Great talk. I agree that Paul's primary focus was on substitutionary atonement which leads us directly to justification by faith alone in Christ alone. Paul also wanted to make plain that Christ died for All people and not just for Israelites.
I was watching this discussion and to my surprise or lack of it, he did not mention the document 4QMMT once, the whole NPP is based on that document and why Romans 3:29 and Galatians is read in that light, I don't know if Simon Gathercole is reformed but if he is then that would be the reason why I'm not surprised.
This was not a Lecture by Simon dealing in depth. It was an interview with the interviewer pressing him for answers the interviewer had. You could tell Simon was at first a little uncomfortable with some questions. Simon is Anglican. NT Wright has referred to his work and is supportive of it. Simon studied for his PHD under Dunn as is mentioned in the video.
@@fleetwd1 again the core of this discussion was the reading of romans 3, you can bypass 4QMMT on that point, you will misrepresent the NPP, NT Wright always accused those who oppose the NPP of misrepresenting it, here we have evidence of that.
@@fernandopaulus9088 He may make that statement which I can not attest to. I will concede your attesting to it. However, I have video where Tom Wright affirms Simon's work and says it has a place in theology. He also says that he has mainly questioned the degree that this aspect of theology has effected some who stress the point to the neglect of some others important themes in Paul. Something he says Simon's work does not neglect. I am sure Wright based his evaluation of Simon's work on far more than what you find in this interview.
Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology) by Simon Gathercole, Craig Evans, et al. | May 19, 2015 Amazon listing www.amazon.com/Defending-Substitution-Atonement-Studies-Theology/dp/0801049776/ref=sr_1_2?crid=20X7M93M02ASI&keywords=simon+gathercole&qid=1687307002&s=books&sprefix=Simon+Gath%2Cstripbooks%2C131&sr=1-2
What he said at "what does that mean? That means verse 29" is entirely off. Glad he doesn't hold to this perdpective if this is their best proof text. 29 is a potential rebuttal for 28 which is thrn answered. This has the same structure as "[stuff about grace] ... but should we then sin that grace may abound? Certainy not." Paul clearly means that faith is how all will be justified, with or without law and is answering potential objections beforehand.
This messenger of the Lord is preparing the church for Jesus' imminent return and warning the world. He is sharing the prophetic book of Habakkuk is playing out. He is warning a nuke and tidal wave to NY that he prophesied years ago is about to happen th-cam.com/video/wUXDnchMMuk/w-d-xo.html Cory Barbee channel
Great talk. I agree that Paul's primary focus was on substitutionary atonement which leads us directly to justification by faith alone in Christ alone. Paul also wanted to make plain that Christ died for All people and not just for Israelites.
I was watching this discussion and to my surprise or lack of it, he did not mention the document 4QMMT once, the whole NPP is based on that document and why Romans 3:29 and Galatians is read in that light, I don't know if Simon Gathercole is reformed but if he is then that would be the reason why I'm not surprised.
This was not a Lecture by Simon dealing in depth. It was an interview with the interviewer pressing him for answers the interviewer had. You could tell Simon was at first a little uncomfortable with some questions.
Simon is Anglican. NT Wright has referred to his work and is supportive of it. Simon studied for his PHD under Dunn as is mentioned in the video.
@@fleetwd1 again the core of this discussion was the reading of romans 3, you can bypass 4QMMT on that point, you will misrepresent the NPP, NT Wright always accused those who oppose the NPP of misrepresenting it, here we have evidence of that.
@@fernandopaulus9088 He may make that statement which I can not attest to. I will concede your attesting to it. However, I have video where Tom Wright affirms Simon's work and says it has a place in theology. He also says that he has mainly questioned the degree that this aspect of theology has effected some who stress the point to the neglect of some others important themes in Paul. Something he says Simon's work does not neglect.
I am sure Wright based his evaluation of Simon's work on far more than what you find in this interview.
What is the book name?will get in India?
Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology)
by Simon Gathercole, Craig Evans, et al. | May 19, 2015
Amazon listing www.amazon.com/Defending-Substitution-Atonement-Studies-Theology/dp/0801049776/ref=sr_1_2?crid=20X7M93M02ASI&keywords=simon+gathercole&qid=1687307002&s=books&sprefix=Simon+Gath%2Cstripbooks%2C131&sr=1-2
Thanks
What he said at "what does that mean? That means verse 29"
is entirely off. Glad he doesn't hold to this perdpective if this is their best proof text.
29 is a potential rebuttal for 28 which is thrn answered. This has the same structure as "[stuff about grace] ... but should we then sin that grace may abound? Certainy not."
Paul clearly means that faith is how all will be justified, with or without law and is answering potential objections beforehand.
This messenger of the Lord is preparing the church for Jesus' imminent return and warning the world. He is sharing the prophetic book of Habakkuk is playing out. He is warning a nuke and tidal wave to NY that he prophesied years ago is about to happen th-cam.com/video/wUXDnchMMuk/w-d-xo.html Cory Barbee channel
Have you heard about the Qumranic document of 4QMMT? The primary evidence for the NPP reading?
this is total wrongheaded mindslime.