Mobile Tracking Using Forward Link in Cellular Networks

Mobile Tracking Using Forward Link in Cellular Networks

Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Circular Rhetoric and Exegetical Challenge in Romans Circular Rhetoric and Logic of Paradox Society of Biblical Literature International Meeting 2015 Buenos Aires, Argentina, July 20-24, 2015 Paul and Pauline Literature Theme: Romans Elsa Tamez, United Bible Societies, Presiding 7/22/2015 2:00 PM to 3:30 PM Room 111 (1st floor) Universidad Catlica Argentina, San Jos Building Richard K. Min University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, Texas, USA Instituto Teologico Bauptista Pablo (ITBP), Chiapas, Mexico email: [email protected] http://www.utdallas.edu/~rkm010300 SBL IM 2015

The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Acknowledgements Gopal Gupta for his support and guidance for my study and research at University of Texas at Dallas. Hyungu Kim at Ko-Mex Mission in Chiapas, Mexico, Sam Underwood at FBC Farmers Branch, Sang-Jin Kim at Glory Baptist Church, Richard Covington at the Heights BC, Katy Barnwell at Wycliffe Bible Translators, David (Hosik) Kim at Korean Bible University, Paul Miller at Gramcord, and SeJune Hong at IBM, for research opportunity, support, and encouragement. E. Earle Ellis for my NT Study and Harry B, Hunt for my OT study at SWBTS, Carl F. H. Henry for my study in John and Theology, John Grassmick and Eugene Merrill at Dallas Theological Seminary. Cathy Drewry for Editorial Support. Mi Min (my wife) for her support and encouragement, and being my first and best audience.

SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Note on Terminology These terms are used somewhat informally (interchangeably): Cycle )or or or or in Ecclesiastes 1:6) Self-Reference, Self-Witness, Self-Testimony (Genesis 22:16; Isaiah 45:23; Hebrews 6:13; John 8:12-20) Idem per idem (Exodus 3:14; 33:19; 21:2324; Matt. 5:38) (S. R. Driver, 1911; recently Lundbom, 1978) Perichoresis ( Gregory Nazianzen; John 14:10) Coindwelling, Coinherence, Circumincession in Early Christianity Reciprocal Interiority (John 14:10, Brown 1966, 1982; Malatesta 1978)

Vicious Circle (Titus 1:12) Russell 1903, Kripke 1975) (Infinite) Loop, Coinduction, Coinductive Logic (in computational logic) Circular Rhetoric and Paradox in the Bible (Min 2010-2015) SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Part 1 Introduction and Background SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox

Circular Rhetoric and Paradox: Background Russells Discovery - Paradox (1910 & logical atomism) A barber is one who shaves all those, and those only, who do not shave themselves." (Barbers Paradox) Does the barber shave himself? Yes? or No? (Russell 1918 Lecture: The Philosophy of Logical Atomism) cf. Physician, Heal yourself! (Luke 4:24) The Liar Paradox (Titus 1:12; cf. Romans 3:4) Even one of their own prophet has said, Cretans are always liars. , , , [by Epimenides (circa 600BC), identified by Clement of Alexandria] Logical Role of the Liar paradox in Titus 1:12, 13: A Dissent from the Commentaries in the Light of Philosophical and Logical Analysis by Anthony C. Thiselton (BI 1994)

SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Two Traditional Approaches Logical Atomism 1 (Russell, followed by Tarski): Philosophy to provide a sound epistemological foundation Classical Logic: to avoid circularity (paradox), to treat circular logic as invalid, and to have a hierarchy of language to prevent the circularity Logical Atomism 2 (Wittgenstein): Philosophy to point out linguistic mistake: metaphysics and ethics were literally nonsensical Deconstructionism (Postmodernism) (by Derrida): to treat the languages as incapable and helpless. Is Zombie alive or dead?

