Quote:
Originally Posted by zeek
Am I correct in concluding from this statement that you have dismissed Richard Gaffin Jr.'s, thesis that 15:45 is about the Holy Spirit and if so why?
|
For the most part, yes. Just reading the verse as it is, in context, it is too coherent with the core of the larger discussion and easy to understand as clearly part of that discussion to give much credence to that kind of idea that is so out of sync with the thrust of Pau's larger discussion. Is it definitely wrong? Can't quite say that. But it is close enough to definitely wrong that I do not find rejecting it to be out of bounds.
It is, to me, like concluding that the broken window in my car and the missing CD (that used to be on the passenger seat) is the result of a very small microburst. It hurled a large rock against the window and then sucked out the only unattached thing inside.
Possible? Remotely.
Plausible? No.
And that it my take on "the life-givign spirit must be the Holy Spirit."
Are Edwards' comments on the Trinity pausible? Maybe not hugely, but much more than Lee's version of 15:45.