Examining "A More Christlike Word"
by Brad Jersak
Day 87
“For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough.” (Paul’s concern from 2 Corinthians 11:4)
|
The False Filter |
The Biblical Filter |
|
The word OR the Word |
The Word THROUGH the word |
The purpose of
the BJs’ writings is to demoralize people’s faith in the authority of Scripture
as the breathed-out words of God. They continue the serpent’s question in the
garden, “Did God actually say…?” to replace what God said with what the “evil
people and imposters” are peddling for unjust gain.
Ending
the Rhetoric on Rhetoric (p. 227ff)
I have
some very good news. I just skimmed the whole section on rhetoric from pages 227-236 and I do NOT need to comment on everything he claims there. Why?
Because telling us how ancient worldlings used rhetoric does not dictate how Jesus
and the apostles used it.
However, because BJ is using his teaching on rhetoric to dismiss what
Paul says in the passage in II Thessalonians 1:3-10, before we look at what
Paul said, let’s challenge what BJ is claiming about rhetoric to make sure that
when we read Paul’s words, we are receiving them as the breathed-out words of
God, not the not-literal rhetoric of the BJs.
|
BJ’s Claim |
Monte’s Response |
|
“Now if Paul elsewhere overrides the language of retributive violence
with Christ’s call to patiently endure and forgive persecutors (as he had
been forgiven!), why appropriate this retribution rhetoric at all? Retributive
‘rhetoric’ – yes, that is our first clue” (p. 227). |
No, Paul did NOT override God’s call to judgment in other places. We
already saw that this claim was bogus. Plus Jesus NEVER has called us to “forgive persecutors”. Go ahead,
show me the verse speaking of “persecutors” where Jesus taught us to forgive
them. And I’m already challenging the “clue” that calling something “rhetoric”
changes the meaning of what is written in God’s word. Bogusness. And no
rhetoric can change what that means! |
I need
to interject here that BJ is already twisting what “rhetoric” means to suit his
agenda, so let’s look at what rhetoric means and how BJ distorts it.
|
BJ’s Claim |
Monte’s Response |
|
BJ’s definition of “rhetoric”. “‘Rhetoric’ refers to the art of persuasion used in speeches or
sermons – methods that orators and preachers apply as they seek to change
minds, hearts, and behavior” (p. 228). |
If that is the definition, it has no bearing on whether or not
the person is telling the truth. It refers to the stylistic devices used to
make a view persuasive to the hearers. It is not inherently true or false,
but a description of how a person communicates their message. |
|
BJ’s Claim |
Monte’s Response |
|
“Rhetoric is for those who don’t say what they mean or mean what they
say” (p. 228). |
We are again back in the “Says Who?!” department. This is actually bogus. Rhetoric cannot assess whether the person
meant what they said or said what they meant. It looks at what stylistic
devices were used to be persuasive. Just because a writer takes time to pick
words and phrases already known and accepted by his readers does not mean he
is being false in what he is saying. When Paul spoke to the Greeks through
his understanding of Greek culture and thinking, and spoke to Jews through
Jewish culture and thinking, he was telling everyone the same things, but
using rhetorical connections that the different groups would attach to more
easily. To suggest that if Paul used rhetorical language it meant that he
didn’t mean what he wrote is to be dishonest and deceptive once again. |
I
skimmed through his explanations of what rhetoric includes because it’s just
explaining what rhetoric is as understood by others but says nothing about how
Jesus and the apostles used rhetoric themselves. However, I could only get to
page 233 before I need to point out another bogus claim.
|
BJ’s Claim |
Monte’s Response |
|
“Knowing the types of rhetoric the apostles used helps us distinguish
between calculated emotional appeals and basic instruction” (p. 233). |
Bogus. No, you do NOT know what types of rhetoric the apostles used, or
whether something they did that fits the boxes of rhetorical speech were the
same as what they were doing with their expressions. Who knows if they were
or weren’t, my point is only that the claim that BJ knows is false. He doesn’t.
