Summary of text [comment] page 81

[Allow me to recap the previous blogs.

Schoonenberg did not see that Paul’s parole ‘flesh’ veiled the corruption of the Old Testament term ‘flesh and bones’.

Once one sees this option, then the enumeration of spiritual sins as ‘carnal’ makes perfect sense.

In addition, Schoonenberg did not conceive of the idea that Paul wrote at a time when language was changing ordination. The entire system of differences was in flux. Such a concept simply had not impacted Holland in the early 1960s.

‘Paul’s use of the term ‘flesh’‘ and ‘Christianity’s plain interpretation of Paul’s words’, thus constituted a prophecy; a truth awaiting a moment of surprise, when the mythos opens and the logos is revealed.]