![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2019\/08\/Paul14.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
This is an installment of\u00a0my replies to a series of articles on the epistle to the Romans<\/a> (written by St. Paul) by\u00a0Dr. David Madison<\/strong>: an atheist who was a Methodist minister for nine years: with a Ph.D. in Biblical Studies from Boston University. His summary article is called,<\/span> \u201cBad Bible Theology: Paul\u2019s Letter to the Romans: Let me count the ways\u2026that Paul got it wrong\u201d<\/a> (2-26-18). He devotes a paper to each chapter. Unless he repeats himself (a bad habit of his) or descends to sheer biblical skepticism (which I have less than no<\/em> interest in), I will reply to all.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n The<\/span> introduction<\/a> is basically a catalogue of rank insults, where he calls St. Paul<\/span> \u201ca crank\u201d<\/span> and a<\/span> \u201cdelusional cult fanatic\u201d<\/span> and<\/span> \u201cthe prototype for Christian crazies\u201d and<\/span> \u201can obsessive-compulsive mediocre thinker and bad theologian\u201d and<\/span> \u201can embarrassment.\u201d\u00a0He adds:<\/span> \u201chow can anyone take this guy seriously?\u201d That about covers the \u201ccontent\u201d there.\u00a0Bears poop in the woods, brats throw fits, squirrels walk telephone lines, and the prevalent anti-theist brand of atheists insult Christians. Ho hum. What else is new?<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Thus far, I have counter-replied to 32 of Dr. Madison\u2019s critiques, without hearing one peep back from him as of yet (28 days\u2019 total time, starting on 8-1-19). This certainly doesn\u2019t suggest to me that he is very confident in his opinions. I know he\u2019s still alive and kicking, because I\u2019ve seen him write other<\/em> posts during this same period (example one<\/a> \/ two<\/a> \/ three<\/a>).<\/span><\/p>\n Dr. Madison\u2019s words will be in<\/span>\u00a0blue\u00a0<\/span>below.<\/span><\/p>\n *****<\/p>\n Dr. Madison calls his critique of Romans chapter 8, \u201cThe Force Field that Protects REAL Christians: Forget the Merit Badge. Go for the Spirit Shield\u201d<\/a> (7-7-17).<\/span><\/p>\n It would not be hard to come up with a list of the Top Ten Worst books or chapters of the Bible, and I suggest that one of the chapters that would get mixed reviews at best is Romans 8. Many Christians would give it thumbs-up because one of the apostle Paul\u2019s famous \u201cHallmark moments\u201d is found at the end of Romans 8 (vv. 37-39):<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cNo, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n But the 30-some verses that lead up to this eloquent assurance don\u2019t get as much traffic, and, I suspect, would get substantial push-back from most of the folks who fill the pews on Sunday morning. These people live in the real 21st century world\u2014which wasn\u2019t even supposed to happen, according to Paul\u2014and would not be able to identify with his despondent outlook.<\/span><\/p>\n Yeah, the above passage sounds downright \u201cdespondent\u201d<\/span> doesn\u2019t it? Like virtually all atheist apostates, Dr. Madison is determined to see only what he wants<\/em> to see, and little or nothing else. We continue examining his \u201ccaricature-tour\u201d of the epistle of Romans: truly an Alice-in-Wonderland<\/em> world that is shaped according to Dr. Madison\u2019s whim and fancies and wild imaginings.<\/span><\/p>\n Paul is not good news. And the Book of Romans is chock full of bad theology.<\/span><\/p>\n Thanks for that information. Whew! That was a close<\/em> one. What would we do<\/em> without David Madison advising us that the Apostle Paul is an idiot and raving lunatic? We\u2019d all be lost at sea without a life jacket.<\/span><\/p>\n I\u2019m pretty sure that most Christian sensibilities about living a good life would collide head on with Paul\u2019s view of the world, 8:5-8:<\/span><\/p>\n \u201cFor those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit.\u00a0To set the mind on the flesh is death<\/b>, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For this reason\u00a0the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God<\/b>; it does not submit to God\u2019s law\u2014indeed it cannot, and\u00a0those who are in the flesh cannot please God<\/b>.