In a practical sense, I have to agree on this. I’m not sure if that’s the reality behind everything.
I’ve been reading some more on the new perspectives on Paul, and particularly focusing on a <a href="http://www.thepaulpage.com/Summary.html"summary written by Mark W. Mattison and provided by The Paul Page, and a response to that summary by Chan Lai Ping. I’m going to use the list of key points in the response as a starting point….
I’ve been thinking a bit about this common statement, and I think the answer is both “yes” and “no.” And therein lies a significant problem, if not several! I recall an online discussion some years ago with a gentleman who maintained that one should always take what he called the plain meaning of the text….
I’m finally getting back to my series on Hebrews. I apologize for the delay. I will also be posting new entries soon in the series on Isaiah 24-27 and Genesis, where we will be going to chapter 6. In the meantime . . . I’m taking a very short piece of a passage for this…
19Now then, brethren, we have boldness to go into the holiest place through the blood of Jesus, 20which he placed as a living way through the curtain, not previously available, which is his flesh. 21Jesus is also a great priest over the household of God. 22So let’s come with true hearts and full assurance of…
… at who am i? (Sorry I’m late with the link!)
… at Ancient Hebrew Poetry. We could call this one the “he did it his way” edition. I’m personally quite favorable to the idea of a bit of variety in approaches to the carnival, including this one.