BSBKJVWEBYLTASVBBEWMBT4TDBY|HymnsMusicDonate
Menu
Theology

Seeking help

Z
ZekeO Jun 18, 2005

Here is the scripture:What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? 2Much in every way! First of all, they have been entrusted with the very words of God. 3What if some did not have faith? Will their lack of faith nullify God's faithfulness? 4Not at all! Let God be true, and every man a liar. As it is written: "So that you may be proved right when you speak and prevail when you judge." 5But if our unrighteousness brings out God's righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.) 6Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world? 7Someone might argue, "If my falsehood enhances God's truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?" 8Why not say—as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say—"Let us do evil that good may result"? Their condemnation is deserved. Rom:3:1-8 NIVEven though Paul says that he is using a human argument, I am failing to see what he is getting at. Does anyone have any suggestions?

sermonindex Jun 18, 2005

In my translation (NASB) it has titled on top of it. "All the World Guilty".And it deserves that rightly. Vs. 9 in the chapter. 9 What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; In VS. 1, Paul doesn't nullify the idea of obeying the Law, because it's the very words of God that were spoken to do.(vs.2)3 and 4 kinda just states, NO MATTER WHAT, GOD IS STILL FAITHFUL TO HIS PROMISES, even if we are FaithLESS.The rest shows just that God is Holy, and it shows our sin (by the Law). And God condemning them by the Law, but God is STILL exalted, and receives Glory for it.Think of a Judge who condemns a WICKED person, and His Judgement was correct and true. Wouldn't people Praise the Judge more? I think, i really can't think of a better way to explain it all.Wow, truly Ray Comfort has enlightened me on the book of Romans. Praise God!!!! *(i probly wouldn't have been able to answer this without his teachings)*

Z
ZekeO Jun 18, 2005

YeshuaIsMyGd wrote:3 and 4 kinda just states, NO MATTER WHAT, GOD IS STILL FAITHFUL TO HIS PROMISES, even if we are FaithLESS.SO in your understanding do promises and the law mean the same thing?

