Jump to content

The Christian Protestant Community Forums

Sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community forums. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Community Fellowship

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Solas

Genesis 6:3 and irresistible grace

Recommended Posts

How do the two coexist?

 

Genesis 6:3 KJV
[3] And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
41 minutes ago, Solas said:

How do the two coexist?

 

Genesis 6:3 KJV
[3] And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

 

Not really sure how you mean but Genesis 6:3 and 1 Corinthians 2:14 coexist.

 

Genesis 6:3 Then the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.”
1 Corinthians 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

 

And thankfully so, because the means by which the Holy Spirit contends through the Evangelists 'has better things to do'.

 

In the way I understand Genesis 6:3 God's wrath is being layed up or His wrath kindled until the day of reckoning. Even upon the earth Government could be said to end such contentiousness as Government is ordained to wield the sword against evil. Though the Lord is patient and slow to anger His benevolence to all men will be replaced one day.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
On 5/6/2019 at 8:59 AM, Solas said:

How do the two coexist?

 

Genesis 6:3 KJV
[3] And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

 

The meaning of the Hebrew word (יָדוֹן - KJV "strive") is problematic.  It only occurs here in Gen. 6:3.

 

The NIV has "My Spirit will not contend with humans forever."  That conveys the same thought as the KJV.

 

However I how prefer the Net Bible and the ESV.

"My spirit will not remain in humankind indefinitely" (Net Bible)

"My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh" (ESV)

 

An important question is how are we to understand the word רוּחַ (spirit, breath)?  Note the Net Bible does not capitalize the word "spirit."

 

 

  • Informative 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
40 minutes ago, Origen said:

Any important question is how are we to understand the word רוּחַ (spirit, breath)?  Note the Net Bible does not capitalize the word "spirit."

Nice clarification because I cannot personally see "effectual or irresistible" grace being emphasized here by the Holy Spirit. But rather "spirit, breath" or life by which men exhibit such grace common to all alive though dead in sin and trespass Matthew 5:45. Ah, think I'm catching onto Solas point.... .

 

Given the immediate context of the verse, moments before (context) the flood gates are open, the wickedness of man through intentions and evil thoughts of his heart stand in contrast to God.

 

"His days shall be" seemingly is a frame of time or limitation which contrasts the will of God. Such contrasts follows in the next paragraph which states the condition of the natural man's heart to that of God which grieves their evil. There is a sense of amusement or rather intrigue in my mind as I refer to pre-flood men as "natural" because the following verse mentions Nephilim.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
29 minutes ago, William said:

Nice clarification because I cannot personally see "effectual or irresistible" grace being emphasized here by the Holy Spirit. But rather "spirit, breath" or life by which men exhibit such grace common to all alive though dead in sin and trespass Matthew 5:45. Ah, think I'm catching onto Solas point.... .

 

Given the immediate context of the verse, moments before (context) the flood gates are open, the wickedness of man through intentions and evil thoughts of his heart stand in contrast to God.

 

"His days shall be" seemingly is a frame of time or limitation which contrasts the will of God. Such contrasts follows in the next paragraph which states the condition of the natural man's heart to that of God which grieves their evil. There is a sense of amusement or rather intrigue in my mind as I refer to pre-flood men as "natural" because the following verse mentions Nephilim.

I never intended to address anything theological.  The text itself was my primary concern.  Before one can move to theological issues the text itself must be established and its meaning.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
7 minutes ago, Origen said:

I never intended to address anything theological.  Before one can move to theological concerns the text itself must be established and its meaning.

Yes, I agree. My point being is that it appears that "effectual or irresistible" grace would be forced into the verse.

 

I think Solas question is whether the work of the Holy Spirit in an effectual sense is being contended against by the reprobate in Genesis 6:3. Therefore, the irresistible is resistible.

  • Toast 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
16 minutes ago, William said:

Yes, I agree. My point being is that it appears that "effectual or irresistible" grace would be forced into the verse.

 

The question is whether the work of the Holy Spirit in an effectual sense is being contended against by the reprobate.

I think both the KJV and the NIV possibly could be understood from that point of view though I do not agree.