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Where does this hostility to the flesh come from? At the end of chapter 7 (vv.18-24), Paul demonstrates what an anguished soul he was, grievously wounded by low self-esteem:<\/span><\/p>\n As I alluded to last time, Paul\u2019s use of the word flesh here and elsewhere is in a very specific, non-literal sense. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia<\/em><\/span> (\u201cFlesh\u201d<\/a>) explains:<\/span><\/p>\n Frequently the distinction is made to emphasize the weakness or inferiority of the flesh, as opposed to the superiority of the spirit<\/span> (Isaiah 31:3<\/a>;\u00a0Matthew 26:41<\/a>;\u00a0Mark 14:38<\/a>;\u00a0Romans 6:19<\/a>). . . . ]<\/span><\/p>\n 6. Applied to the Carnal Nature:<\/span><\/p>\n Flesh in the sense of carnal nature (sarkikos<\/em>, \u201ccarnal\u201d; the King James Version uses sarkinos<\/em> in<\/span>\u00a0Romans 7:14<\/a>). Human nature, being inferior to the spiritual, is to be in subjection to it. If man refuses to be under this higher law, and as a free agent permits the lower nature to gain an ascendancy over the spirit, the \u201cflesh\u201d becomes a revolting force (<\/span>Genesis 6:3,12<\/a>;\u00a0John 1:13<\/a>;\u00a0Romans 7:14<\/a>;\u00a01\u00a0Corinthians 3:1,3<\/a>;\u00a0Colossians 2:18<\/a>;\u00a01\u00a0John 2:16<\/a>). Thus, the fleshly or carnal mind, i.e. a mind in subjection to carnal nature, is opposed to the Divine spirit, who alone is a sufficient corrective, Christ having secured for us the power of overcoming<\/span> (Romans 8:3<\/a>), if we manifest a deep desire and an earnest endeavor to overcome<\/span> (Galatians 5:17,18<\/a>).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Dr. Madison shows that he understands this, later on in his article: \u201cPlease note, by the way, that Paul\u2019s focus with the word \u201cflesh\u201d probably wasn\u2019t even sex. By this he means the whole range of corporeal\/material reality\u2014as opposed to the spiritual.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \u201c\u2026the law of sin that dwells in my members\u201d? \u201c\u2026this body of death\u201d? Poor Paul was obsessed about death\u2014and finding a way to get out of it. According to Paul, all of creation was under a death sentence\u2014not because the universe is expanding and will dissipate into nothingness\u2014but because sin, a power that pervades everything, corrupts everything. As his tortured mind hammered out his dismal theology, Paul was sure that God\u2019s optimism in Genesis 1:31 had been cancelled: \u201cGod saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good.\u201d Maybe once upon a time, but no longer. In Romans 5:12 he explains that sin and death came into the world through Adam, and creation has been \u2018groaning\u2019 ever since.<\/span><\/p>\n It\u2019s called original sin<\/a>. It doesn\u2019t follow that Paul is in despair<\/em>. This very chapter provides the remedy<\/em>, and it is a completely triumphant, positive, sunny outlook indeed. Dr. Madison must<\/em> know this (he couldn\u2019t possibly<\/em> be so ignorant as to not<\/em> know), so what he does is very clever: that is, from the cynical, sophistical viewpoint that he has adopted. <\/span><\/p>\n He quickly dismisses the glowing ending as a<\/span> \u201cHallmark moment\u201d<\/span>\u00a0(which he appears to think is an exception<\/em> to Paul\u2019s usual \u201cdark \/ black\u201d outlook) and then immediately goes back to Romans 7: the passages that led up to Romans 8, which gives the solution<\/em> to the age-old miseries and problems of human sin described in the previous chapter. Dr. Madison wants no part of the answer and solution (having rejected God, and in bondage to sin as a result). So he regurgitates his silly and fallacious arguments about Romans 7.<\/span><\/p>\n If Paul has a<\/span> \u201ctortured mind\u201d<\/span> and<\/span> \u201cdismal theology\u201d<\/span> then so do all<\/em> Christians, who believe in original sin or some type of fall from the original blissful Edenic state of mankind. We\u2019re all in that same boat; thus, Dr. Madison is revealing his bigotry, not just towards Paul, but towards all<\/em> of us who follow historic orthodox Christian teaching.<\/span><\/p>\n Yes, of course, God\u2019s original creation was good. We\u2019re<\/em> the ones who rebelled and brought in sin. Dr. Madison cites Genesis 1:31 (which no one disagrees with). But he purposely omits other<\/em> passages shortly afterwards in Genesis:<\/span><\/p>\n Genesis 6:5<\/strong> (RSV)\u00a0The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.