Comments on: The Theology of Paul the Apostle | James D. G. Dunn (ยง4) http://stephenbarkley.com/2009/05/26/the-theology-of-paul-the-apostle-%c2%a74/ Reader, Writer, Pastor, Paddler Thu, 02 Feb 2012 17:48:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Stephen Barkley http://stephenbarkley.com/2009/05/26/the-theology-of-paul-the-apostle-%c2%a74/comment-page-1/#comment-1530 Stephen Barkley Wed, 27 May 2009 13:49:12 +0000 http://stephenbarkley.com/?p=1462#comment-1530 Yeah, I remember you telling me about Ellul making those observations already in <em>Subversion</em>. It resonated when I read it in Dunn. Yeah, I remember you telling me about Ellul making those observations already in Subversion. It resonated when I read it in Dunn.

]]> By: Brian Lachine http://stephenbarkley.com/2009/05/26/the-theology-of-paul-the-apostle-%c2%a74/comment-page-1/#comment-1529 Brian Lachine Wed, 27 May 2009 13:30:54 +0000 http://stephenbarkley.com/?p=1462#comment-1529 It was either Dunn or Ellul who made the observation that "the fall" was not necessarily about rebellion against God, but the fact that man could now decide what was good and what was evil - a trait only God had prior to the eating of the fruit. I appreciate Dunn's "soft(?) systematic approach to Paul. Looking back at the first Adam to understand the second Adam (Narrative approach) seems to fit a little more nicely. Good summations Steve. Peace (cheese) It was either Dunn or Ellul who made the observation that “the fall” was not necessarily about rebellion against God, but the fact that man could now decide what was good and what was evil – a trait only God had prior to the eating of the fruit.

I appreciate Dunn’s “soft(?) systematic approach to Paul. Looking back at the first Adam to understand the second Adam (Narrative approach) seems to fit a little more nicely.

Good summations Steve. Peace (cheese)

]]>