And how he tries to write off the letters to the churches as studies
in rhetoric is totally bogus as well. He only wants to continue his question
of, “Did God actually say…?” and now uses his understanding of rhetoric to
claim that God’s word doesn’t mean what it says. |
|
BJ’s Claim |
Monte’s Response |
|
“That’s the power of Spirit-filled rhetoric. That’s the nature of the
New Testament Epistles” (p. 235). |
BJ has no authority to say that someone’s message was “Spirit-filled
rhetoric”, but I am in no place to judge if someone else was Spirit-filled
either! However, it is dishonest and deceptive to then throw in the conclusion
that the New Testament Epistles were built around rhetoric when no such
evidence has been shown. |
|
BJ’s Claim |
Monte’s Response |
|
“Since they do, we are expected to recognize the rhetoric (just as we
are meant to recognize poetry, parables, or symbolic visions) and understand the
flattery, threats, or pathos at some level as nonliteral, while not
dismissing their important meaning as ‘empty’” (p. 236). |
SOOOO… BOGUS!!! First of all, it is only subjective to read in whether we think an
author was using rhetoric in any particular way. Second, it is a BJ-centered assumption that “they do” (use rhetoric in
the way he claims) and that we “are expected” to “recognize” it. Third, rhetoric does NOT require treating what is spoken “at some
level as nonliteral”. This is a BJ insertion that is NOT part of rhetoric. |
This
section on rhetoric is one more bogus claim by BJ to make it appear that
something in the Bible he doesn’t like could be taken another way than what is
written. My contention is that using rhetoric would not make something “nonliteral”.
Rhetoric is aimed at persuasive communication, but that does not mean Paul is a
corrupt politician saying whatever he needs to say to get votes. The apostles
were not communicating to persuade people of things that were not true. So the
idea that if we can box a certain aspect of a letter into something that
matches a rhetorical focus that must mean that part of Paul’s letter wasn’t
literal is not necessary to rhetoric. There would need to be some other reason
to think that Paul didn’t say what he meant or mean what he said.
Now, to try to keep this objective, I am looking at the definitions of rhetoric that come up on a search right from my Word document. Here they are:
1. “Rhetoric is the language you use to communicate your writing’s core message.” “Rhetoric is language that’s carefully constructed to persuade, motivate, or inform the reader or listener about the speaker or writer’s position.” (Grammarly)[1]
2. “speech or writing intended to be effective and influence people:” (Cambridge Dictionary)[2]
3. “speech or writing that is effective and persuasive.” (American Dictionary)[3]
4. “Rhetoric is the art of persuasion through communication. It is a form of discourse that appeals to people’s emotions and logic to motivate or inform. The word ‘rhetoric’ comes from the Latin ‘rhetorica,’ which comes from the Greek ‘rhetorikos,’ meaning ‘oratory.’” (Masterclass)[4]
5. “Rhetoric (/ˈrɛtərɪk/) is the art of persuasion. It is one of the three ancient arts of discourse (trivium) along with grammar and logic/dialectic. As an academic discipline within the humanities, rhetoric aims to study the techniques that speakers or writers use to inform, persuade, and motivate their audiences.[1] Rhetoric also provides heuristics for understanding, discovering, and developing arguments for particular situations. (Wikipedia)[5]
I hope we can see that rhetoric is about how to communicate persuasively. As one who is obviously trying to communicate persuasively to get people to turn from Brad Jersak’s false teachings, I can say that I have never studied rhetoric as a way to persuade people. I live by Jesus’ words that his sheep will hear his voice and follow him, so I just want to tell people about Jesus, and about my love for the breathed-out words of God in Scripture. If anyone sees facets of rhetoric in this, it does not mean I tried to use them.
The
bottom line is that even if Jesus and the apostles did follow what was
understood as rhetoric back in the day (it dangers on the subjective for anyone
to claim they know exactly how often or how strongly), using rhetoric does not
mean someone’s teaching is non-literal. And, as I showed in the last two or
three days of Journal journeys, it is very clear even in Jesus’ parables when
he moves from the allegorical illustration to the real-life application.
So, with this clarified that BJ is being dishonest
to suggest that using rhetoric implies a non-literal meaning to what is written
in Scripture, I’m going to go back to the passage that BJ claims was rhetoric
and look at it the way it is written. I will begin by considering it the
breathed-out words of God written down by a man who did not pen II
Thessalonians by his own will, but was carried along by the Holy Spirit to
write down God’s words. These words as designed by God to teach us, reprove us,
correct us, and train us in righteousness, and I am going to examine them with
that expectation.
