Fortigurn, apologies for not responding to this one for a while, i thought there were a few other things more pressing to wade into, and you were quite busy elsewhere!
I take full responsibility for you being confused with my argument, and I take further responsibility for not clearing it up in this post.
nothing like a bit of defeatism to start things off.
1) It's easier to make short posts than long posts.
Yay... you may have noticed i have a similar theory... repitition really does get us nowhere (which is why i probably won't respond to this any more after this post, unless something new comes into it).
Apologies for the length of this one - it was necessary to clear up all the misunderstandings which seem so prevalent. Rest assured that unless some new material is brought into the discussion, and my original question addressed, i have no intention of continuing to repeat myself.
2) I prefer the reader to do the work - it's called thinking - instead of spelling it all out and putitng it on a plate for them
Believe me, as a Maths and CompSci tutor at uni, i am in total agreeance. There are those who end up doing the work for the student - i call that bad teaching, because the student learns nothing more than how to spunge off others.
You're confused because you don't see that the wisdom in verse 8 is the wisdom in verse 4
Not strictly true. I'm confused because i can see that the wisdom Paul offers in verse 8 is not precisely equivalent to the knowledge
in verse 4, whereas you seem unable to make that distinction. It is only one small subset (ew, the more i post on here, the more mathematical terminology i start using!!
), a part of the greater whole. The knowledge Paul speaks of in verse 4, if thought about properly, gives rise to that which he reveals in verse 8. Verse 7 supports this, when Paul explains that the reason people's consciences were affected upon eating the meat was because they had not yet fully grasped the "knowledge" he was speaking about earlier. As you quoted:
v 7: Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol
Facts are, you contradicted me when i said the knowledge was that contained in verse 4-6, and effectively said "actually, the knowledge referred to in verse 7 is that contained in verse 8". The post after, you said you had "quoted" the knowledge in verse 4. You did no such thing, you didn't even mention verse 4. I've pointed out this contradiction, and you have flatly denied it. I provided you with the evidence of this in my last post, which you totally ignored. This is not conducive to effective discussion.
"You don't understand" followed by a contradictory statement, doesn't fool anyone.
No, the problem is that you don't see that verse 7 is connected to verse 4.
Surely you must be joking here? :oh: My argument is based on that connection - i recall spending significant energy trying to demonstrate this point to you. Observe:
Unfortunately, to assert that verse 8 is the 'knowledge' Paul was speaking about in verse 7, is stretching the text. You can quote all the versions you want, since they all say exactly the same thing, but none of them help your case because it totally ignores the preceding verses:
<dir>v1:we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.
v2:And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.
v4-6:we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.</dir>
It is these verses which are directly followed by: Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge:
It doesn't matter which of those versions you wish to quote, all of them except the CEV connects verse 7 with the preceding verses with either a 'but' or a 'however'. The 'knowledge' Paul speaks about in verse 7 can ONLY be the knowledge revealed in verse 4.
What is important to note here is that the existence of gods other than Yahweh is not the issue. No one has a problem with that -
No one has a problem with that????? Fort, if no one had a problem with that, Paul wouldn't have started off the chapter saying "knowledge" this, "knowledge" that, "we know" this, and "we know" that, and then immediately followed it up with "but not everyone does." The 'we' is contextually obviously talking about Paul and those who were in the position of not having the problem...
...and that an idol is nothing in the world, 'we know'. Despite that, the idol is still an issue to some - which is why Paul has to deal with 'meat offered to idols'.
Gurny, if the idols were "nothing in the world" to everyone, then it couldn't be "still an issue to some". Paul quite clearly says that "not all have that knowledge". You highlighted the wrong sections of the quote. "As concerning the eating of meats offered to idols" is not a piece of knowledge, it is simply Paul introducing the topic. And in introducing the topic, Paul is attempting to educate the Corinthians, who couldn't understand the problems their b&s had
that the problem went deeper than simply "meats offered to idols". That was nothing more than an outward manifestation of a mental struggle. When Paul starts a clause with "we know" and then three verses of knowledge later refers to "not all have that knowledge", he is talking about the same piece of knowledge. It really can't be any plainer.
Firstly, the greatest commandment defined: Matt 22:37 - "You shall love the Lord you God with all you heart, and with all your soul, and with all you mind."
29And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:
30And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.
Whatever... you asked for the "greatest commandment" so i gave you the greatest commandment. It still doesn't address the issue - to acknowledge the existance of something else does not require you to devote any energy towards it...
Besides which, you still haven't dealt with the 1 Cor 8 passage contextually.
If you want another example, have a look at this:
1 Corinthians 11:
13Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
14Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
15But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
16But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
What does verse 16 refer to?
I must say, i'm struggling to work out the relevance of this. I cor 11 isn't by any means the passage under discussion, nor does it bear any relationship to the topic. I think i remember making some comment about this (in support of you) on EE a while back. Unfortunately, my computer is in another city, so i don't have a copy. Any idea what i said then?
Anyway, i'd appreciate it if you didn't go bringing in other arguments until you've dealt with my current ones. So far, you've done nothing other than state self-contradictory counter-assertions without providing support, and made no attempt to rebutt my argument, other than saying what amounts to "you're wrong". Until you do so, i'll just continue with some of the other threads... :whistle:
Edited by Phil, 29 August 2003 - 04:36 PM.