Hopefully one the learned members can help me out with this. I have been having a friendly debate with an Arminian friend, and we are on to Total Depravity. I was looking at Romans 1:18-32 as a scriptural illustration of the doctrine. It is my sense, and belief, that Paul gives a general description here of mankind apart from Christ, so what he describes is the basic state of unregenerate man. IN the KJV, NKJV, and NASB, 1:18 has:
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
As you can see in this NASB rendering, the comma following men, which seems to indicate that Paul has a general "man" in view, as in humanity. However, the NASB update, NIV, RSV all have no comma, and there is no comma follwing men in the original greek in the interlinear bible I looked at. To me, the insertion or deletion of the comma can change the whole sense of the passage. If there is no comma follwing men, then Paul would appear to referring to specific individuals who manifest the traits he goes on to speak about. With the comma, men becomes much more general- at least in my understanding. So, can anyone help me out with why certain translations have included the comma or not, and for the ones that have, what is the warrant ofr doing so? I am not a Greek scholar, or even really a dabbler, so I have no idea.
Commas do not appear in the Greek manuscripts, so their placement is a matter of judgement on the basis of the apparent meaning of the text.
It is true that putting the comma after "men" can produce a more general understanding of "men" in English: With the comma, we might understand (1) the wrath of God is revealed against all men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness; vs. without the comma, (2) the wrath of God is revealed against those men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness.
But, for argument's sake, let's suppose that number (2) is the meaning Paul intends to convey. We shall then ask, which men are those? And we need only turn to ch. 3, beginning with v. 9 [NASB updated]:
Quote
What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; as it is written, "There is none righteous, not even one; There is none who understands, There is none who seeks for God; All have turned aside, togther they have become useless; There is none who does good, not even one." "Their throat is an open grave, With their tongues they keep deceiving," "The poison of asps is under their lips"; "Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness"; "Their feet are swift to shed blood, Destruction and misery are in their paths, And the path of peace they have not known." "There is no fear of God before their eyes."
Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law [comes] the knowledge of sin.
Of course, it isn't true that each individual is guilty of every particular deed Paul mentions: all are not murderers any more than all men trade the natural use of the woman to lie with men. But the effect is rather as James writes, that "whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one [point], he is guilty of all" (Jas. 1:10).
Last edited by CovenantInBlood; Wed Apr 04, 20071:00 AM.
Kyle
I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
Thanks for that! I suppose either way in light of Romans 3 the comma does not matter. Or, in light of Romans 3, the comma is appropriate <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />.
I agree that not all men do the things that Paul describes in the verses following 18, but I was prepraed to point out to my friend that Paul starts from a base point that all unregenerate men "suppress the truth in unrighteousness" and mankind in general then proceeds down the path where filled with homosexuality, idolatry, murder etc etc, which I think we can see is the general tenor of our times, and which was the general tenor of Paul's day as well.
At any rate, thanks, I think I got unnecessarily hung up on the comma, but my Arminian friend is a sharp guy and I was anticipating the objection on that point <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Taking CovenantInBlood's comparison of Romans 1:18 to related Scriptures (always the proper approach in cases like this) a step further, the following Scriptures come to mind:
Quote
Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God actually say, 'You shall not eat of any tree in the garden'?" : But the serpent said to the woman, "You will not surely die." : Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this that you have done?" The woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." (Genesis 3:1,4,13 ESV)
Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God. (John 8:44-47 ESV)
The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. Therefore God sends them a strong delusion, so that they may believe what is false, in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
But we ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers beloved by the Lord, because God chose you as the firstfruits to be saved, through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth. (2 Thessalonians 2:9-13, ESV)
These and passages too numerous to quote buttress the fact that all outside of Christ deny, as did Adam, the truth of the Word of God through unbelief. That is why Paul's phrase stands at the head of his argument running from 1:18 to 3:20 that "there is none righteous"; rather than describing the subset of the exceptionally wicked, whose deeds he goes on to detail in 1:19-32, it describes all in Adam, all of whom are described throughout the following verses.
Suggestion, if your friend raises objections, challenge him along these lines:
1) if the people of 1:18 "who suppress the truth in unrighteousness" are a mere subset of humanity and not all, are the deeds described in 1:19-32 representative expressions of the unrighteousness of this group of people?
2) if so, have you ever committed any of the approximately 40 specific categories of sin* listed in those verses?
3) if so, you have acknowledged yourself to be a suppressor of the truth in unrighteousness.
4) if not, reading 2:1-3 will require you to acknowledge that the very fact that you distinguish between those guilty of God's wrath--based on their deeds which you judge--and yourself, is proof sufficient to acknowledge that you have yourself suppressed, in unrighteousness, the truth about your own lack of righteousness before God.
Let us know what develops. Will pray that his eyes be opened--to the truth.
* 40 categories of sin
refusal to honor God refusal to give thanks to God futile thinking darkened hearts claiming wisdom becoming fools exchanging the glory of God for images impure lusts dishonoring of bodies exchanging the truth about God for a lie worshipping the creature rather than the Creator serving the creature rather than the Creator dishonorable passions homosexual acts refusal to acknowledge God debased mind doing what ought not to be done unrighteousness evil covetousness malice envy murder strife deceit maliciousness gossip slander hatred of God insolence haughtiness boasting invention of evil disobedience to parents foolishness faithlessness heartlessness ruthlessness doing what is known to deserve death giving approval to those who do what deserves death
Thanks Paul, that is a nice summation of the list of sins which makes it clear that everyone has done at least one of those things, and almost certainly more than that!
The discussion is ongoing, more today; he is hung up on Hebrews 6:4-6, and based on that verse rejects eternal security, and based on that, finds that the whole reformed theology falls apart. No eternal security means no election, etc., which I agree with, but don't believe Hebrews 6 means you can lose salvation. However, it is a tough passage, and I haven;t been entirely satisfied with the answers that I have found from Reformed theologians.
It's a universal rule of hermeneutics that you NEVER formulate a doctrine based upon a less than clear text against myriad texts which are clear on the subject. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />
On that note, take a look at the several articles in the following section which deal with "Perseverance of the Saints" and other related articles for some good "ammunition". <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Heb 6:4-6 merely shows how far a hypocrite can go and yet not actually be saved. If it mentioned someone who was born again, or regenerated, or a child of God, then one could make a case for a fall from grace, but it doesn't.
Just take him back to John 3:16 and 1 John 5:13. Once one has everlasting/eternal life it can't end otherwise it would not be everlasting. With the doctrine that denies eternal security, one can never HAVE everlasting/eternal life. Then the whole game is over.
Quote
1 John 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
As to Hebrews 6, you might consider the parable of the sower (Mk. 4:1-20) -- evidently, not all faith is saving faith; also, take a look at 1 Jo. 2:19.
Kyle
I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
It's a universal rule of hermeneutics that you NEVER formulate a doctrine based upon a less than clear text against myriad texts which are clear on the subject. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />
I tried that argument, actually. At this point, while he is a good friend I think he's just being wilfully obstinate at this point. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/Banghead.gif" alt="" />
But, I will have a closer look through some of those articles, Pilgrim, and see how many weapons I can load up
Others have made excellent suggestions to you. But I thought I would mention something that helped me convince a friend of the truths of TULIP. I brought over to his house the Amazing Grace (The History and Theology of Calvinism) DVD. As we were watching it his arguments slowly became weak and he now is a 5 point Calvinist. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/ClapHands.gif" alt="" /> You can find out more about this DVD here
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/pilgrim/pil_sig2.gif)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/pencil.gif)
