Posts
I am struggling to understand the real meaning of this, so I need to compile a comparison of the similarities and differences to flush out what he is really trying to say here. The chart is extracted from Romans 5:12-21.
| Through one man sin entered into the world |
|
| Through sin death entered and spread to all men because all sinned |
|
| Sin was in the world before “the Law” |
|
| Sin is not imputed when there is no Law |
|
| Death reigned over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam |
|
| Adam is a type of Jesus |
|
| By the transgression of one many died | The grace of God abounds to the many by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ |
| Judgment arose from one who sinned | The free gift arose from many transgressions |
| – Resulting in condemnation | – Resulting in justification |
| By the transgression of one death reigned through the one | Much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ |
| Through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men | Through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men |
| Through one man's disobedience the many were made sinners | Through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous |
| The Law came in so that the transgression would increase | Where sin increased, grace abounded all the more |
| Sin reigned in death | Grace reigns through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord |
My mind must not be perceiving correctly here and must be missing something. Even after lining up all these things side by side it seems to me like they are more parallel than different. I am sure that it has a lot to do with my culture and its effect on how I perceive the concept of “contrast” and “comparison” in contrast to the culture that formed the mind of the Hebrews that is confusing me. When I look at this chart it strikes me as being very parallel instead of being different. Of course the parallels are from opposite extremes, but they seem to be opposite parallels if that makes sense. So I am still musing over what is meant by “the free gift is not like the transgression” and “the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned”.
Maybe I need more time and more insight from others. I suppose I could go research a commentary but that is about the last thing I want to do. It feels like being programmed to simply reflect someone else's thoughts and beliefs instead of discovering truth myself. But on the other hand it could offer some suggested ways of viewing things that I have not yet thought of, so in that way it might prove useful.
Any input?
I've had to read this one over a couple of times this week. I like the fact that you wrestle with the text. Too many people are quick to consult a commentary or another's opinion before taking the time to prayerfully and meditatively wrestle. Therefore, you never cease to challenge and encourage me.
ReplyDeleteBut, don't get me wrong, I love reading commentaries. They do have a place. Unfortunately, though, one can shop for a commentator to support any view they wish to have. There are so many out there. One first and foremost needs to be like a Berean in Acts who searched the Scriptures to see if the things Paul taught them was in fact true (Acts 17: 11). Wrestling is good, there is no place, however, for laziness. Keep persevering.
Thank-you so much for your thoughts on this. I believe that commentators have something to contribute to our understanding just like our own blogs are contributing to the understanding of those perusing them. Commentators also often have the advantage, if used appropriately, of a better picture of the original context concerning the language, culture and history surrounding the original text.
ReplyDeleteAt the same time I have to admit that I almost never read a commentary anymore about any texts that I am studying. Since I have learned the methods of inductive study and have come to believe that the Holy Spirit is quite interested in opening the Scriptures to anyone willing to take the time and have an open heart, I have not had time to check with the commentaries to view their opinions of what I am reading. Mostly this is due to lack of time but also I find it less confusing sometimes.
On the other hand, the few times I have gone to check what others that I respect have said about a text that I have spent a lot of time unpacking first, I have been pleasantly surprised how similar our findings are in some cases and usually find further ideas that I had not yet seen which only stimulated my interest even more.
But the most important reason I believe we should study for ourselves first is that when the Holy Spirit reveals a truth to us directly we have a much deeper sense of ownership of the truth than when it came second-hand. It also carries a great deal more conviction as a result and tends to affect the life more efficiently.