Reconstruct ones own personal & subjective meaning of the text (for there is no such a thing as objective truth expressed in a text). The rise of Post-Liberal (Narrative) Theology SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min Breakthrough by Kripke (1975) and Emerging new development with Circular Logic Kripke (1975): Outline of a Theory of Truth, and Kripke-Kleene 3-valued Semantics for Logic Programs by Fitting (1985), and various computational approaches, applications & implementations, including: Coinductive Logic Programming by Simon (2006), Coinductive Logic Programming with Negation as Failure by Min (2009), and its application to the study of Circular Rhetoric and

Paradox in the Bible by Min (SBL IM 20102015, EABS 2014, ETS 2014). Rediscovering Circular Rhetoric and Logic in Trinitarian formulation in Early Christianity: Recent noteworthy work on Gregory of Nyssa by Stramara Jr. (1996; 1998). SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Part 2 Survey - Selected Examples in the Bible Circular Rhetoric and Paradox SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox

Richard K. Min Example 1. Exodus 3:14 "I am who I am ( )" in Exodus 3:14. idem per idem (OT) S. R. Driver; Lundbom SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min Example 2 - John 14:10, 11

Perichoresis () and oneness by Gregory Nazianzen, Triniterian concept & term by Athansius, and Cappadosian coindwelling, coinherence, circumincession, cycle, periphero, anacyclosis, etc. Fathers: SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Example 3 Titus 1:12 The Liar Paradox Romans 3:4; Psalm 116:11 cf. Physician, Heal yourself! (Luke 4:24)

Self-Reference with Negation Bertrand Russell SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min Example 4 Three Paradoxes in Matthew 22:1546 (1) Matthew 22:15-22 To Pay Tax to Caesar or not (2) Matthew 22:23-33 Marriage vs Resurrection (3) Matthew 22:41-46 David called Christ, My Lord in Psalm 110:1 SBL IM 2015

The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox A New Look at Matthew 22:15-46 All dealing with Biblical Law & Legal Reasoning thus the problems of Biblical Legal Reasoning (Halakoth) Two Laws in Conflict Matthew 22:15-22. Tax Law the law of God vs the law of Caesar (this World) Who is my Master (Matthew 6:24)? Whose servant am I? Matthew 22:23-33. Marriage (Family) Law the law of Marriage (Mosaic Law) in this age vs. in the age to come the old law to be perished (time-expired) vs. the new law in resurrection Old Law vs. New Law (over the old law)

Matthew 22:34-40. Linear Order in the Laws (legal precedence) Hierarchy of the Laws, legal authority, highest law, legal precedence and superseding law, to avoid circular paradox but provide a linear order Matthew 22:41-46. Law of Inheritance (for Title of Lordship) the law governing the Son of God in flesh vs. divine (Psalm 110:1) SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Part 3 Circular Rhetoric and Exegetical Challenge in Romans (1) From faith to faith" in Romans 1:17 (2) Romans 3:4 with the Liar paradox in Titus 1:12, (3) In Christ" and "Christ in you" in Romans 8:10,

(4) Already" and "not yet" in Romans 8:2930, and (5) Romans 9:1518 in the light of Exodus 33:19. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (1) "from faith to faith" in Romans 1:17 Circular lexical pattern ( + A + + A) frequently found in Greek texts between the Homeric era to 600 A.D. Quarles notes in approximately 340 cases. The idiomatic use and meaning may vary emphasis, repetition, range, or duration (in

time or space, of thing or person), iteration, or even cycle. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox (1) "from faith to faith" in Romans 1:17 Five possible meanings for (1) from God's faithfulness to man's faith, (2) from one's faith to the other's faith from a person to person, from preachers to hearers, from Old Testament believers to New Testament believers, from OT faith to NT faith, from Abraham to Rahab as a panoramic or spectacular array of the faithful people from one end to the other end. (3) dispensational interpretation (from OT to NT)

