dog-on

Edit: Let me try that again.

The questioner asks Price, on his Bible Geek Show, if kata sarka can refer to how one reads the scripture in contrast with reading the scripture via the holy spirit.

In other words, he is saying that Paul is contrasting his view with that of the Jews and not that he accepts a dual nature of Christ.

Any thoughts?

dog-on

I see that my post is garbled.


1Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God— 2the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures 3regarding his Son, (when the scriptures were read according to the flesh) was a descendant of David, 4and who (now that the scriptures are read according to the spirt) was declared with power to be the Son of God[b] by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.

Could Paul have been making a distinction between how the Jews read the scriptures, (kata sarka) and how he reads the scriptures, (kata pnuema)?

In other words, can the phrases kata sarka and kata pneuma actually be referring to how one understands the scriptures?

Clivedurdle

Isn't this what Pagels argues in the gnostic Paul?

dog-on

I haven't read that book.

If this is indeed what Paul meant, it would resolve a lot of questions.

dog-on

Would such an understanding clarify Paul's specific meaning where he, repeatedly, says this?

according to the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past,

Is the mystery revealed by understanding the scriptures via the spirit instead of understanding the scriptures via the flesh?

Doug Shaver

What was Price's answer?

dog-on

He thought that it was interesting.

Here is the link to the podcast:

http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/4697329

It is the first question he discusses.

aa5874

What version of translation are you using? You cannot just re-write the passages to suit a desired outcome.

The phrases you have inserted in brackets have completely changed the interpretation of the passages.

KJV Romans 1:1-4 - From the KJV translation, "according to the flesh" and "according to the spirit of holiness" are not directly related to how one reads the scriptures.

dog-on

Listen to the link I provided.

EarlDoherty

This translation does not seem likely on several grounds. It implies that Paul is rejecting the "kata sarka" reading and promoting the "kata pneuma" reading. But there is no sense of contrast or preference between the two but rather of complementary features, just in different categories. There is no evident negativity in regard to the former, and Paul nowhere else shows an interest in maintaing that there is something wrong with regarding the Son as "of David's seed" (regardless of what he means by that). Both are dependent on verse 2 which declares that what follows is part of the gospel of God about the Son as found in scripture. If he meant to reject one in favor of the other, that would have to be made clearer, as no casual reader would be led to understand such an intention. Also, the passage sounds like a snippet of liturgy, which is why many scholars have suggested it is pre-Pauline.

Earl Doherty