Friday, May 27, 2011

Original Meaning Translation: Romans 8:1-8

I don't know if anyone likes these translations enough for me to do much more than the spot translations I've done to help myself, but here's another one.

Previous ones include:
Romans 1:1-7
Romans 1:8-10
Romans 1:11-15
Romans 1:16-17
Romans 5:12-17
Romans 7:13-25

And now, Romans 8:1-8:

8:1 Then now [there is] no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus, 2 for the "law" of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has freed you from the "law" of Sin and death. 3 For with regard to the impossibility of the Law (in that it was weak through the flesh), God condemned Sin in the flesh when he sent his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh as a sin offering* 4 so that the righteous expectation of the Law might be fulfilled in us who are walking not according to flesh but according to Spirit.

5 For those who are in the category of flesh are minded toward the things of the flesh, but those who are in the category of Spirit [are minded toward] the things of the Spirit. 6 For the mindedness of the flesh [is] death, but the mindedness of the Spirit [is] life and peace. 7 Therefore the mindedness of the flesh [is] hostile toward God, for it is not subject to the law of God, for [that] is not even possible. 8 And those who are in the flesh are not able to please God.


Angie Van De Merwe said...

I have a "problem" with "flesh talk", as it so often means that one denies what is human, or any desire itself, setting up a "cruciform" cultural value, which does not value every life alike.. (those in authority set up the structure and those "at the bottom" of the authority structure, just "trust and obey" the leaders. It is not a balancing of power structure, but a hierarchal type of leadership model, which is good as long as it is a co-operative vision and effort.).

I recognize that the Church (Catholic) used to "teach" virtues. But, virtue still has to be understood within one's own personal values/reasoning about life...otherwise, it is another authoritarian domination of another's conscience on the basis of appealing to "greater good" or "common purposes", that might not be self-chosen ones...

Rick said...

What are your thoughts about the use of an article with "Spirit" in most verses here, yet in v. 4 and v. 5 it does not have the article?

Angie Van De Merwe said...

Let's go to what most in the Christian movement are so afraid and ashamed about; sex.

Sex is a natural desire. And its expression in the Christian community has a particular understanding, within the confines of marriage between two people. The definition of marriage is "at a crossroads". Will marriage be between a man and a woman or between to equal partners, who choose to love and respect one another mutually?

The Christian understanding of what marriage is has developed. Many in primitive cultures have more than one "wife". And then, these wives have been understood as "commodites" for men's appetites, instead of equal partners.

After the idea developed that man and woman were to be the definition of marriage, then, sex was given a "purpose", which was procreation.

All of these developments were "biblical ones"...

But, with the women's right to vote, and equal rights overall, there was a challenge to how the marital relationship was to marriage was understood to be between the two partners as to define the relationship, other than in fundamentalists camps that still taught "headship"...authority.

Now the challenge to the Church, since they left the literal for the metaphorical, is whether there will be an acceptance of same sex marriage, with sex being understood as a way to express natural affection and not just for procreation purposes!

How did Paul understand or where did his information come from about marriage, as he does suggest celibacy is desired....but if one burns...But, Hebrews views marriage as a good gift....which was the Jewish undestanding of marriage..

Ken Schenck said...

Rick, I have assumed that Paul has the Holy Spirit in view, without defining what the Holy Spirit is for Paul. I have never done a thorough study, but I have a sense that articles are often omitted in prepositional phrases as a matter of Greek style. Perhaps I am wrong to think that.

Angie Van De Merwe said...

BTW, I don't see any difference in what Paul did and what the State Department does in nation-building, or foreign service officiers, etc...diplomats,...these are the real jobs in the real world that carry out what was a spiritualized (or was it a conceptual message) message...Paul (a conceptual message to develop men's cognitive capacities), or Augustine (a spiritualized, "Kingdom of God" message)...

Angie Van De Merwe said...

James MacGrath is talking about the Trinity (not in those words) on his blog site at Patheos....

Angie Van De Merwe said...

maybe I should say the issue of Christology and Jesus as the "God/Man"...or was he? History or myth..

Ken Schenck said...

Angie, have you ever noticed that mailmen are kind of like mice distributing cheese to other mice, which reminds me of how Amazon has distribution centers around the nation, which are within boundaries, which is different than city states where there are kind of boundaries, but really unless you can take over the city it isn't defeated?