(4) from faith to faith as growing and intensifying. "from faith" as the source or the origin of faith cf. John 1:37 => 2:11 => 16:3031 => 20:8 => 20:31 (5) through faith and faith alone, or simply faith. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (1) "from faith to faith" in Romans 1:17 The same lexical pattern ( + A + + A) is found twice in 2 Corinthians 2:16 with "death" and "life," and Psalm 84:7 with "strength" (LXX) Two cases in 2 Corinthians 2:16 should settle the recent debate for the case of Romans 1:17. Faith vs Faithfulness

Barrett (1970) points out, "to ascribe different meanings to the same word in one phrase is very harsh," as it is similarly noted by Black (1988), to be ruled out. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox (1) "from faith to faith" in Romans 1:17 For the case of God's faithfulness, it could be better meant if one takes it as "from God's faithfulness to Christ's faithfulness" instead of "from Christ's faithfulness to man's faith." Further within Paul's theological framework of God's sovereignty ( ) in Romans 11:36.

Note that Jesus Christ is not only divine, but also fully a man of faith, and is faithful to God (cf. Galatians 3:25) SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (1) "from faith to faith" in Romans 1:17 The spectrum of the various kinds of faithful people is exemplified by those in the Old or New Testaments. 1. Those who preached (including Jesus Christ himself in Matthew 4:23) or received, 2. Those prophets or the apostles, 3. Those highly or lowly regarded moral representatives ranging from Abraham to

Rahab. 4. From OT believers to NT believers, or 5. Faith in/from OT Law to NT Gospel SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox (1) "from faith to faith" in Romans 1:17 The one-and-only-one answer (?) is still debatable for what this circular expression ( ) in Romans 1:17 may mean exactly. Within the framework of circular rhetoric, various proposals noted by the early church fathers and commentators could be considered viable within a permissible and creative framework of a preacher or a commentator (e.g., an interpretive

model-set). Matthew 22:15-22 To pay tax to Caesar or not SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (1) "from faith to faith" in Romans 1:17 With this understanding, as a circular and idiomatic expression, faith () in Romans 1:17, is then emphatic, intensive, repeating, iterative, perpetual, continuing, complete, thorough, arrayed, being panoramic, or overarching (in various aspects of faith) that is, nothing but faith and faith alone. SBL IM 2015

The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Part 3 Circular Rhetoric and Exegetical Challenge in Romans (1) From faith to faith" in Romans 1:17 (2) Romans 3:4 with the Liar paradox in Titus 1:12, (3) In Christ" and "Christ in you" in Romans 8:10, (4) Already" and "not yet" in Romans 8:2930, and (5) Romans 9:1518 in the light of Exodus 33:19. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas

Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox (2) Romans 3:4 with the Liar Paradox in Titus 1:12 The liar paradox ( ) Romans 3:4, citing Psalm 116:11 ( ) cf. The Liar paradox in Titus 1:12 Circular Rhetoric with Self-Negation Self-Reference plus Negation to assert what is true by denying oneself (or itself) Charge against Paul himself Misanthropist and very Negative Self-Image I am a liar and you too, and all of us! Anthony C. Thiselton, "The Logical Role of the Liar Paradox in Titus 1:12, 13: A Dissent from the Commentaries in Light of Philosophical and Logical Analysis," Biblical Interpretation 2 (1994): 207223 SBL IM 2015

The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox (2) Romans 3:4 with the Liar Paradox in Titus 1:12 Mans confession & Gods conviction (John 16:811) Romans 3:918. No one is righteous. John 8:44 and 1 John 1:89 (even for all Christians) Many paradoxes in the Bible use self-negation despising conventional wisdom. Much more difficult expressions in the Bible are: self-denial discipleship to deny oneself and to follow Jesus Christ (Mark 8:34), saving by losing one's life or losing by saving one's life (Mark 8:35), and the first to be the last and the servant of all in servant-leadership

