Rom.1:18-20
- Thread starter Preach
- Start date
- Status
Steve Owen
Puritan Board Sophomore
Lloyd-Jones Romans vol 1.
Martin
Martin
Puritan Sailor
Puritan Board Doctor
Hodge and Haldane are always helpful.
JohnV
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Another thing to watch for, Bobby, is reference to this passage in passing. I mean, the author might be talking about another subject, but may refer to this passage as a proof for something on the side. More particularly, when an author is attempting to draw a conclusion from his specific concern, he needs premises which are not questioned. This passage fits in with that.
For example, in reading Jus Divinum, on the divine right of Church government, I came across that passage used in the normal classical sense, that the proof of God's existence is plain to all from the witness of the elements of creation. This indicates an underlying argument, one that is assumed and that is supposed that everyone else assumes as well. So here too you have a exegesis, an implied one.
I tend to pay more attention to these kinds of of things than to the direct aruments themselves. I like to get to the plain meanings, not the ones that people write book upon book to derive or define. If the plain meaning of the text is what we are to pay attention to rather than the reasonings of man, then this is important. But if sound and reasonable men explicate upon a certain text at length, then you still need to know the plain meaning of the text as well. It is through this practice that you find at times that what you thought was the plain meaning is not, in fact, the plain meaning at all, but your own superimposed one.
I am impressed by the many times the ministers who wrote Jus Divinum use this methodology in their argument in the text.
For example, in reading Jus Divinum, on the divine right of Church government, I came across that passage used in the normal classical sense, that the proof of God's existence is plain to all from the witness of the elements of creation. This indicates an underlying argument, one that is assumed and that is supposed that everyone else assumes as well. So here too you have a exegesis, an implied one.
I tend to pay more attention to these kinds of of things than to the direct aruments themselves. I like to get to the plain meanings, not the ones that people write book upon book to derive or define. If the plain meaning of the text is what we are to pay attention to rather than the reasonings of man, then this is important. But if sound and reasonable men explicate upon a certain text at length, then you still need to know the plain meaning of the text as well. It is through this practice that you find at times that what you thought was the plain meaning is not, in fact, the plain meaning at all, but your own superimposed one.
I am impressed by the many times the ministers who wrote Jus Divinum use this methodology in their argument in the text.
Pilgrim
Puritanboard Commissioner
Lloyd-Jones The Plight of Man and The Power of God contains some very pointed application of Rom. 1:18-20, particularly on ungodliness leading to unrighteousness. The full text is available somewhere on the web, but I can't remember where. Shouldn't be too hard to search for it though.
- Status
