21 Because that *when* they knew God they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful;
but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
When was this *when* they knew God they glorified Him not as God????
There's no "when" in the Greek.
dioti gnontes ton theon
because having known [the] God
ouch os theon edoxasan e eucharistesan, ....
not as God did they glorify or thank. ...
gnontes γνοντες is an aorist participle used possibly as a substantive - "the having known guys"
I never thought when I joined Free Republic that I'd be goosing up my Koine Greek.
The "plucking out of a few words" is used because here Paul seems to be clarifying how being "without the law" does not exclude one either from deserving punishment or from acts which are in some sense meritorious. And this has led to people talking about "natural law" or "general revelation".
And I still do not see a positive statement of what you think the passage is about. What I am seeing is THAT you disagree, but not what your disagreement leads you to think about the passage, or about "natural law" or "general revelation".
As to the rest, tempting as these issues are to explore, if you don't mind I think that we may lose sight of the general revelation issue if we go after them.
What comes to my mind in what words Paul uses is in IICorinthians 11:2-3......."simplicity that is in Christ."?
It is my understanding that Romans is not the first book Paul wrote, yet it is placed first, and Romans gives the ABC's of "church" teaching. "The just shall live by faith" (1:17)
There's no "when" in the Greek. dioti gnontes ton theon because having known [the] God ouch os theon edoxasan e eucharistesan, .... not as God did they glorify or thank. ... gnontes γνοντες is an aorist participle used possibly as a substantive - "the having known guys"
And while you are technically correct that the word *when* is not in the Greek as used in the English Romans 1:21 there is a time element given by the implication of what is said.
I never thought when I joined Free Republic that I'd be goosing up my Koine Greek. The "plucking out of a few words" is used because here Paul seems to be clarifying how being "without the law" does not exclude one either from deserving punishment or from acts which are in some sense meritorious. And this has led to people talking about "natural law" or "general revelation". And I still do not see a positive statement of what you think the passage is about. What I am seeing is THAT you disagree, but not what your disagreement leads you to think about the passage, or about "natural law" or "general revelation". As to the rest, tempting as these issues are to explore, if you don't mind I think that we may lose sight of the general revelation issue if we go after them.
I do not read Romans in a vacuum, but as foundation given on three levels. Paul was not allowed to live his life with doing his free will. He explains why he was set apart from the majority of peoples that come through this flesh age. This is instruction to me and explains how it could be said that God loved Jacob and hated Esau Romans 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of Him that calleth;)