(Mark 9:35). SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Part 3 Circular Rhetoric and Exegetical Challenge in Romans (1) From faith to faith" in Romans 1:17 (2) Romans 3:4 with the Liar paradox in Titus 1:12, (3) In Christ" and "Christ in you" in Romans 8:10, (4) Already" and "not yet" in Romans 8:2930, and (5) Romans 9:1518 in the light of Exodus 33:19. SBL IM 2015

The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox (3) "Christ in You" in Romans 8:10 & "In Christ" "Christ in you ( )" in Romans 8:10, In Christ and its variants (in Romans) 21 times 16:22 SBL IM 2015 3:24, 6:11, 8:1, 8:2, 16:3 () 6:23, 8:39

9:1, 12:5, 16:7, 16:9, 16:10 16:2, 16:8, 16:11, 16:12a, 16:12b, 16:13, 14:14, 15:17 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (3) "Christ in You" in Romans 8:10 & "In Christ" This pair-expression ("in Christ" and "Christ in") in Romans provides a comprehensive conception of Paul for the mutual-indwelling relationship of Christ and Christians. The pair-expression in Romans is clearly circular (at least in lexical level), and comparable to what is noted in John (e.g., John 14:20; 15:5; 17:23, 26). Question:

Is Christ in significantly different from In Christ in meaning (in Romans, or in Paul, or in NT)? SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (3) "Christ in You" in Romans 8:10 & "In Christ" No Difference?: The phrase ("Christ in" [you/me]) has been treated essentially equivalent or parallel to the phrase ("in Christ") among the majority of the contemporary Pauline scholars. Bultmann voiced: "It makes no difference whether Paul speaks of the believers being in Christ or of Christ's being in the believer. Rudolf Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament, vol. 1, trans. Kendrick Grobel (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1951), 328;

SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (3) "Christ in You" in Romans 8:10 & "In Christ" A handful of scholars have voiced their differences or distinctions between these two phrases. Albert Schweitzer, The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle, trans. W. Montgomery (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 1931 [1929]), 12225; Ernest Best, One Body in Christ: A Study in the Relationship of the Church to Christ in the Epistle of the Apostle Paul (London: S.P.C.K., 1955), 9, n. 2, 22; C. F. D. Moule, The Origin of Christology (Cambridge: University Press, 1977), 5657; J. A. Ziesler, Pauline Christianity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983), 50; N. T. Wright, The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992), 45; and Barcley, "Christ in You," 10535.

William B. Barcley, "Christ in You": A Study in Paul's Theology and Ethics (Lanham, MD: University of America, 1999). SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (3) "Christ in You" in Romans 8:10 & "In Christ" The meanings of the "in Christ" phrase are rich and comprehensive, usually presented with six+ major theses - being in union with Christ (e.g., Romans 6:5) or - being baptized into one body of Christ (e.g., Romans 12:4 5; Galatians 3:2728; 1 Corinthians 12:1213; Col 3:1011) (1) Corporate expression of Christians in Christ, (2) the AdamChristology or Adam-Christ anthropology, (3) Membership in the body (church) of Christ who is the head, (4) Eschatological

temple (house, building), (5) typological husband in marriage with his wife (or the virgin), (6) Metaphor of being clothed in Christ, (7) Adoption in Christ, and so on. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox (3) "Christ in You" in Romans 8:10 & "In Christ" Bousset provides an insightful difference between Paul's Christ mysticism and the Hellenistic religion with similar rhetoric, but pantheistic implication. That is, The lexical pattern ("X in the Christ" or "the Christ in X" where X is, for example, a Christian or Christians) does not grant a pantheistic or panentheistic implication (to say that "X is the Christ" or "the Christ is X") whether the expression is provided reciprocally