sermonindex Jun 18, 2005

See if this helps, please. I've taken out the verse numbers, so it flows better.You boast about having God's law--but do you bring shame on God by breaking his law? The scripture says, "Because of you Jews, the Gentiles speak evil of God." If you obey the Law, your circumcision is of value; but if you disobey the Law, you might as well never have been circumcised. If the Gentile, who is not circumcised, obeys the commands of the Law, will not God regard him as though he were circumcised? And so you Jews will be condemned by the Gentiles because you break the Law, even though you have it written down and are circumcised; but they obey the Law, even though they are not physically circumcised. After all, who is a real Jew, truly circumcised? It is not the man who is a Jew on the outside, whose circumcision is a physical thing. Rather, the real Jew is the person who is a Jew on the inside, that is, whose heart has been circumcised, and this is the work of God's Spirit, not of the written Law. Such a person receives his praise from God, not from man. Do the Jews then have any advantage over the Gentiles? Or is there any value in being circumcised? Much, indeed, in every way! In the first place, God trusted his message to the Jews. But what if some of them were not faithful? Does this mean that God will not be faithful? Certainly not! God must be true, even though every man is a liar. As the scripture says, "You must be shown to be right when you speak; you must win your case when you are being tried." But what if our doing wrong serves to show up more clearly God's doing right? Can we say that God does wrong when he punishes us? (This would be the natural question to ask.) By no means! If God is not just, how can he judge the world? But what if my untruth serves God's glory by making his truth stand out more clearly? Why should I still be condemned as a sinner? Why not say, then, "Let us do evil so that good may come"? Some people, indeed, have insulted me by accusing me of saying this very thing! They will be condemned, as they should be. Well then, are we Jews in any better condition than the Gentiles? Not at all! I have already shown that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under the power of sin. As the Scriptures say: "There is no one who is righteous, no one who is wise or who worships God. All have turned away from God; they have all gone wrong; no one does what is right, not even one. Their words are full of deadly deceit; wicked lies roll off their tongues, and dangerous threats, like snake's poison, from their lips; their speech is filled with bitter curses. They are quick to hurt and kill; they leave ruin and destruction wherever they go. They have not known the path of peace, nor have they learned reverence for God." Now we know that everything in the Law applies to those who live under the Law, in order to stop all human excuses and bring the whole world under God's judgment. For no one is put right in God's sight by doing what the Law requires; what the Law does is to make man know that he has sinned. But now God's way of putting people right with himself has been revealed. It has nothing to do with law, even though the Law of Moses and the prophets gave their witness to it. God puts people right through their faith in Jesus Christ. God does this to all who believe in Christ, because there is no difference at all: everyone has sinned and is far away from God's saving presence. But by the free gift of God's grace all are put right with him through Christ Jesus, who sets them free. God offered him, so that by his sacrificial death he should become the means by which people's sins are forgiven through their faith in him. God did this in order to demonstrate that he is righteous. In the past he was patient and overlooked people's sins; but in the present time he deals with their sins, in order to demonstrate his righteousness. In this way God shows that he himself is righteous and that he puts right everyone who believes in Jesus. What, then, can we boast about? Nothing! And what is the reason for this? Is it that we obey the Law? No, but that we believe. For we conclude that a person is put right with God only through faith, and not by doing what the Law commands. Or is God the God of the Jews only? Is he not the God of the Gentiles also? Of course he is. God is one, and he will put the Jews right with himself on the basis of their faith, and will put the Gentiles right through their faith. Does this mean that by this faith we do away with the Law? No, not at all; instead, we uphold the Law. (Today's English Version - Romans 2:23 - 3:31)Many translations are available at http://www.olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm - but no NIV there.I think you have to read the whole 'argument' Paul is making, because it is an important one. It is clear from other parts of the New Testament, that through the Holy Spirit believers are expected to keep 'the Law', under the terms of the New Covenant or rather, to find the righteousness of Christ imputed to them through faith, as has already been mentioned ...Basically, Paul is saying the Jews were important because God entrusted His word to the world through them, but, they themselves have not kept the Law, so they are as much in need of salvation as the Gentiles. The purpose of God's revelation is that we may be aware of His definitions of sin and, cease from sin, and anyone who thinks the availability of forgiveness gives them licence to sin more, should be condemned for even suggesting this. Paul points out some have slandered him by using this logic to distort the meaning of the gospel.

C
crsschk Jun 18, 2005

Well this is most interesting. Was downloading and away for awhile and just caught this.This is exactly what I was reading through earlier this morning.Would say to go back a bit and then go forward past this section to get more of Paul's intent.I had started back in Chapter 2..."For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. Rom 2:25-29Think Paul is laying the ground work to prove Gods justification as well as the 'order' of things. Just as Jesus accused the Pharisees of the hypocrisy in cleaning the outside of the cup ("in the letter") that by doing things in the outward fashion they thought could still obtain Gods approval all the while harboring all kinds of evil within their hearts.5But if our unrighteousness brings out God's righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.)Could be wrong here but I think the "our" Paul is referring to is to the Jews, to himself as well as his hearers. Meaning that "we" (us Jews) have the oracles of God (The KJV has it differently in verse 2 right after "Much in everyway!" ':chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.) to "us" was given the law, to Israel, the Jews. In other words, "Just because we blew it and never understood it correctly, because of our folly now God is using it to further His own righteousness, do we get off the hook?" Surely not!Going further on there is a couple of words that really stand out; "Counted" and "Accounted" and by the time you get to chapter 5 the realization of what God wants is Faith...It's amazing how many times one can go through things and suddenly they strike you just a slight bit differently, even if you have 'known' it all along and nodded your head a bazillion times...Hope this is making some sense here, my whole perspective from this since this morning may be altogether different than what ZekeO is asking. One last thought in bold up above: "Fulfil" another key word.