 

Clearly, however, the Net Bible and to a lesser extent the ESV cannot be understood in those terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
17 minutes ago, Origen said:

I think both the KJV and the NIV possibly could be understood from that point of view though I do not agree.

 

Clearly, however, the Net Bible and to a lesser extent the ESV cannot be understood in those terms.

Just pointing out that the heart of the wicked in Genesis 6 (surrounding context) is stated which stands in contrast to the theologically "Regenerated" (effectual grace).

 

I think further context contrasts Noah and family with these wicked men. That is, if one might want to contrasts the two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, William said:

I think Solas question is whether the work of the Holy Spirit in an effectual sense is being contended against by the reprobate in Genesis 6:3. Therefore, the irresistible is resistible.

Yes, that was my thinking behind my post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Origen said:

I think both the KJV and the NIV possibly could be understood from that point of view though I do not agree.

 

Clearly, however, the Net Bible and to a lesser extent the ESV cannot be understood in those terms.

A sampler...

 

v.3 So the Lord said, “My spirit will not remain in humankind indefinitely, since they are mortal. NET

 

v. 3 The LORD said, “My Spirit will not ·remain in [or contend with] human beings forever, because they are ·flesh [mortal]. EXB

 

v. 3 Then the Lord said, My Spirit shall not forever dwell and strive with man, for he also is flesh; but his days shall yet be 120 years. AMP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
34 minutes ago, Solas said:

Yes, that was my thinking behind my post.

Consider going down into the next verse:

 

Gen 6:4  The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.

 

Genesis 6.4 theologically contrasts the regenerated, not contrasting in the immediate context but from what we know theologically elsewhere. For example, the Regenerate are "born from above or of God", but Genesis 6.4 is explicitly stating that those were born of the world, they were children of and men of renown or worldly reputation. Therefore, they were not effectually called (theological conclusion). If they had a regenerate heart their very hearts would not be in contrast to God's (He grieved), that is, they would grieve their evil:

 

5 The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the Lord regretted that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart. 7 So the Lord said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens, for I am sorry that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.

 

As you can note a contrast is occurring.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
20 minutes ago, Solas said:

A sampler...

 

v.3 So the Lord said, “My spirit will not remain in humankind indefinitely, since they are mortal. NET

 

v. 3 The LORD said, “My Spirit will not ·remain in [or contend with] human beings forever, because they are ·flesh [mortal]. EXB

 

v. 3 Then the Lord said, My Spirit shall not forever dwell and strive with man, for he also is flesh; but his days shall yet be 120 years. AMP

The Amplified Bible is just flat out wrong.   The Hebrew is not "dwell and strive."  There is only one verb.

 

The Expanded Bible simply gives the two alternatives which I pointed out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Origen said:

The Amplified Bible is just flat out wrong.   The Hebrew is not "dwell and strive."  There is only one verb.

 

The Expanded Bible simply gives the two alternatives which I pointed out.

Quoting Jarchi, John Gill brings up an interesting angle...

 

"my Spirit shall not always strive with man; meaning either the soul of man, called the Spirit of God, Job 27:3 because of his creation, and is what he breathes and puts into men, and therefore is styled the Father of spirits; and which is in man, as some in Aben Ezra observe to be the sense the word used, as a sword in the scabbard; and so the meaning is, it shall not always abide there, but be unsheathed and drawn out; man shall not live always, since he is corrupt, and given to carnal lusts: or else, as Jarchi thinks, God himself is meant, and that the sense is, my Spirit shall not always contend within myself; or there shall not always be contention within me concerning man, whether I shall destroy him, or have mercy on him; I am at a point to punish him, since he is wholly carnal: or rather this is to be understood of the Holy Spirit of God, as the Targum of Jonathan, which agrees with 1Pe 3:18 and to be thus interpreted; that the Spirit of God, which had been litigating and reasoning the point, as men do in a court of judicature, as the word signifies, with these men in the court, and at the bar of their own consciences, by one providence or by one minister or another, particularly by Noah, a preacher of righteousness, in vain, and to no purpose; therefore, he determines to proceed no longer in this way, but pass and execute the sentence of condemnation on them:" -John Gill on Genesis.