or not. Wilhelm Bousset, KYRIOS CHRISTOS: A History of the Belief in Christ from the Beginnings of Christianity to Irenaeus, trans. John E. Steely (Waco: Baylor University Press, 2013 [1913]), 16469. Bousset notes the expressions in Hermetic prayers for being completely pantheistic (for example, "Come to me, Hermes, as children come into the body of women. . . . I know you, Hermas, and you know me. I am you and you are I," and "For you are I and I am you. Your name is mine and mine is yours. I am your image.") Based on this ground, four points are noted. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (3) "Christ in You" in Romans 8:10 & "In Christ" First (1), in the framework of Adam-Christ

anthology (Adam-Christology), we note the pair-expression of "in Christ" and "Christ in" in Romans, but always with the phrase "in Adam." There is never a phrase such as "Adam in" or with any human being (except the Christ or Satan, or non-human object such as sin, death, or the Kingdom of God). This observation may hint the difference between "in Christ" and "Christ in" for further study. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (3) "Christ in You" in Romans 8:10 & "In Christ" Second (2), in the framework of the two-stage coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 17:17

24), a clear difference and distinction exists between the case of the invisible Kingdom of God within a person ("the Kingdom of God in X") and the case of the visible Kingdom of God on the day of the Son of Man ("X in the Kingdom of God"). Clearly, the invisible Kingdom of God is present in all those who witness the power of the Holy Spirit (Matt 12:28; Luke 11:20). SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (3) "Christ in You" in Romans 8:10 & "In Christ" Third (3), Satan (or demonic beings) enters into a man ("Satan in X"), as well as a man is in or under the rule of Satan (Eph 2:12; John 8:34,

44). For example, Satan enters into Judah (John 13:27). Judah was already in (under the influence of or being tempted by) Satan, who inserted an evil thought into Judah's heart to betray Jesus (John 13:2). A similar case of an evil spirit being in and later coming out of a slave girl by Paul is noted in Acts 16:1618. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (3) "Christ in You" in Romans 8:10 & "In Christ" Finally (4), in the framework of Temple-House anthropology, a man is like a temple or a house in which the Holy Spirit or evil spirit(s) may come and

dwell (Rom 8:9, 11; Matt 12:4345). So does Christ (John 2:1922). Abundant biblical examples exist of a man possessed by evil spirit(s) dwelling in the man, and evil spirit(s) being cast out of a man (Matt 8:2834). Further, John notes that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit shall dwell in the believer (John 14:17, 23). SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (3) "Christ in You" in Romans 8:10 & "In Christ" Based on these four observations, we may conclude safely that a substantial difference and distinction exists between "in Christ" and "Christ in"

in this circular rhetoric and expression in the Bible, and is consistently applied to the letters of Paul and so in the framework of Romans. Gal 2:20; 4:19; 2 Cor 13:5; Col 1:27; Eph 3:17 as well as in Johannine Literature, and then to New Testament in general. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Part 3 Circular Rhetoric and Exegetical Challenge in Romans (1) From faith to faith" in Romans 1:17 (2) Romans 3:4 with the Liar paradox in Titus 1:12, (3) In Christ" and "Christ in you" in Romans 8:10, (4) Already" and "not yet" in Romans 8:29

30, and (5) Romans 9:1518 in the light of Exodus 33:19. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (4) "Already" and "Not Yet" in Romans 8:29 30 The passage in Romans 8:2930 presents another mystery and paradox for those in Christ. We have already surveyed and discussed extensively with a handful cases of "already" and "not yet" in tension. In addition, the temporal-modal mystery and paradox in Romans 8:2930 is closely related to the cases in this study for example, the two-stage coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 17:2030),

the human Christ who was "not yet" come in contrast to the divine Christ who was "already" existed before John the Baptist (John 1:15, 30), the Son of God, both human and divine, in the lordship-relationship with David (Ps 110:1 in Matt 22:4146), and in the order of priesthood-relationship with Melchizedek (Ps 110:4 in Hebrews 7). SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (4) "Already" and "Not Yet" in Romans 8:29 30 Paul presents the divine providence for those whom God foreknew, predestinated, called, justified, and glorified. These five verbs , , , , are given in past tense (aorist) as if all are done and completed.