sermonindex Jun 20, 2005

SO in your understanding do promises and the law mean the same thing?Sorry for such a late reply, i just forgot to go back to this thread...sorry!!But how do you get that outta what i was saying?And i think the other posters helped out the first person that was in need. *That is always encouraging*

P
philologos Jun 20, 2005

Hi ZekeOSorry, late to the party. Is this clarifying for you yet? There is a little comment in John Wesley's commentary;Verse 5. But, it may be farther objected, if our unrighteousness be subservient to God’s glory, is it not unjust in him to punish us for it? I speak as a man?—As human weakness would be apt to speak. Is this where you are struggling to catch Paull's thought? The psalm quoted is Psalm 51 and is part of David's consideration of the nature of what he has done. Is it the word 'so' in your TEV Rom 3:4 (that in the KJV) which is causing the problems? Try substituting the word 'thus' for 'so' and see if it makes more sense. The word could be translated 'consequently'. It does not mean 'in order that' nor 'subsequently' as if one statement is the logical deduction of another, but simply that the 'consequence' of this is that God is justified in His judgment. It is sometimes missed that Paul is as anxious to 'justify God' in Romans as he is to explain how God justifies men. “To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.”(Rom. 3:26, KJVS)

Z
ZekeO Jun 20, 2005

YeshuaIsMyGd wrote:

SO in your understanding do promises and the law mean the same thing?But how do you get that outta what i was saying?
The reason I ask is because I have always thought that the law was different from the promises of God. Maybe I am seeing the law in the wrong light and have a bad attitude toward it, but that is why I wrote that.

Z
ZekeO Jun 20, 2005

dorcas wrote:The purpose of God's revelation is that we may be aware of His definitions of sin and, cease from sin, and anyone who thinks the availability of forgiveness gives them licence to sin more, should be condemned for even suggesting this. This ties in with Rom 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? Makes sense. I think my confusion came because of looking at who he was talking to in different parts of the passage. Swinging from adressing Jews and then Gentiles and them both together.

sermonindex Jun 20, 2005

It is not 'easy' to 'get' first time round! Glad the mist is clearing from the text. 8-)

Z
ZekeO Jun 20, 2005

philologos wrote:Is this clarifying for you yet?Indeed it is. Is it the word 'so' in your TEV Rom 3:4 (that in the KJV) which is causing the problems? Try substituting the word 'thus' for 'so' and see if it makes more sense.Can't do that it would give the kingjamerites to much milage. :-PSeriously though thanks for the suggestion. After taking the passage apart I am left with another couple of questions.What about Pauls preaching/teaching and presentation of the gospel message could give the impression that he was saying that...Let us do evil, that good may come?Rom 3:8 KJV 8-) In my reading of the New Testament I never get the impression that that is what he was suggesting.

Z
ZekeO Jun 20, 2005

dorcas wrote:It is not 'easy' to 'get' first time round! If only I could use that excuse, it would'nt be so bad. :lol:

sermonindex Jun 20, 2005

ZekeOIn my reading of the New Testament I never get the impression that that is what he was suggesting.I think this is because whatever Paul had said which allowed malicious misinterpretations to be made after he had been preaching or debating, he explained himself even more fully in the written word, precisely so we could not make that mistake.

Z
ZekeO Jun 20, 2005

dorcas wrote:I think this is because whatever Paul had said which allowed malicious misinterpretations to be made after he had been preaching or debating, he explained himself even more fully in the written word, precisely so we could not make that mistake.This may be an answer, but then are we not preaching a different gospel to him? I think it took the form more of what he did'nt say in presenting the gospel that got him into trouble.

sermonindex Jun 23, 2005

ZekeO,I think it took the form more of what he did'nt say in presenting the gospel that got him into trouble.I'm not an expert, but I read of Paul debating day after day, answering questions and explaining things. It is difficult to think he was not faced with every possible objection to the gospel and this makes it quite possible, in my view, that he could be misquoted or slandered afterwards, forcing him to make the refutation in the passage you chose.