It
should be noted that, with a biblical view of inspiration, since the words of
Scripture are breathed out by God, BJ must add God to his list of persons he is
accusing of relying on his version of rhetorical speech when God is the
perfection of communication and would NEVER say something he didn’t mean or
mean something he didn’t say!
I need
to interject something. I just realized that, although BJ spent considerable
pages telling us about the use of rhetorical devices throughout the centuries,
he never did address what Paul said in this text! He showed the readers the
text, and, without dealing with anything Paul said, spent so many pages talking
about rhetoric as if he was proving what Paul said about God’s judgment on
sinners must be taken as “non-literal” simply because some people see rhetoric
in what Paul wrote. However, since rhetoric is simply referring to the study or
art of persuasive language, all we can accuse Paul of is trying to be
persuasive in communicating the gospel and discipling the church, something
against which there is no law!
II
Thessalonians 1:3-10 (NASB).[6]
|
II Thessalonians 1:3 |
Monte’s Response |
|
We ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers and sisters,
as is only fitting, because your faith is increasing abundantly, and the love
of each and every one of you toward one another grows ever greater. |
I’m not testing for rhetorical devices or how this fits the various
facets of what is understood as rhetoric. I’m only looking for any sign that Paul
is using some figure of speech that would make what he says “non-literal”.
This is the claim of the BJs, that God’s word cannot be taken literally (that it
says what it means and means what it says). For this verse, I can only say that I hope BJ does NOT think Paul is
being non-literal about his thankfulness for how the believers are growing in
their faith and their love. |
|
II Thessalonians 1:4 |
Monte’s Response |
|
As a result, we ourselves speak proudly of you among the churches of
God for your perseverance and faith in the midst of all your persecutions and
afflictions which you endure. |
I also hope BJ is not twisting what was happening to the early
Christians as if their persecutions and afflictions were non-literal just
because Paul's personableness in speaking with the Thessalonians might fit some
aspect of rhetoric. I contend that Paul is writing from his heart as carried
along by the Spirit so that he is expressing what the Spirit is leading him
to express of himself in genuine love and concern for the churches in what
they truly are facing of trials and tribulations. Nothing about this smacks
of being non-literal. It is real life through and through. |
|
II Thessalonians 1:5 |
Monte’s Response |
|
This is a plain indication of God’s righteous judgment so that you
will be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you indeed are
suffering. |
Hmmm… it appears that even God likes the “plain” reading of Scripture!!! What Paul is introducing is that “God’s righteous judgment” is at work
the same way we have seen it all through the Scriptures. This righteous
judgment of God is using the present sufferings to prepare them for the
return of Christ where “mercy triumphs over judgment” for the believer, and
the persecutions and afflictions are being noted by God to be avenged on the
unbelievers before the Great White Throne of Jesus Christ.[7] |
|
II Thessalonians 1:6 |
Monte’s Response |
|
For after all it is only right for God to repay with affliction those
who afflict you, ESV: “since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction
those who afflict you,” |
God himself considers it “right” or “just” to repay the unrepentant
with the same afflictions they afflicted on God’s people. That is EXACTLY
what we see throughout Scripture. It is God’s justice. His judgment against
sinners is always holding hands with his mercy towards the repentant. BJ so
desperately wants us to believe his “did God actually say…?”, but what Paul
is saying here is so similar to what we see in the Hebrew Scriptures Jesus and
the apostles endorsed that there is no way we should be believing the BJs
that cherry-picking rhetorical devices somehow turns the clear and plain
reading of the text into something non-literal that can be explained away. I
know God’s word says these deceivers will keep on deceiving and being
deceived, but it raises the hair on the back of my neck (anyone want to tell
me what rhetorical device I just used) to see these evil men and imposters making
good money (or is it bad) peddling their version of the poison-in-the-pudding
(there’s another one) words of God. |
|
II Thessalonians 1:7-8 |
Monte’s Response |
|
and to give relief to you who are afflicted, along with us, when the
Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming
fire, |
This also is completely consistent with the way God’s justice is
pictured throughout the Hebrew Scriptures. The same pillar of cloud and fire
that destroyed the Egyptians gave relief to the people of God who had been
afflicted by the Egyptians. It is the way of God. And it is so clearly stated
here that there is no possible way that a rhetorical device magically turns
these words non-literal. I would also question whether the use of the expression “repay
with affliction” in the previous verse is non-literal merely because it
supports God’s judgment against sinners while the word “give relief” (yes,
one word in the Greek) is literal since it is a positive word towards the
saints. I would also hope that Paul’s talk about Jesus being revealed from
heaven is not non-literal, since it is the hope of the church, “our blessed
hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ”
(Titus 2:13). And we can’t write off his mention of “His mighty angels in flaming
fire” since that is what Jesus himself said, “Then will appear in heaven the
sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and
they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and
great glory. And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and
they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the
other” (Matthew 24:30-31). So far, Paul is teaching us through his letter to the Thessalonians
how to think about our seasons of persecution and affliction. As Asaph in
Psalm 73 went into the sanctuary and got alone with God so he remembered the
final destiny of the wicked, so Paul is reminding God’s people of the church
that God is just, and he will most certainly carry out his judgment on their
persecutors, saving some because of the judgment already poured out on his
Son, and letting others bear his justice against them as they have chosen.