<\/span><\/p>\n Genesis 6:11-12\u00a0<\/strong>Now the earth was corrupt in God\u2019s sight, and the earth was filled with violence.\u00a0[12] And God saw the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Genesis 18:32<\/strong>\u00a0Then he said, \u201cOh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak again but this once. Suppose ten are found there.\u201d He answered, \u201cFor the sake of ten I will not destroy it.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Genesis 19:13 <\/strong>\u201cfor we [God\u2019s two angels: v. 1] are about to destroy this place, because the outcry against its people has become great before the LORD, and the LORD has sent us to destroy it.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Genesis 19:24-25<\/strong>\u00a0Then the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomor\u2019rah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven;\u00a0[25] and he overthrew those cities, and all the valley, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground.\u00a0<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Dr. Madison acts as if St. Paul were the first or the only person to note the sad, sordid history of man\u2019s sin, wickedness, and rebellion. It\u2019s ludicrous. It\u2019s no different than it ever was. Has he never heard of Hitler, Stalin, and Mao?<\/span><\/p>\n Maybe I\u2019m wrong, but I just don\u2019t think most Christians are in tune with such gloom. This is not the heartwarming faith they bargained for.<\/span><\/p>\n True, the wide extent of ignorance of theology can never be underestimated. Christians are generally as poorly educated as they ever were. But Christian theology<\/em> holds to original sin. This is what Christianity teaches. It\u2019s only \u201cgloom\u201d<\/span> in terms of the continuing dominance of sin in actuality. But Paul (like all good Christian evangelists) provides the solution<\/em><\/strong> to the gloom. <\/span><\/p>\n It\u2019s right in front of Dr. Madison, but he wants to ignore<\/em> it; obviously because he doesn\u2019t believe<\/em> it. But whether he believes it or not, intellectual honesty would or should compel him to at least accurately interpret Paul\u2019s message<\/em>. He picks and chooses what he will deal with, which is a silly and dishonest method, unworthy of any serious thinker, whether atheist, Christian, or of any other belief-system.<\/span><\/p>\n They show up at church to worship and enjoy community, to affirm that Jesus is their Lord and Savior, and that believing in his resurrection is key to their salvation: \u201cGod so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son\u2026\u201d But they are also interested in enjoying life as much as possible; they are fully engaged in jobs, hobbies, sports, vacations, charities\u2014achieving as much contentment and as many happy outcomes as possible. Paul\u2019s advice to his contemporaries was, \u201cPut all such things aside. Focus instead on dwelling in the spirit, to be ready for the coming of Jesus, any day now.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n This is an absurd caricature of Paul\u2019s teaching, as I demonstrated in<\/span> installment #6<\/a>.<\/p>\n Unless I\u2019m much mistake[n],\u00a0Christians rejoice in marriage and enjoyment of the flesh. They would balk at Paul\u2019s dark thoughts: \u201cthe mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God\u201d\u2026 \u201cthose who are in the flesh cannot please God.\u201d It would be a mistake to think that Paul is just making a slam against sex here, although he viewed sex with distaste. In I Corinthians 7 he says it is best for a man not to touch a woman, and only begrudgingly does he say it\u2019s okay for couples to have sex: . . .\u00a0So, away with sex! \u2026if he had his way.<\/span><\/p>\n Paul is not<\/em><\/strong> against sex or marriage, as I covered in<\/span> installment #1<\/a>.<\/p>\n It\u2019s no surprise that Paul shows no interest whatever in art, literature, theatre and amusements.