interpretations. Often our dogmatism could be
expressed by “if it happened to me it ought to happen to you” and “if it has never happened to
me, it should never happen to you either.” Both are false!
V. Basic Presuppositions About the Bible
At this point I need to be as transparent as possible and try to spell out my own operating
assumptions. If we are so affected by non-biblical factors, why is this Textbook not just one more in
the series? I am not attempting to get you to agree with me, but to provide a more consistent,
verifiable methodology for personal, non-technical Bible study. The methodology is not inspired, but
it is a developed ancient Christian model. My basic presuppositions are
A. The Bible, both Old and New Testaments, is from the one and only Creator, Redeemer God.
He gave it to us through human instrumentality so that we might know and understand Him and
His will for our lives (cf. 2 Tim. 3:15-17). It is absolutely authoritative.
Utley

Johann.
 

face2face

Well-Known Member
Jun 22, 2015
4,777
636
113
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
I appreciate scholarly work-and personally-my opinion-the teaching of my pastor Utley is way over your head-now notice @face2face I say this in love
It this that struck me the most Johann...you know what they call it, dont you?
 

face2face

Well-Known Member
Jun 22, 2015
4,777
636
113
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
@face2face

The Need for Non-technical Hermeneutical Procedures
A. Apathy Among Believers
This problem has been on my heart as a pastor and professor for several years. I have
been made painfully aware of the decline in general biblical knowledge among believers in our
14
day.
Take care it's not just knowledge Johann!

This lack of knowledge has been the root cause of many of the problems in the
contemporary church. I know that modern believers love God as much as past generations have
loved Him and His Word, so what is the cause of the degeneration in our understanding, not
only of the content of Scripture, but what it means and how it is applicable today?
In my opinion a sense of frustration has caused the majority of Christians to become
indifferent and apathetic about studying and interpreting the Bible.
True...however your example of copying and pasting chunks of commentaries is not going to teach them the skills to open the Word and read it in context. It might have a puffing affect on the poster but what is that worth?
This apathy is discernible
in several areas of modern life. One of the major problems is our cultural attitude of
consumerism. We as a people are accustomed to instant gratification of our every need. Our
culture has turned the “fast food” industry’s mentality into a cultural norm. We are accustomed
to a product being readily available and instantaneously consumed.
Copying large chunks of other peoples work is no different, it shows you havnt taken the time to study it for yourself and place it in your own words.
Christian maturity based
on Bible knowledge and daily lifestyle cannot accommodate this cultural expectation. Bible
knowledge is only available by paying a personal price of prayer, persistence, training, regular
study, and personal application. In reality, most modern believers are on the fast track of
twenty-first century, materialistic America and are not willing to pay such a personal price.
Also, the non-biblical dichotomy between clergy and laity has accentuated the problem.
It almost seems that our “hired gun” mentality has relieved most lay persons of the sense of need
to study and understand the Bible personally. “Let the preacher do it” has become our mind set.
The problem with this mentality is, “What if the pastor misinterprets?” or “What if you change
pastors?” This apathetic attitude circumvents the biblical truth and the Reformation reemphasis
(Luther) of the doctrine of “soul competency” (1 Pet. 2:5,9; Rev. 1:6). It reinforces our “herd
society” tendency. It tends to focus spiritual responsibility away from ourselves and onto others.
Church leaders become intermediaries or gurus instead of “player coaches” (Eph. 4:11-12). Not
only have we as a culture divided life into the secular and the sacred, but we have delegated the
sacred to surrogates.
Another major cause for apathy among the majority of modern believers in the area of
Bible study is our growing modern trend toward specialization. Bible study has become the
technical domain of trained specialists.
Precisely. My Logos library has 7000 books costing over $25,000 - imagine if I started posting volumes of these works most of which I dont agree with because I have studied to show myself approved - not approving of others falsehood.