Edited by Solas
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
28 minutes ago, Solas said:

Particularly by Noah, a preacher of righteousness, in vain, and to no purpose; therefore, he determines to proceed no longer in this way, but pass and execute the sentence of condemnation on them:" -John Gill on Genesis.

Pretty strong statement from Gill and one that might receive a lot of theological contention.

 

Gill goes against the grain of modern day Christian cliches which depict God as a wishful thinker up in heaven just hoping someone will decide to choose Him. The statement is contrary to such sentiments conveying that God knows His own and that literally 'God is not going to waste His breath'.

 

I mean wowsers!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
2 hours ago, Solas said:

Quoting Jarchi, John Gill ...

I cannot agree with Jarchi (i.e. Rashi).  I don't see any grammatical or exegetical reason for such a view (i.e. "God himself is meant").

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
8 minutes ago, Origen said:

I cannot agree with Jarchi.  I cannot see any grammatical or exegetical reason for such a view (i.e. God himself is meant).

Oh, you said Jarchi and not Chachi!

 

55bdda7edad0620a8706bc7dc5c4e4586a8a38c7

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
Just now, William said:

Oh, you said Jarchi and not Chachi!

 

oc chachi GIF

Charles in charge

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
2 minutes ago, Origen said:

Charles in charge

charlesincharge1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Origen said:

I cannot agree with Jarchi (i.e. Rashi).  I don't see any grammatical or exegetical reason for such a view (i.e. "God himself is meant").

I admit, I'm not a Hebrew scholar by any stretch of the imagination, soooo,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Origen said:

The text itself was my primary concern.  Before one can move to theological issues the text itself must be established and its meaning. 

Excellent point!

Reminds of saying I once heard "without morphonology, there is no theology!" attributed to Peter Gentry

  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
6 minutes ago, Solas said:

I admit, I'm not a Hebrew scholar by any stretch of the imagination, soooo,

I understand.  My point is if we are going to consider\choose one view over another then some objective evidence is needed.  Gill provides no grammatical reasons for Rashi view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Solas said:

Quoting Jarchi, John Gill brings up an interesting angle...

 

Rather than taking Gill's word for it check out what Rashi (and the others) actually have to say(at least according to Michael Carasik's translation):

 

GENESIS 6:3

 

RASHI
My breath shall not abide in man forever. Rather, “My spirit shall not trouble Me about man forever.” Right now My spirit is debating within Me whether to destroy them or be merciful to them. But this debate within Me will not go on “forever”—that is, not for long. Since he too is flesh. The difficult Hebrew word b’shagam should be interpreted as if it were bishvil she-gam, “because also of this [fact about him].” He is flesh, yet he refuses to submit to Me. Just imagine if he were made of fire, or of some hard substance!—For other cases of sha- instead of the standard she-, see Judg. 5:7 and 6:17. Let the days allowed him be one hundred and twenty years. I will keep My temper for 120 years. If they have not repented by then, I will bring a Flood upon them.—If you object that from the birth of Japheth to the Flood was only 100 years, remember that the Torah is not written in chronological order. This decree was issued 20 years before Noah begot children. (See Seder Olam for confirmation of this chronology.) There are many midrashim about the phrase “My breath shall not abide,” but this is clearly the straightforward sense of it.

 

RASHBAM
My breath shall not abide in man forever. Rather, “My spirit shall not judge man forever,” deliberating whether or not to wipe out humankind.

 

