Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Translated: "Okay, so I lie in the message I preach. Doesn't the end, souls being won to Christ, justify the means (lying) I employ?"
Very honest and very bold of Paul. We know that he preached a gospel (salvation by faith alone) completely contrary to Jesus' gospel (salvation and works) and reiterated by James, His brother (salvation and works). James should have had better knowledge of Jesus' message than Paul, James having lived with Jesus and hearing Him preach.
Well, at least Paul comes clean about his lie. The problem is 99% of Christians are so ignorant about what is really in the Bible they have no clue. I was recently talking to my cousin, a passionate fundy, about the fallacy of Matthew's "He shall be called a Nazarene" and she had absolutely no idea about the verse. Her response, "Really, I didn't know that."
Wow. Just wow. You have taken this verse completely out of context and twisted it to present a falsehood. Paul was not talking about himself lying. He was demonstrating what someone else would say (such as half the folks on this forum would, I imagine) about lying to advance the kingdom. Read scripture in its entirety before misstating that "Paul lied".
Romans 3:7-8 (NIV) [SIZE=2]7 [/SIZE]Someone might argue, “If my(this "someone") falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I(this "someone") still condemned as a sinner?” [SIZE=2]8 [/SIZE]Why not say—as some slanderously claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is just! (emphasis mine)
Paul is presenting an argument from others that doing bad, i.e. lying, evil, even if it advances the kingdom is okay. Paul refutes this by saying condemnation against such persons is justified. Do you see the picture now??
Wow. Just wow. You have taken this verse completely out of context and twisted it to present a falsehood. Paul was not talking about himself lying. He was demonstrating what someone else would say (such as half the folks on this forum would, I imagine) about lying to advance the kingdom. Read scripture in its entirety before misstating that "Paul lied".
Romans 3:7-8 (NIV) [SIZE=2]7 [/SIZE]Someone might argue, “If my(this "someone") falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I(this "someone") still condemned as a sinner?” [SIZE=2]8 [/SIZE]Why not say—as some slanderously claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is just! (emphasis mine)
Paul is presenting an argument from others that doing bad, i.e. lying, evil, even if it advances the kingdom is okay. Paul refutes this by saying condemnation against such persons is justified. Do you see the picture now??
Blessings.
Looking at the quote in context . . . I cannot agree with you, mams. I do not get the impression he was talking about anyone but himself. Thrill makes an interesting and valid point. It is even consistent with Paul's avowed flexibility to be whatever his audience required him to be to effectively deliver the Gospel. I can even see how some of the posters here might have come to believe their "lying for Jesus" strategy might be legitimate . . . though I strongly disapprove of it.
Romans 3:1-10 King James Version (KJV)
1What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
5 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man)
6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?
7 For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?
8 And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.
9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Looking at the quote in context . . . I cannot agree with you, mams. I do not get the impression he was talking about anyone but himself. Thrill makes an interesting and valid point. It is even consistent with Paul's avowed flexibility to be whatever his audience required him to be to effectively deliver the Gospel. I can even see how some of the posters here might have come to believe their "lying for Jesus" strategy might be legitimate . . . though I strongly disapprove of it.
Romans 3:1-10 King James Version (KJV)
1What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
5 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man)
6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?
7 For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?
8 And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.
9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Thanks much, Mystic, for that illumination on Paul's not-so-modest I-am-justified-in-lying-all-I-want-if-it-get's-God-glorified way of doing business.
One of the key giveaways which I missed which you very astutely picked up on:
Quote:
For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory
Translated: "If my lie has increased the reach of God's truth, why do you find fault with my method? I lie; God is glorified; His word is spread through my lie. At the end of the day more souls have been won to Christ."
This is classic "use any means, even dishonest ones, to accomplish my goals, because at the end of the day it's results that counts and that nullifies the sin". Ministers use the lie of tithing to bludgeon their congregations into emptying their purses into the collection basket; con men use it to justify stealing from old ladies on pensions in order to afford that penthouse mansion. In the minds of the ministers and the con men their means to the end are just as valid as Paul's.
No one comments on the other verse I provided
Quote:
In every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Jesus is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice. Philippians 1:18
You gotta hand it to Paul, he admitted so many times his dishonest approach to getting the gospel spread, and he slept like a baby doing it because he was convinced in his somewhat twisted mind that winning souls was all that counted.
And as usual, the fundies will find ways to justify his questionable behavior. After all, the Bible is "inerrant", don't ya know.
thrillobyte, I am not a great fan of most of Paul's writing--primarily because fundamentalists have misapplied it so frequently.
But with your quote of Romans 3:7--OUT OF CONTEXT--you have become a fundamentalist with a different objective and Vizio has every right to call you on it.
Let's review the entire section of Romans 3:5-8 (NIV)
The entire message of those few verses in contrary to what you have declared. Paul was making a defense against such idiotic arguments--one cannot claim innocence by being evil because it makes God appear greater and more truthful.
I agree with your thoughts concerning James being more likely to have understood the message of Jesus than did Paul. But resorting to fundamentalist tactics of lifting verses from context is not the mark of a scholar.