P
philologos Jun 23, 2005

In my reading of the New Testament I never get the impression that that is what he was suggesting.It's not that Paul was suggesting it, but that unscrupulous people could put this construction on his teaching.There is a challenge here too. I know we all like to be quick to add the checks and balances, but do we preach a gospel that is so absolutely 'grace' orientated to the degree that people could misinterpret what we are saying? If we are not accused of saying this, is it because we are not saying what Paul was saying? Could they put this construction on our preaching?

Z
ZekeO Jun 23, 2005

philologos wrote:There is a challenge here too. I know we all like to be quick to add the checks and balances, but do we preach a gospel that is so absolutely 'grace' orientated to the degree that people could misinterpret what we are saying? If we are not accused of saying this, is it because we are not saying what Paul was saying? Could they put this construction on our preaching?Thankyou for putting into words what I was only vaguely trying to express. :-) This feels like a veiled subject at the momment for me, The questions are there to be asked and the answers are there to be found.It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter. Prov 25:2

W
Welch Jun 24, 2005

The problem is not that those people (Paul's subject of unfaithful and ungodly Jews) where misinterpreting or confusing Pauls words, but it was that they where purposefully misconstruing his clear message for their own benefit. These Jews carried the same ideas and arguments (as someone posted earlier) against Jesus. They knew where they stood when compared against the truth Paul presented versus the Law that they whimsically followed (and only half of it at that). They where purposefully attempting to mock him by saying, 'so if you say God is honored by his grace through Jesus on our sin, shouldn't our sin be glorifying to him?' it is possible that there where some (I'm sure alien Gentiles that had no understanding of God) that may have had some genuine questions such as these that Paul was trying to answer. One principal that cannot be emphasized enough is the fact of Paul stating that if you have recieved grace through Jesus then you will autommatically obey they law (See Romans 2:15). The go's against the Jews justifiaction and self-righteous patterns of pretending to obey the Law and that alone will bring you into God's grace. Pau;'s shwing that the Law is not a bad thing, if it where why would we obey it when we are transformed? He is saying that not one can stand, no one is Holy when compared to the Law only God is but through his Son, Jesus they may be changed and will then obey the Law but most importantly walk with God. That's the whole principal of Pauls teaching's is for people to flee their comfort zones of following the Law (or so they pretended to), circumcision, etc. to elevate themselves over Gentiles and excuse themselves from their actions that they where justified in doing :-p and embrace the calling of Christ to a 'personal' relationship with God versus doing old traditions to appease a powerful master that he may have grace to you and not punishment. Sorry for the rant but I get excited when I think of how our Father gave us a living book that shows Grace and Love everlasting in every scripture in some way or another! All in all I think that there where some genuine questions by recently converted Jews and/or Gentiles that where ignorant of Paul's teachings that he was trying to answer plus there where 'religeous' Jews who where attempting to scoff and mock, either to stop his teaching's or to ease their own guilt of not following God, Pauls message that he cleared in Chapters 2-3 of Romans. As far as what Promises versus Law means to me personally... I feel like they are indeed seperate, no I don't feel like I know. First the Law is not wrong or too old, that's like saying the Old Testament is out of date. If we are to accept Salvation for oursleves and Live a life pleasing to God His word lays out rewards and promises that will be kept for our lives (i.e. Fruits of the Spirirt, peace that passes all understanding, Joy, Life everlasting, heaven here on earth, etc.) In living this life for God with a personal and daily fellowship with Him we will automatically keep his commandments/Law and live a life pleasing to him. I hope I helped someone or encouraged someone through this! I love you all.

sermonindex Jun 24, 2005

That's the whole principal of Pauls teaching's is for people to flee their comfort zones of following the Law (or so they pretended to), circumcision, etc. to elevate themselves over Gentiles and excuse themselves from their actions that they where justified in doing :-p and embrace the calling of Christ to a 'personal' relationship with God versus doing old traditions to appease a powerful master that he may have grace to you and not punishment... I hope I helped someone or encouraged someone through this!You blessed me! I appreciate how you explained this, thanks.

This discussion is locked.

Archived
1 of 19 posts