The principles and procedures are so complicated and
involved that one feels incompetent unless he has several PhD. degrees: linguistics, Greek,
Hebrew, hermeneutics, and theology. This introduces the danger of “modern gnosticism,”
which is spiritual truth available only from an intellectual elite. Of course, even the elite do not
agree. It seems that even technical skills do not bring consensus.
This brings us to the next reason for apathy, which is the multiplicity of interpretations.
Not only is one confronted with denominational differences, but even within denominations
there is a divergence of opinion. It is no wonder that the majority of believers are confused in
the face of such disagreement, which is usually presented in such a forceful, dogmatic fashion.
B. Dogmatism Among Believers
Is it any wonder that there is confusion and reluctance to become involved in the
interpretive process? Besides these previously mentioned external factors, there are several
15
internal ones. If there is an apathy about getting involved in Bible study, it almost seems that
once the decision is made to overcome that apathy, immediate polarization and exclusivism
results. The level of dogmatism among modern western Bible students is very high.
This seems to involve several factors. The first is often related to the spiritual tradition
in which one is raised. Often dogmatism is a learned response from our parents or church
teachers. This can be either a complete identification with their views and practices or the
complete rejection of their position. This transference, assimilation, or negative reaction is
usually unrelated to personal Bible study. Often our biases, presuppositions, and á priories are
passed on through families.
If parents do not stamp us with their spiritual views, then most assuredly our
denomination will. Much that we believe is not a result of personal Bible study, but of
denominational indoctrination. Today very few churches systematically teach what they believe
and why. This problem is affected not only by denominationalism, but by the geographical
location of the denominational church. As it is obvious that the age (post-modernity) in which
we live affects our belief system, so too, does our geographical location. Parochialism is as
significant as parental or denominational tradition. For over thirty years I have been involved
in Partnership Evangelism and have taken church members and students on mission trips to
work with my denomination’s churches in foreign countries. I have been amazed how
differently churches from the same denominational tradition practice their faith! This really
opened my eyes to the denominational, parochial indoctrination (not Bible reading) that has
affected all of us.
Correct and many of these denominations have their Dr's and philisophical works they based their sermons on all of which is nonsense most of the time.
The second major cause of dogmatism among believers is related to personal factors. As
we are affected by time, place, and parents, so too, are we equally impacted by our own
personhood. This concept will be developed in some detail in a later section of this Textbook,
but it needs to be mentioned at the beginning how much our personality type, personal
experience, and spiritual gift affect our interpretations. Often our dogmatism could be
expressed by “if it happened to me it ought to happen to you” and “if it has never happened to
me, it should never happen to you either.” Both are false!
V. Basic Presuppositions About the Bible
At this point I need to be as transparent as possible and try to spell out my own operating
assumptions. If we are so affected by non-biblical factors, why is this Textbook not just one more in
the series? I am not attempting to get you to agree with me, but to provide a more consistent,
verifiable methodology for personal, non-technical Bible study. The methodology is not inspired, but
it is a developed ancient Christian model. My basic presuppositions are
A. The Bible, both Old and New Testaments, is from the one and only Creator, Redeemer God.
He gave it to us through human instrumentality so that we might know and understand Him and
His will for our lives (cf. 2 Tim. 3:15-17). It is absolutely authoritative.
Utley

Johann.
and that from childhood thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

It was refreshing to read this post Johann because its apparent you wrote it and I can sense your character and person through your words.

I can only encourage this approach going forward.

F2F
 

face2face

Well-Known Member
Jun 22, 2015
4,777
636
113
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Give it to me straight-or are we going to nit pick?
Johann.
It's the type of arrogance that comes from knowledge. It puffs up...its not given in a loving way to instruct people into the Word of God, to allow them to see its light. The knowledge you post is mostly the musings of men. I can give you many examples of this if you so desire.
F2F
 

Johann

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2022
8,588
4,871
113
63
Durban South Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
and that from childhood thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

It was refreshing to read this post Johann because its apparent you wrote it and I can sense your character and person through your words.

I can only encourage this approach going forward.

F2F
Actually, this was the very words from Utley-consider yourself blessed having a Logos bible software-there's a dearth of biblical resources where I am.
I just appreciated a post from @GRACE ambassador on soul sleep-biblical or not-a fantastic piece of work.
I can only foresee one or two things-either we work together-or not.
I am a poor man brother and don't have what you have-so don't criticize what I post-for the glory of Christ Jesus-not sounding my own trumpet.
Whether it be in my own words, using Scriptures-or using Utley-which I consider as biblically sound.
I can hold my own, by the grace of Christ Jesus F2F.
Johann
Precisely. My Logos library has 7000 books costing over $25,000 - imagine if I started posting volumes of these works most of which I dont agree with because I have studied to show myself approved - not approving of others falsehood.
I'm amazed you actually said it-you want to know what I would do with $25,000?
Where I am the Rand is useless compared to one dollar.
Don't be so quick to judge me brother.
Copying large chunks of other peoples work is no different, it shows you havnt taken the time to study it for yourself and place it in your own words.
You don't know me F2F-I have studied, not devotionally, and still studying the Scriptures for 30 years-my approach is different than yours-my character different than you- This is uncalled for.
True...however your example of copying and pasting chunks of commentaries is not going to teach them the skills to open the Word and read it in context. It might have a puffing affect on the poster but what is that worth?
I have, by the grace of God, all the necessary skills and tools at my disposal-and may I say this politely?-To hell with the "puffing affect"-this is for my edification and for the benefit of others.
You drilled me twice now-I would submit you look up Utley-since you have the dollars-peruse the site-and tell me you disagree.
I am benefitting from his teaching and listen to his sermons-for MY edification and growth in the gnosis of Christ Jesus OUR Messiah.
If you agree-throw out your Logos. You don't seem to be strapped for money-I am.
Yes?
Thanks
Johann.
 