It seems your translation says "some might argue" at the beginning, while other translations don't.
what does the original say or imply?
I think worshiping ink and desired interpretation is such great folly. It would be folly from a god to hide in books instead of making itself always as abundantly clear as the air or a real parent.
Quote:
Let's review the entire section of Romans 3:5-8 (NIV)
But if our righteousness brings out God's righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing His wrath upon us? (I am using a human argument.) Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world? Someone might argue, "If my falsehood enhances God's truthfulness and so increases His glory, why am I condemned as a sinner?" Why not say---as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say---"Let us do evil that good may result?" Their condemnation is deserved.
Quote:
Romans 3:1-10 King James Version (KJV)
1What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. 5 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man)
6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?
7 For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?
8 And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.
9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Which version shall we believe? the one where the word is righteous instead of unrighteous?
The one that includes "some might say" or the one that doesn't?
Is it taking vengeance in general or bringing wrath upon us specifically?
The NIV actually says UNrighteousness, so you quoted it wrong. Reading both, Paul is definitely says that our weakness glorifies God and that us being Sinners and liars makes God greater than us and that Lying for God is great if it spread's God's message. Also he seams to imply that those who do evil against the damned "that good may come" are just as good as any Jew or Gentile, all are sinners.
Paul is condemning both Jews and Gentiles in Favor of equalizing the Christians (Latter Day Jews) that he began to control and fleece, including the radical terrorist ones that were destroying statues and vandalizing pagan Temples and murdering people like Hypatia.
Last edited by LuminousTruth; 01-03-2014 at 02:39 AM..
Look.... I wouldn't post here, if it didn't seem to me that Paul (for whom I hold no brief at all) is being misunderstood.
He is making an argument about how the Jews have an 'advantage' in observing the law, even if only righteousness through Faith (by which he has the meaning 'faith in Jesus' up his sleeve) can save and unrighteousness effectively nullifies what the law is supposed to do (sinning makes the circumcised 'spiritually' uncircumcised).
Now he is talking about himself as part of Judaism, so when he talks about 'my falsehood' he means 'if a Jew such as myself were to be false - he means act unrighteously; falsely towards the mosaic law; then, if thereby, that 'abounds to God's glory' why would the unrighteousness be considered sinful?'
This is of course, wretched logic and a crappy argument, and Paul in fact loses sight of what he wanted to prove - that Jews have an advantage in being Jews, and goes on to show that they have no advantage, but a burden of a Law that gains them nothing and imposes (as Luke - Acts 15,10 puts into Peter's mouth) 'a yoke...which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear'.
Paul is crafty rather than clever, and a twister of the Torah rather than an explainer. But I think it is necessary to clearly comprehend what he is actually trying to argue. In context. Quotemining is a pernicious method of polemic, no matter who is doing it.
Look.... I wouldn't post here, if it didn't seem to me that Paul (for whom I hold no brief at all) is being misunderstood.
He is making an argument about how the Jews have an 'advantage' in observing the law, even if only righteousness through Faith (by which he has the meaning 'faith in Jesus' up his sleeve) can save and unrighteousness effectively nullifies what the law is supposed to do (sinning makes the circumcised 'spiritually' uncircumcised).
Now he is talking about himself as part of Judaism, so when he talks about 'my falsehood' he means 'if a Jew such as myself were to be false - he means act unrighteously; falsely towards the mosaic law; then, if thereby, that 'abounds to God's glory' why would the unrighteousness be considered sinful?'
This is of course, wretched logic and a crappy argument, and Paul in fact loses sight of what he wanted to prove - that Jews have an advantage in being Jews, and goes on to show that they have no advantage, but a burden of a Law that gains them nothing and imposes (as Luke - Acts 15,10 puts into Peter's mouth) 'a yoke...which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear'.
Paul is crafty rather than clever, and a twister of the Torah rather than an explainer. But I think it is necessary to clearly comprehend what he is actually trying to argue. In context. Quotemining is a pernicious method of polemic, no matter who is doing it.
Doesn't sound very Holy-Spirit inspired to me. Remember fundies swear on a stack of Bibles that the Bible is the Holy-Spirit-breathed, inspired Word of God--without any type of error, or fault or guile or anything imperfect. It IS perfect, according to them. Are these the tactics the Holy Spirit uses to win converts?
It doesn't sound Holy spirit inspired to me, either, which is why I see it as Paul writing a thesis (Romans) to reason his way to where he wants to get to: the Law is not necessary for Gentiles: only Faith in Jesus.
While he may have claimed that Jesus gave him all this stuff during their coffee -morning in the Third heaven, in fact it is pretty clear that he is working it all out for himself in a very mundane rationalizing way.
I'm just saying that passage isn't really to be taken as an admission that he is lying.
One of the things that I've learned here that surprises me, is how much Paul is responsible for what we call Christianity, rather than Jesus.
And what a dishonourable person he seems to have been.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I wouldn't post here, if it didn't seem to me that Paul (for whom I hold no brief at all) is being misunderstood.
which is why I see it as Paul writing a thesis (Romans) to reason his way to where he wants to get to: the Law is not necessary for Gentiles: only Faith in Jesus. 