Essentially, God is in His total control and sovereignty from the beginning to the end over all things (Romans 11:36). All the passages in Romans 8 clearly for those (in Romans 8:2930) who are either already in Christ or not yet in Christ (or what is already or not yet done or fulfilled). SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (4) "Already" and "Not Yet" in Romans 8:29 30 To avoid any potential exegetical or theological difficulty, one conventional option is to label these divine actions in past tense as prophetic past or gnomic (time-less). Within this temporal-modal framework,

one may explore viable variations or alternatives in exposition, to be flexible and consistent within the theological framework of Romans. Is this acceptable? exegetically and hermeneutically SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min Already and Not Yet in Tension Classical Examples in Contemporary NT Studies Two-Stage Coming of the Kingdom of God Already and Not Yet in Tension (Luke 17:20-30) Salvation History (Heilsgeschichte) by Oscar

Cullmann SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min Already and Not Yet in Tension The Testimony of John the Baptist (John 1:15, 30) The similar circular rhetoric of already & not yet in the testimony of John the Baptist (John 1:15,30) The passage is composed of three simple and distinctive prepositional phrases, in either temporal or spatial (in rank or order) meaning, to generate an interesting enigma and paradox in exegesis. (1) (2) (3)

SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min Already and Not Yet in Tension Divine-Human relationship in Matthew 22:41-46 Christ - Whose son is he? Son of David. Paradox of Lord-Servant (Father-Son) Relationship What is Human vs Divine relationship in crash! SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min

Already and Not Yet in Tension Melchizedek and the Son of God in Hebrews 7 Melchizedek and the Son of God 1 , , , 3 , , , . Melchizedek is (made) alike the Son of God 15 , , 15 And it is yet far more evident if, in the likeness of Melchizedek,

there arises another priest. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Already and Not Yet in Tension A Difficult Problem in 1 John 3:9 & 5:18 vs1:8-10 1. Sin-state of Christian in need of Confession for the forgiveness of God (1 John 1:8-10) versus 2. Sinless-state (impeccable state) of Christian (1 John 3:9, 5:18) How to Harmonize these conflicting passages? Or is it even possible? 1 John 3:9 one born of God in circular logic , , ,

. Does sin have a different meaning (aspect) to one before and after being born of God? What sin can one born of God never commit? Sin of not believing in Jesus Christ the Son of God our Propitiation SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (4) "Already" and "Not Yet" in Romans 8:29 30 One appealing case for Romans 8:2930 is a temporalmodal framework of:

(1) all the five actions are being declared by God before the creation of the world, and (2) the five actions are spread over a linear timeline. For (2), the first two actions are considered to have occurred before the creation of the world, the next two actions in this present age, and the last action in the future of the eschatological timeframe. As a result, in the temporal-modal framework of what is divine versus human, various paradoxical and intriguing questions would emerge in the context of Romans. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (4) "Already" and "Not Yet" in Romans 8:29 30

One appealing case for Romans 8:2930 is a temporalmodal framework of: (1) all the five actions are being declared by God before the creation of the world, and (2) the five actions are spread over a linear timeline. foreknew, predestinated, called, justified, and glorified , , , , The first two actions are considered to have occurred before the creation of the world, the next two actions in this present age, and the last action in the future of the eschatological timeframe. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (4) "Already" and "Not Yet" in Romans 8:29 30

As a result, in the temporal-modal framework of what is divine vs human (declarative vs effectual, promised vs fulfilled, ) various paradoxical and intriguing questions would emerge in the context of Romans. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Part 3 Circular Rhetoric and Exegetical Challenge in Romans (1) From faith to faith" in Romans 1:17 (2) Romans 3:4 with the Liar paradox in Titus 1:12,