Johann

Well-Known Member
Apr 2, 2022
8,588
4,871
113
63
Durban South Africa
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
It's the type of arrogance that comes from knowledge. It puffs up...its not given in a loving way to instruct people into the Word of God, to allow them to see its light. The knowledge you post is mostly the musings of men. I can give you many examples of this if you so desire.
F2F
Musings of men? Arrogance?
What YOU imply is that I sit and read commentaries all the time and too lazy to study!
Don't bother to reply-I had enough of this.
Johann.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amigo de christo

amigo de christo

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
23,408
40,003
113
52
San angelo
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Paul was not Chosen By Jesus to teach the History of Jewish OT Prophecy. Tho He did teach this Torah family Tree.

He was called to be the "Apostle to the Gentiles" and Deliver "The Gospel of the Grace of God", that defines the 'time of the Gentiles".
Actually you would be amazed at how many jewish synagogues paul entered into to preach the gospel to them .
Absolutely amazed . Now he was the main one to reach the gentiles .
but neither he nor peter preached a different gospel . Paul did not preach a different gospel to the jews
than he did to the gentiles . And peter , when he entered into the house of cornelious , A GENTILE
preached the same gospel he had always preached . THE ONE , THE ONLY gospel FOR BOTH JEW and GENTILE .
BELIEVEST THOU THIS . if not you better fast read the bible .
THERE are not TWO SEPERATE GOSPELS . one for the jews and one for the gentile .
THERE IS BUT ONE GOSPEL . and it goeth out to all , both jew and gentile . THERE SIMPLY IS NO OTHER GOSPEL
and there simply is no other NAME UNDER HEAVEN WHEREBY A JEW OR GENTILE can be saved .
Believest thou this . I SURE HOPE SO .
 

amigo de christo

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
23,408
40,003
113
52
San angelo
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Musings of men? Arrogance?
What YOU imply is that I sit and read commentaries all the time and too lazy to study!
Don't bother to reply-I had enough of this.
Johann.
Hit the trenches my friend . some folks accuse you of being too smart , they accuse me of being too dumb and uneducated
and they both attack the one and only gospel that we BOTH SING ALOUD .
Just a friendly reminder my friend .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marvelloustime

face2face

Well-Known Member
Jun 22, 2015
4,777
636
113
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Actually, this was the very words from Utley-consider yourself blessed having a Logos bible software-there's a dearth of biblical resources where I am.
I just appreciated a post from @GRACE ambassador on soul sleep-biblical or not-a fantastic piece of work.
I can only foresee one or two things-either we work together-or not.
I am a poor man brother and don't have what you have-so don't criticize what I post-for the glory of Christ Jesus-not sounding my own trumpet.
As you know, it's merely my observation - I think you would reach more with less commentary.

Whether it be in my own words, using Scriptures-or using Utley-which I consider as biblically sound.
I can hold my own, by the grace of Christ Jesus F2F.
Johann
No problem here!

I'm amazed you actually said it-you want to know what I would do with $25,000?
Thankfully I didn't fork out the 25K - I have a wife, 4 children and a large mortgage but I'm still rich in imperishable riches.

Where I am the Rand is useless compared to one dollar.
Don't be so quick to judge me brother.
Not judging Johann - I want to read "your" posts, but less interested in working through the garb.
You don't know me F2F-I have studied, not devotionally, and still studying the Scriptures for 30 years-my approach is different than yours-my character different than you- This is uncalled for.
Thumbs up!
I have, by the grace of God, all the necessary skills and tools at my disposal-and may I say this politely?-To hell with the "puffing affect"-this is for my edification and for the benefit of others.
You drilled me twice now-I would submit you look up Utley-since you have the dollars-peruse the site-and tell me you disagree.
I am benefitting from his teaching and listen to his sermons-for MY edification and growth in the gnosis of Christ Jesus OUR Messiah.
If you agree-throw out your Logos. You don't seem to be strapped for money-I am.
Yes?
Thanks
Johann.
Often people will go to those supposedly more knowledgeable but as I've found the Word of God holds its own secrets and the hidden things belong to God and reveals them to His own.

Utley might not be one of His.

F2F
 

amigo de christo

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
23,408
40,003
113
52
San angelo
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Musings of men? Arrogance?
What YOU imply is that I sit and read commentaries all the time and too lazy to study!
Don't bother to reply-I had enough of this.
Johann.
Yep . stay DUG in that bible my friend . The GOD INSPIRED words of TRUTH are meat for the lambs .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marvelloustime