IBN EZRA
My breath shall not abide in man forever. Some think this means God is saying He will remove it, as when He “ordered the angel to return his sword to its sheath” (1 Chron. 21:27). In this view, the noun nadan (“sheath”) is related to the verb yadon (“abide”) in our verse. The body is a kind of “sheath” in which God’s “spirit” (OJPS) temporarily abides. In the Aramaic of Dan. 7:15, “My spirit was disturbed within me,” the spirit is literally inside a nadan. But these are separate roots. (There are many cases where the same two letters may be preceded by י or נ in one root and have a י or ו between them in a second root.) Others point out that the form of yadon resembles yashov of Eccles. 12:7. It would therefore mean that “My” spirit (“Mine” in the sense that the spirit comes from God) “will not judge” man forever. For the spirit is the body’s judge. The point is that the spirit cannot stay forever in the body: “The dust returns to the ground as it was, and the lifebreath returns to God who bestowed it” (Eccles. 12:7). Only man has this kind of spirit. Yet it will not remain in him due to the “lawlessness” coming up in v. 11. Moreover, man is made of flesh, which reaches its limit and begins to decline, until the made outpaces the maker.  Since. The sha- syllable of this word is the equivalent of the more common she-, an alternative form of the relative pronoun asher. Let the days allowed him be one hundred and twenty years. Some say this expression is describing the limit of (most) human life. We do find some in the Bible who live longer than this, but very few. This view, however, is quite wrong. Shem (11:10–11) lived 600 years, and all the ensuing generations lived similarly long lives. Only with Peleg (11:18–19) did lives begin to grow shorter. From David’s time to our own, “the span of our life is [just] seventy years, or, given the strength, eighty years” (Ps. 90:10). The truth is what Onkelos said: God was giving mankind a deadline. Just as when Jonah announced, “Forty days more, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!” (Jon. 3:4), here too if they repented they would escape and if not they would die. Pay no attention to the fact that this warning follows the notice that “Noah had lived 500 years” (5:32) and that “Noah was six hundred years old when the Flood came” (7:6). You must not expect everything in the Torah to be written chronological order. After all, 11:32 tells us that “Terah died in Haran,” after which we find that “the LORD said to Abram, ‘Go forth from your native land’ ” (12:1)—yet we can easily figure out that Terah must have lived until Abraham’s yet-unborn son Isaac was 35 years old. This is just one example out of many I could have chosen.

 

KIMHI
The LORD said. He “said” this to Himself, or to Noah. My breath shall not abide in man forever. My father of blessed memory understood yadon (“abide”) to be related to the noun madon (“quarrel”). “The higher spirit that I breathed into man cannot struggle forever with the body and its animal appetites.” The link with “sheath” of 1 Chron. 21:27  is quite plausible: for a similar pair of words, see 25:29. Since he too is flesh. Rather, “he is flesh, too,” not just spirit, and the flesh pulls the spirit in the animal direction. Let the days allowed him be one hundred and twenty years. I will give them another 120 years. If they repent, fine. If not, I will wipe them off the earth. Why precisely 120 years we do not know, other than that this was the will of the Creator.

 

NAHMANIDES
My breath shall not abide in man forever, since he too is flesh. Rashi’s comment about “since he too is flesh” is unsatisfying. As for Ibn Ezra’s explanation, what would be the point of it? Obviously they are flesh—but their death has already been decreed: “For dust you are, and to dust you shall return” (3:19). In my view, the phrase is saying, “My spirit shall not abide in man for ever [OJPS]—for he too is flesh, just like all flesh that creeps over the earth, the birds and the beasts. He does not deserve to have a divine spirit in him.” God made man fit to be like one of the ministering angels with the soul that was in him, but he is drawn after the flesh and its physical appetites, “like the beasts that perish” (Ps. 49:13 and 21). So the spirit of God would no longer abide in him. He is physical, not divine. But the Holy One would wait a while and give them the chance to repent: “He remembered that they were but flesh, a passing breath that does not return” (Ps. 78:39).

 

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
My breath shall not abide in man forever. I did not punish Adam or Cain immediately when they sinned, for “they were but flesh, a passing breath that does not return” (Ps. 78:39); the same is true for these people (Bekhor Shor). “The intelligence I created in the human race will not be able to make them act properly unless I come up with some sort of plan.” This was undoubtedly spoken to a prophet: Noah (Gersonides).


Carasik, Michael, ed. Genesis: Introduction and Commentary. Trans. Michael Carasik. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 2018. The Commentators’ Bible.

Edited by Ben Asher
  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
1 hour ago, Solas said:

I admit, I'm not a Hebrew scholar by any stretch of the imagination, soooo,

Neither am I, but my tactical rifle packs a grenade launcher named @Origen

 

charles bronson grenade launcher GIF by Cheezburger

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Origen said:

I understand.  My point is if we are going to consider\choose one view over another then some objective evidence is needed.  Gill provides no grammatical reasons for Rashi view.

Right, he just threw it out for consideration, like I did.

Edited by Solas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...