But there is nothing non-literal about the return of Jesus Christ our Lord to
judge the lost and gather his elect to himself forever. |
|
II Thessalonians 1:8 |
Monte’s Response |
|
dealing out retribution to those who do not know God, and to those who
do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. |
“dealing out” is “inflicting” in the ESV. It means “to give (make) v.
— to cause to happen or be responsible for” (BSL). Oh my, “Houston, we have a
problem!” God breathed out a word that makes HIM responsible for
RETRIBUTION!!! And “retribution” (“vengeance” ESV) means, “righteous punishment n. —
the disadvantageous or painful consequences of a failure to keep some moral
standard; especially as a failure to keep God’s moral requirements” (BSL).
What is amazing is that this is EXACTLY what God already said about himself, “Beloved,
never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written,
‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord’” (Romans 12:19 with a direct
quote from (drum roll please)… DEUTERONOMY!!!). So, what Paul says here in II Thessalonians 1:8 is the same as what he
said in Romans 12:19 which is the same as what God said in Deuteronomy 32:35
and yet BJ wants us to believe Paul was borrowing from contemporary oratory
styles to say something in such clear words that BJ can tell us is
non-literal because he doesn’t like it that God judges sinners?! I feel like pleading with you, the reader, to look at this for
yourself and see where Paul is saying ANYTHING that doesn’t match what is
written from one end of Scripture to the other. And if you have a problem
with a “just” God, how do you explain how a holy and righteous God can be
sovereign over a universe, and specifically over the kingdom of heaven, when
he never carries out justice against sin or sinners! How exactly does this
work? |
|
II Thessalonians 1:9 |
Monte’s Response |
|
These people will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from
the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, ESV: They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction,
away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, |
“Pay” or “suffer” means, “to bear ⇔ pay v. — to bear (a cost or penalty), in
recompense for some action; conceived of as giving money (to discharge a
debt)” (BSL). There is nothing non-literal about speaking of someone who did
the crime doing the time. There is payment in justice. And all the believers
Paul was writing to understood that the only reason they were right with God
was because Jesus already made this payment, that notoriously wonderful
aspect of the good news that the BJs do NOT want people to know! They must
deny that there is a payment for sin because they cannot entertain that God
so loved the world that he sent his only Son into the world, giving us his
Son as the propitiation for our sin, so that whoever believes in Jesus will
not perish (make the payment), but will receive the free gift of God, eternal
life in Jesus Christ our Lord! “Penalty” or “punishment” means, “righteous punishment n. — the
disadvantageous or painful consequences of a failure to keep some moral
standard; especially as a failure to keep God’s moral requirements” (BSL). While
we have switched from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant, nothing has
changed about God’s justice. The New Covenant changes how we are made right
with God, but the penalty of sin must be paid, either by Jesus Christ on the
cross, or by sinners in the judgment. “Eternal destruction” is in both translations. “Destruction” means, “ruin
(worthlessness) n. — an event or act that results in destruction; especially
the loss of all that gives worth to existence” (BSL). This is nothing new.
