English grammer Help!

[J. Jump]

Steaver if you are looking for a purely English language answer then the answer I believe would have to be it could go either way. One could support saying that it is an attribute of those that are in Christ Jesus, in that they "are" walking after the Spirit and not after the flesh.

However it is just as easily supported that the no condemnation clause is conditioned on those in Christ Jesus walking after the Spirit and not after the flesh. And if they are walking after the flesh then there is condemnation.

From an English language viewpoint at best the sentence would be poorly written in my opinion. One could easily clear up the meaning by adding a couple of more words.

My sister-in-law was an English teacher for several years, and I think she may be teaching it again in college now, so I will email her and ask her.

 

[Pastor Larry]

How can I go to Greek to answer how an English sentence structure is grammatically defined?

Because the English sentence is translated to tell us what the Greek means. So we go to Greek to see what God inspired. That tells us what the English means.

I am asking, apart from this being a Bible verse and apart from this being a translation from the Greek, what is the latter part of this English sentence telling us about those in Christ?

As I said, it is telling us that the "in Christ" are the same as those who "do not walk after the flesh but the Spirit."

Forget the bible exegesis of the verse.

You can't. You can't understand what the verse means without the exegesis.

I was told that to make the latter of the sentence an "attribute" of the subject was to destroy English semantics and that it should be made a "condition".

I would chastise the person who told you this for being off topic. The English can be taken several ways. the Greek and theology tells us how it is to be taken.

 

[steaver]

My sister-in-law was an English teacher for several years, and I think she may be teaching it again in college now, so I will email her and ask her.

Thanks Jump, that would be greatly appreciated! Thanks Larry! :thumbs:

God Bless!

 

[J. Jump]

She said from a reading based solely on the English language that both renderings could be correct. So on the one hand the person you were speaking with was incorrect to say that seeing the later clause as an identifier was destroying the English language. That is what I suspected, but just wanted to get confirmation.

However he is not incorrect in saying that the clause is tied to the condition either based solely on an English reading.

So that leaves us with a need to go back to the Greek and comparing Scripture with Scripture to find out what the exact meaning of this verse is when we get back to Biblical interpretation, which is nothing that hasn't been already said.

Hope that helps Steaver.

 

[steaver]

Thanks Jump! At least i haven't destroyed the English :laugh: .

God Bless!

 

[BobRyan]

This is a really good question to meditate for long time. Eventually the question is whether there is no condemnation even unto the believer in Jesus Christ or not even though they don't follow the spirit but flesh
BTW grammer should read grammar (I point out this because the issue here is about grammar)

The "To those WHO" prepositional phrase and qualifer is being used to show that release from condemnation is at a point in time for each person actively following a certain course of action not a point in history for all mankind. You see the same thing in Gal 3 "when faith came" is the same point for each person - the moment of conversion and choosing to walk after the spirit.

I would argue that WALKING after the Spirit includes hearing the conviction of the Holy Spirit who "Convicts the WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment" and then repenting, submitting yielding to that conviction. So from the very start the sinner is either choosing to turn and follow after - walk by - the Spirit or to reject and be hardened against the Holy Spirit.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

I need to hear from some English grammer folks. I was never that great at it.

Rom 8:1¶There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.



Is "who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit" an attribute of those in Christ Jesus here proper English, or is it a condition placed on those in Christ Jesus?

What I need to know is how would this be interpreted in English class? Any English majors out there?

God Bless!

GE:

I'm no gammarian, nevertheless will stick out my neck and say this is not a question or matter of grammar or for grammar. This is a matter of simple Gospel truth, which anwers your question in the affirmative both ways.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Arminianism:

"the moment of conversion and choosing to walk after the spirit."

GE:

'Be converted / turned', Passive, twisted, Active, "conversion and choosing";
Subject: God / Spirit, twisted, man's "conversion and choosing to"