(3) In Christ" and "Christ in you" in Romans 8:10, (4) Already" and "not yet" in Romans 8:2930, and (5) Romans 9:1518 in the light of Exodus 33:19. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (5) Romans 9:15, 18 in the light of Exodus 33:19 Two passages in Romans 9:15 and 9:18 present an exegetical challenge and theological difficulty in the Bible. Both passages present God's will and action accordingly in the frame of circular rhetoric and logic. The passage in Romans 9:15 repeats what God said to Moses in Exodus 33:19 that God will have mercy on

whom God has mercy, and that God will have compassion on whom God has compassion. The relational quality of God's compassion and mercy could be good and positive, especially for those in God's compassion and mercy. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (5) Romans 9:15, 18 in the light of Exodus 33:19 The passage in Romans 9:15 explicitly addresses with regard to those in God's compassion or mercy, but is silent about those not in God's compassion or mercy. In man's perspective, this declaration in Romans 9:15 could be understood as being value-neutral, negligible, irrelevant, or even ignorable by those

who are not in God's compassion and mercy. However, the passage in Romans 9:18 presents not a partial view, but rather a complete view covering not only for those in God's mercy, but also for those not in God's mercy. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (5) Romans 9:15, 18 in the light of Exodus 33:19 We have explored the similar usages of circular rhetoric and tautological logic. For example, the reply by Jesus in Matthew 22:21 satisfies two contradictory and contending quests on whether one should pay tax to Caesar or not. SBL IM 2015

The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (5) Romans 9:15, 18 in the light of Exodus 33:19 The circular rhetoric with a model-set in its complete form (that is, a reciprocal form) in Matthew 22:21 resolves 1. so simply, instantly, and wonderfully the conflicting legal demands in a difficult dilemma and legal deadlock and 2. to terminate any further debate. This similar effect of terminating a debate with circular rhetoric and logic of idem per item is also noted by Lundbom in Exodus 3:14 and 33:19. Further, the circular rhetoric and its complete form in

Romans 9:18 generates potentially an uneasy or damaging concern to question God's righteousness and fairness. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (5) Romans 9:15, 18 in the light of Exodus 33:19 Being so bold or nave in narrative, Paul speaks aloud and states so clearly both the question ("who resists God's will?") and the answer ("no one can resist God's will") in Romans 9:1920, to terminate any further debate or question on God's sovereignty and righteousness. The defense and justification for God's choice of action in Romans 9:15 is again solely based on God's mercy alone (and not by man's will or effort) as stated

in Romans 9:16. Additionally, the same line of logic is noted in John 1:13 and summarized in Romans 11:36. SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (5) Romans 9:15, 18 in the light of Exodus 33:19 The concept of God's sovereignty and righteousness in Romans seems too much and too overwhelming to be accepted by a man (with his own will, mind, desire, interest, optimism, courage, intelligence, strength, ability, effort, achievement, love, mercy, compassion, courage, and even a conviction to stand before God sooner or later, for or against his own case and destiny, or even to

plea for his own loving spouse or children, instead, in his despair or sacrifice). SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min (5) Romans 9:15, 18 in the light of Exodus 33:19 As stated in Luke 16:2731, the rich man finally realized he could do nothing for himself or for his own family. It was too late for the rich man. The mind-boggling question is then whether this rich man had a chance and an ability to change his own destiny. Again, Paul provides the metaphor of the potter and his right over his own creation in Romans 11:2123 to terminate the debate or shut the mouth of those questioning against God.

cf. Job 40:114 SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Part 4 Circular Rhetoric and Paradox A New Critical Method SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Richard K. Min A Semantic Difference with Circular

Logic Induction and its Semantics Here we say infinite or eternal but it has no meaning in the frame of Induction or Inductive Logic (in this conventional finite worldview). Coindcution and its Semantics (extending induction) Example: The chicken or egg problem (1)a chicken comes out of an egg, (2) an egg comes out of a chicken, and (3) the reproductive cycle between chicken and egg goes on forever. Inductive Logic: No answer Coinductive Logic: 4 possible answers { No answer, Chicken, Egg, Chicken and Egg } SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox

A New Critical Method Circular Rhetoric and Logic of Paradoxes To make sense and do a valid and sound exegesis. Otherwise, to treat it meaningless or invalid, or to treat as if it is not there There are so many and so predominant in the Bible And each case/its presence simply cannot to be ignored or silenced. Once understood and applied correctly, it truly makes sense objectively and logical Matthew 22:15-46, John 8:12-20 with Exodus 3:14-15 To construct a coherent, consistent, and unifying framework in exegesis and its application (and no need of post-liberal theology or narrative theology, deconstructionism or story-telling [as one may argue that these biblical passages have no valid logic or an objective truth, and thus treat them metaphorically, subjectively, ...] SBL IM 2015 The University of Texas at Dallas

Richard K. Min Circular Rhetoric and Biblical Paradox Afterword by Solomon 13 Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the duty of all mankind. 14 For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil. (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 NIV) SBL IM 2015

The University of Texas at Dallas

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • DoDAAC Basics By Dave 1 Home Organization DoDAACs

    DoDAAC Basics By Dave 1 Home Organization DoDAACs

    I work in an office. That office is identified with a DoDAAC like this one. HQ0102. DoDAAC. DoDAAC stands for DoD Activity Address Code.
  • Developmental Psychology

    Developmental Psychology

    Developmental Psychology The study of YOU from womb to tomb. We are going to study how we change physically, socially, cognitively and morally over our lifetimes. ERIKSON PSYCHOSOCIAL STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT Erik Erikson A neo-Freudian Worked with Anna Freud Thought...
  • Nectar Marketing - Amazon Web Services

    Nectar Marketing - Amazon Web Services

    Mobile Marketing Will Shuckburgh, Business Development Director, Nectar ... account management, rewards C. 1million collectors have transacted through Nectar eStores across Nectar and Nectar Business 45% of registrations are online We developed a paper-less offer engine Mobile - Why now...
  • Airway Pressure Release Ventilation

    Airway Pressure Release Ventilation

    APRV- Evidence Based Study Study design Groups Results Rasanen et al. 1991 Prospective Crossover trial 50 pts with ALI/ARDS APRV Vs CMV Lower peak airway pressure Similar oxygenation and hemodynamics Sydow et al. 1994 Randomized controlled trial 18 pts with...
  • Casts and Drains - Asheville-Buncombe Technical Community ...

    Casts and Drains - Asheville-Buncombe Technical Community ...

    Types of PassiveDrains. Penrose. Cigarette. T-Tube. Gastrostomy Tube. Cystostomy tube. Nephrostomy tube. Penrose. A Penrose drain is a surgical device placed in a wound to drain fluid. It consists of a soft rubber tube placed in a wound area, to...
  • The Chemistry of Copper Electrolysis Objectives  Apply basic

    The Chemistry of Copper Electrolysis Objectives Apply basic

    Pre-1982 penny (contains 95% copper, versus only 2.5% copper post-1982) Dime (any year) 9V battery (use a new 9V battery for each experiment) 18-gauge copper wire. Four alligator clips (2 each of red and black) Wire stripper and needle-nosed pliers....
  • Algebra 1 Review Systems of Linear Equations Using Substitution

    Algebra 1 Review Systems of Linear Equations Using Substitution

    Since a system is a set of linear equations. The solution of a system is the coordinates where the lines would intersect when graphed. So, the solution is an ordered pair, if there is one. What is a solution of...
  • US Tactical Marketing Plan Winter 2010

    US Tactical Marketing Plan Winter 2010

    IFNα Induces MDSC Maturation and Loss of Suppressive Function ® Treatment of plasmacytoid dendritic cells with CpG DNA leads to the production of inflammatory cytokines like interferon alpha (IFN-α).