God destroying his unrepentant enemies (don’t forget he showed mercy to
repentant enemies) is all through the Scriptures, even in Jesus’ teachings. Could I just interject that, in almost 21 years of working with my
wife in a family daycare, kids are QUICK to figure out when parents do not
mean what they say. The children who know their parents don’t really mean the
consequence that is described have no respect for their parents warning them
about consequences. The children who know the consequences described are real
have healthy and loving respect for their parents being the parents. So too, for someone like BJ to claim that every reference in the Bible
to God’s judgment against sinners does not mean what it says is not only
ludicrous in itself (they can’t all be explained away), but the chaos we have
seen with parents and children in such permissiveness would utterly destroy
societies (the earthly kingdom of God included) at the “Lord of the Flies”
level of disaster. The unrepentant persecutors and afflicters of God’s people will suffer
their judgment “away from” God’s “presence”. The words used here mean, “presence
⇔ face n. — the presence or proximity of someone understood in terms of the face;
with the implication of being before or in front of them” and “face of God n.
— the face of God understood as being in the presence of the full
manifestation of the nature and glory of God” (BSL). People, what we look forward to as the children of God is that day “when
he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is” (I John
3:2). We shall see him “face to face”! And live! But this is in the context
that those who have hated God and his people are “away” from the face of the
Lord our God and never see the wonders of what we get to enjoy for eternity. Which reminds me of how this is already contrasted in the present
time. For unbelievers, God says, “In their case the god of this world has
blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of
the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God” (II Corinthians
4:4). In other words, unbelievers do not see the face of God now because Satan
has blinded them, and Paul says that the unrepentant and unbelieving persecutors
and abusers of God’s children will be taken away from God’s face and will
never live in the light of his glorious countenance. On the other hand, for believers God says, “For God, who said, ‘Let
light shine out of darkness,’ has shone in our hearts to give the light of
the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (II
Corinthians 4:6). By faith, we already have a sense that we see the face of
our Savior. But in the judgment, we will be taken into the presence of our
Savior forever where we will see the glory of God on the face of Jesus Christ
FOREVER! And I say all these superlatively wonderful things because God has SAVED
US from the judgment to come and assures us that he will take care of us now,
and take care of our persecutors later, because he is the same yesterday,
today, and forever! And one more thing, “the glory of his power (might)”. Believers will
see the glory of the power of God in heaven, the power Paul prayed we would
have a growing understanding of in this lifetime. In the meantime, Paul
assures us that God is working all our persecutions and afflictions together
for good while preparing sinners for the judgment of God against their sin. And there is absolutely NOTHING non-literal about ANY of that. |
|
II Thessalonians 1:10 |
Monte’s Response |
|
when He comes to be glorified among His saints on that day, and to be
marveled at among all who have believed—because our testimony to you was
believed. |
I love this. Paul makes sure to not even complete a sentence so BJ
cannot make this two opposing thoughts. Not even the BJs can say that he
speaks of the judgment on the lost as non-literal but then, oh lookey what he
does for the saints for real! Now, on an illustrative viewpoint along the garden path, we recently
found some LP records and a player at a garage sale and were just laughing
this morning in home church that we can once again use the imagery of a
broken record! Yeeha!!! Anyway, I know I’m being a broken record about this (repeating myself, to explain the metaphor), but this is nothing new for God to breathe out a
picture of his blessings on the saints right alongside his judgment on
sinners. He saved Noah and destroyed the world. He saved Lot and destroyed
Sodom and Gomorrah. He saved Israel and destroyed Egypt. He saved Rahab and
destroyed Achan. He saved Mordecai and destroyed Haman. He blessed Barnabas
and put Ananias and Sapphira to death. In fact, he condemned the sinful man
of Corinth in I Corinthians 5 and then called for forgiveness because of his repentance in II
Corinthians 2. My point is that there is nothing surprising about Paul interweaving
God’s judgment on the lost with his mercies towards his people. He WILL be “glorified”
among us who believe at the same time as he is glorified in purging from the
world all the evil people who died unrepentant in their sin. My contention (only because I believe it is a true and sincere summary
of Scripture) is that it is only “His saints” who can stand in his glory. It
is only “His saints” who can marvel at our God’s glory without dying.
