From: T & J Peterson (email@example.com)
Date: Sat Feb 22 1997 - 09:36:19 EST
Ronald Wong wrote:
> you quote in the middle of Paul's thought....verse five is actually the
> resumption of v 3. (HDH KEKRIKA).
> the hINA clause is purpose....purpose of what? well..."ALREADY I have
> judged. . . ) v.3.
But what is that judgment? Granted, v. 4 is parenthetical, whereby we
have Paul saying HDH KEKRIKA . . . PARADOUNAI TON TOIOUTON . . . . So,
if the judgment was to hand this one over to Satan, and if the purpose
of the judgment was that his spirit might be saved, then that purpose
naturally carries over to the form the judgment took. Does anyone have
a way of viewing this passage that would not end up at that conclusion?
> I don't believe it is Paul's intention to say that delivering one to
> Satan is the salvation of TOV TOIOUTON. (I could be wrong....) But
> that Paul was saying that the intention of the judgement is hINV TO
> PNUEMA SWQH EN TH hMERA TOU KURIOU.
> could the action of the assembly in disciplining the sinner directly
> affect his salvation? hm...I don't think you could find this supported
> in the NT. I could be wrong...
Which is what I'm trying to discern. Even if we take the purpose of the
judgment, your question doesn't change much. Could the action of Paul
(who clearly says that he made this judgment in anticipated congruence
with the assembly) or of the assembly in judging or disciplining the
sinner directly affect his salvation? I don't think you could find it
supported in the NT either, but what then does he mean? If hINA
introduces his purpose, then how does the act of judging or handing over
to Satan further that purpose?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:07 EDT