<\/span><\/p>\n Really? Funny, then, that he is aware of Greek figures in literature and art (poetry), theatre, and philosophy, as shown in his discourse on Mars Hill with the philosophers in Athens and other passages in 1 Corinthians and his letter to Titus. In Acts 17:28, he cited Cretica<\/em>, by<\/span>\u00a0Epimenides<\/a> (7th or 6th century BC), a Greek philosopher-poet (whom he also cites in Titus 1:12) and the Greek poet<\/span> Aratus of Cilicia<\/a> (d. 240 BC); expanding upon their understanding as well (17:29):<\/span><\/p>\n Acts 17:28-29<\/strong>\u00a0for `In him we live and move and have our being\u2019;\u00a0as even some of your poets have said, `For we are indeed his offspring.\u2019 [29]\u00a0Being then God\u2019s offspring, we ought not to think that the Deity is like gold, or silver, or stone, a representation by the art and imagination of man.<\/span><\/p>\n Titus 1:12<\/strong>\u00a0One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, \u201cCretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Since he cited both of them by memory (quoting the first half of the fifth line, word for word, of Aratus\u2019 astronomical poem Hymn to Zeus<\/em>), this certainly indicates a knowledge of secular art and literature. Paul also cited the Greek comic dramatist<\/span> Menander<\/a> (d. c. 290 BC):\u00a0\u201cBad company ruins good morals\u201d (1 Cor 15:33), from his play, Thais<\/em>. So much for having<\/span> \u201cno interest whatever in . . . amusements.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Thus, it is no surprise that Dr. Madison shows no interest in accurately portraying what Paul was interested in, being dead wrong<\/em> once again, and all because he made a rather stupid universal negative assertion that has now been refuted. Paul was from Tarsus.<\/span> A Christian article<\/a> provides a background on this city:<\/span><\/p>\n Tarsus was a prime city of the fertile plain of East Cilicia, in Southeast Asia Minor. It was an important and culturally rich city. The Roman Empire favored the city of Tarsus. It became the capital of the province of Cilicia, following Pompey\u2019s victories (67 B.C.). Notable Roman leaders visited the city. The orator Cicero took up residence in the city (51-50 B.C.) and Julius Caesar visited it in 47 B.C. Strabo, the Greek geographer and historian who wrote in the early part of the first century, tells of the enthusiasm of its inhabitants for learning, and especially for philosophy. In this respect, he says, Tarsus surpasses Athens and Alexandria and every other university town (Geographica<\/em> 14.5.13). Tarsus was also famous for noted Sophists such as Archademus and Antipar, and it was known for well-known philosophers like Plutiades and Diogenes (Geographica<\/em> 14.5.14). While Paul received his education in Jerusalem, the place of his birth undoubtedly exerted influence.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n His only obsession\u2014and it\u2019s a massive one\u2014is to make sure that he has achieved the status of being \u201cin Christ,\u201d because that\u2019s the only way he can get out of dying. Romans 8:11: \u201cIf the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his Spirit that dwells in you.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Sounds to me like that is the best possible obsession that anyone could have. May it mightily consume all of us!<\/span><\/p>\n Now let\u2019s take a look again at Paul\u2019s famous Hallmark Moment at the end of Romans 8, i.e., \u201cFor I am convinced that neither death, nor life, etc. etc. will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.\u201d These words of assurance are NOT addressed to the world at large; he says this to the select few in the congregation at Rome who have achieved the status of dwelling in Christ. . . .\u00a0This text is so commonly read at funerals as if Paul had issued a come-one, come-all Jesus-loves-you statement to the world at large. Not at all.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n This is beyond ludicrous. Obviously, it\u2019s written to Christians, but equally obvious is the fact that anyone who decides to become<\/em> a Christian (the offer is open to all) can also<\/em> partake of these blessings. Much ado about nothing . . .\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n So anyone who doesn\u2019t dwell in the spirit of Christ is out of luck: this assurance is not meant for those outside the cult.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Here Dr. Madison contradicts himself. He already conceded (in an ultra-rare moment of actually being charitable and fair to St. Paul), that Paul didn\u2019t teach such exclusivism. He did this in his commentary on Romans chapter 2: which I cited in<\/span> my counter-reply<\/a>:<\/p>\n