Unredeemed sinners could never see God glorified in their midst (think Mt.
Sinai). So they must be utterly removed from the scene to leave the redeemed
free to marvel at the glory of God without fear or fault. |
I
encourage readers to do your own research of reputable commentaries and look at
how clear it is what Paul is teaching here. BJ is absolutely “deceiving and
being deceived” to think that he can erase all this amazing encouragement to
believers by cherry-picking which parts are non-literal because he decided Paul
is using rhetoric (which doesn’t even mean non-literal!).
I
include this article from Got Questions Ministry, What is rhetorical
criticism?[8] And this one, What does it mean when God says, “Vengeance is mine”
(Romans 12:19)?[9]
My
conclusion is that BJ continues to bat 0 (zero) in his handling of Scripture.
It is totally subjective to look at what Paul wrote by divine inspiration and
claim that Greek or Roman oratory is more influential in interpreting what he
was trying to say than simply taking him to mean the same thing that is stated
all through Scripture from beginning to end.
Now,
in case anyone thinks I am being flippant about God’s judgment against sinners,
that is not the case. This is about how people handle the word of God. I
contend that we glorify God for his justice in both its judgment and mercy, and
that we rightly handle God’s word because it is the word of life. If we let the
BJs tamper with it, people never hear the good news of great joy that we have a
Savior, and so they will be horrified to find themselves facing divine judgment
that the BJs said was non-literal.
I know
I will not stop prophecy from being fulfilled. Evil men and imposters like BJ
will go from bad to worse, deceiving AND being deceived. I simply call people
to delight in God’s word as his manual for life until Jesus’ return. BJ is not
the authority over God’s word, and God’s authority in his word convicts BJ as a
false teacher. Someone who knows him should warn him (although he keeps telling
us people have already tried).
© 2024
Monte Vigh ~ Box 517, Merritt, BC, V1K 1B8
Email: in2freedom@gmail.com
Unless otherwise noted, Scriptures are from the
English Standard Version (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version. ESV® Text
Edition: 2016. Copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a publishing ministry of
Good News Publishers.)
A More Christlike Word © 2021 by Bradley Jersak Whitaker House 1030 Hunt
Valley Circle • New Kensington, PA 15068 www.whitakerhouse.com
Jersak, Bradley. A More Christlike Word: Reading Scripture the
Emmaus Way. Whitaker House. Kindle Edition.
Definitions from the Bible Sense Lexicon (BSL) in Logos Bible
Systems
[4]
https://www.masterclass.com/articles/writing-101-what-is-rhetoric-learn-about-rhetorical-devices-in-writing-and-3-modes-of-persuasion-in-rhetoric#7vqmBDMJz29FJljbyaA9x1
[6]
New American Standard Bible®, Copyright © 1960, 1971, 1977, 1995, 2020 by The
Lockman Foundation. All rights reserved.
[7]
Your enduring these tribulations is a “token of the righteous judgment of God,”
manifested in your being enabled to endure them, and in your adversaries
thereby filling up the measure of their guilt. The judgment is even now begun,
but its consummation will be at the Lord’s coming. David (Ps 73:1–14) and
Jeremiah (Je 12:1–4) were perplexed at the wicked prospering and the godly
suffering. But Paul, by the light of the New Testament, makes this fact a
matter of consolation. It is a proof (so the Greek) of the future judgment,
which will set to rights the anomalies of the present state, by rewarding the
now suffering saint, and by punishing the persecutor. And even now “the Judge
of all the earth does right” (Ge 18:25); for the godly are in themselves sinful
and need chastisement to amend them. What they suffer unjustly at the hands of
cruel men they suffer justly at the hands of God; and they have their evil
things here that they may escape condemnation with the world and have their
good things hereafter (Lu 16:25; 1 Co 11:32) [EDMUNDS].
Jamieson, R., Fausset, A. R., & Brown, D. (1997).
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (Vol. 2, p. 394). Logos
Research Systems, Inc.
[8]
What is rhetorical criticism?
[9]
What does it mean when God says, “Vengeance is mine” (Romans 12:19)?
No comments:
Post a Comment