The Letter to the Romans...

homwardbound · Jan 19, 2014

Romans 2:17-24

But if you call yourself a Jew and rely on the law and boast in God and know his will and approve what is excellent, because you are instructed from the law; and if you are sure that you yourself area guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of children, having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth - you then who teach others, do you not teach yourself? While you preach against stealing, do you steal? You who say that one must not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the law dishonor God by breaking the law. For, as it is written, “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.”

What Paul's Saying...

(Paul continuing with a contrast) However, those who call themselves “Jews” are aware of God’s whole law. And although they pride themselves on being the light bearers to the world, they’re hypocrites because they are continuously disobedient; breaking God’s law. This leads to the nations blaspheming God saying “wow, so that’s a follower of God? They don’t act any different than anyone else...God must be a mental illness some people go through.” [I took the liberty to modernize this last sentence for a better effect.]

If you agree with this interpretation, “like”.

If you disagree with this interpretation, post an alternative for others to agree with.

If you’d like further elaboration of an interpretation, feel free to ask.

Now here comes the difference in Law and grace, how the two do not mix as oil and water can't mix. As new wine can fit at first in old wineskin, but the old skin will not last and the old skin will, break and loss will be had.
Where as new wine needs new wine skin so that it will last and allegory to flesh and the Spirit of God. Why we need born again or anew, dead to flesh and alive to God

homwardbound · Jan 19, 2014

Yahshua said:

Romans 2:25-29

For circumcision indeed is of value if you obey the law, but if you break the law, your circumcision becomes uncircumcision. So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? Then he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law. For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God.

What Paul's Saying...

(Following the context of the hypocrisy of “preaching God’s law but not doing it”) Paul uses the example of circumcision to explain. He says there’s nothing wrong with physical circumcision for anyone who obeys the law of God, but if they disobey God’s law it’s as if they were never circumcised. Likewise, any uncircumcised person who obeys God’s law would be counted as being circumcised...because it’s not about what you can show people (like physical circumcision) but more about an inside conversion. So a true “Jew” is anyone who’s had a true change of heart from the world’s way to obeying God’s law, it’s not about outward symbols.

If you agree with this interpretation, “like”.

If you disagree with this interpretation, post an alternative for others to agree with.

If you’d like further elaboration of an interpretation, feel free to ask.

It is about God's circumcision of the Heart that god the Father through Christ gives us the power to all who belief God. Belief in god empowers to do love of God via the new Heart that god gives through Son's finished work at the cross, if one believes they receive and see

Hoffco · Jan 19, 2014

please, don't repost old posts, it distroys the flow. to Redtent ,thank fot the defence for true faith. And I do see ,the sinner whom God saves is a believer, who at that moment is not save, he is merely seeking God for salvation in faith to God who alone saves the sinner by Sanctification first and Justification second. Please, look ahead to Rom.8:29-30: please note,"called" (sanctification) is before "justified" (justification). This is always the order in salvation all thur the New T.. Hoffco

homwardbound · Jan 19, 2014

Yahshua said:

Romans 3:19-20

Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.

What Paul's Saying...

(Following the previous point) The context is “how EVERYONE is under sin”, so here Paul explains how the law makes this possible. So the subject of this passage is “The Law and how *IT* specifically functions”; how it works to reveal unrighteousness (i.e. sin) in the world. In Context, this passage has nothing to do with the works of men, positively or negatively. The subject of this thought is The Law's works...not men's works.

[Letting the bible interpret itself; the same phrase "work of the law" is first used in Romans 2:14-16 and shows that The Law itself has a "work"; a job to perform. Other translations of the same phrase say "the requirements of the law" (the law's requirements), and "the deeds of the law" (the law's deeds).]

Paul says “The Law Speaks” (an action)...and no one is justified because of what The Law *says* (an action). The Law has a necessary job to do: to show what is a sin (and why we are ALL unrighteous). So “the works of the law” [i.e. "The Law's works" or "The Law's requirements" or "The Law’s actions"] hold the world accountable to a Just God.

If you agree with this interpretation, “like”.

If you disagree with this interpretation, post an alternative for others to agree with.

If you’d like further elaboration of an interpretation, feel free to ask.

The Law itself is pure righteous and Holy, yet whenever it flows through flesh the perfect Law shows our inability to obey it perfectly. Flesh is weak, yet the Law is Holy, and the Law show us our weakness and need for the perfect God

homwardbound · Jan 19, 2014

Yahshua said:

Romans 3:31

Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.

What Paul's Saying...

Paul says because it’s faith that justifies us some may argue to do away with The Law, but Paul emphatically denounces such an idea. (In context to what Paul says in Post #9, #10, & #12) Paul says we maintain The Law (because as he said earlier, it’s “obeying the law” that makes us righteous)...we simply can’t do that without Christ’s grace, which alone comes from having faith in him.

----

Ephesians 2:8 - Salvation is by Grace through faith in Christ

1. post #37: Faith in Christ...

2. Christ’s gift of Grace...

3. Post #2: Grace is the Christ's power to be obedient to God...

4. Post #36: Obedience to God's Law is righteousness...

5. Post #10: As all will be judged based on their works

----

The law of God is the “lock”...Christ’s grace is the “key”...and our faith is how we receive that key. And when we use it we are freed from our bondage to sin and finally able to be obedient to God.

If you agree with this interpretation, “like”.

If you disagree with this interpretation, post an alternative for others to agree with.

If you’d like further elaboration of an interpretation, feel free to ask.

without the perfect Law being put in place I would never had Known I need a savior since I can't obey the law in perfection in from me my own flesh
Thank you god for the Law to show me my need for you.
This is how I uphold the Law

Elin · Jan 19, 2014

Hoffco said:

No, my friend, "called" is not sanctification.

If you attended a Reformed seminary, then you know that "called" is effectual calling,
the call of God in the gospel to which there is invariably a positive response of faith.

The call of God in the gospel is to become sanctified through the obedience of faith,
it is not sanctification itself.

See 2 Tim 1:9; Gal 1:15; Eph 4:4.

Ro 8:28-30 does not present sanctification before justification.

homwardbound · Jan 19, 2014

Keren said:

I have also seen a terrible thing here. Taking the words of Paul and making them say that by the Spirit we now are empowered to obey Mosaic Law better? This also is from Satan. Paul never said anything like that. The Mosaic Law was added, because of transgressions , to show how exceedingly sinful all mankind is, that we do not obey the Law according to God's standard. Not while we were unsaved and not after we are saved. The Law condemns, it can not save, it can not add to righteousness. It was never intended to. Jesus Christ is God Himself and He came because in Adam all men fell and sinned. That means all. There is not any time at all in anyone's life, including the Christian life where the Work of Jesus Christ is not central and critical. I don't care how moral you think you are, or how much you think you obey God's Law. The Law was ADDED to SHOW unrighteousness. And to lead to the ONLY other way. Jesus Christ on the Cross. What God expects from us is gratitude and love! Will you break any of Moses`Laws if you love God for giving Jesus.
When Jesus said if you love me you will keep mu commandments He meant keep and guard and hold dear and treasure and listen and obey and pass on to future generations. He did not sy to to the woman caught in adultery, If you go and sin no more I will not condemn you. He said, neither do I condemn you. Now go, and sin no more. Is this not the Christian life, and do we not STILL fall short. Please tell me if you do not.

Anytime I walk in the flesh I do, but anytime I walk in the Spirit I don't have time for sin to have control, too busy praising and thanking God for Son Christ being dead daily to flesh and alive to God daily

Hoffco · Jan 19, 2014

Thanks to Yahshua for the great truths in your posts, at the moment it is falling on deaf ears, but Iwill continue my out line for those who have"ears" to hear. (sorry, I do not mean this as Jesus used "ears" to condemn the pharisees; I think most here on this thread are saved,) Before I go to the 2nd great theme of Roman, Justification in chs. 3-5:14, I will point out the new birth statement in 2:29. Paul has just stated the contrast between the saved Gentile and the lost Jew, and now to prove his point, paul says who the TRUE Jew is: v,29. " But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; .." This verse confirms that chs, 1&2 are talking of the new birth, which is sanctification by the Spirit. this is as Peter says in 1Pet.1:2 "Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ:..." Sanct.first and "sprinkling" Justi. second. Hoffco Paul will deal with the second phase of Sanct. in chs. 5:15-; 6,7,8,12. That will refer back to our new birth and go on to our life in Christ and our perfection in the after life.

Hoffco · Jan 19, 2014

To Keren, You have a very demeaning view of the Old Test.. The word of God,the Law, was Gods way of salvation for Them . With the sacrifice of the lambs their sins were forgiven: that was salvation for the repenting sinner in the O. T.. God knew the REAL sacrifice would come in His son, on the cross, but for them, it was the lamb, which they offered for their sins, and they were forgiven. Hoffco

Yahshua · Jan 19, 2014

chubbena said:

Yes, from the context the "among you" is referring to the believers in Rome, those same believers he's writing to. Apologies; I don't think I was clear in my explanation, but I'm led to believe from the immediate context preceding the statement you're asking about, that Paul is harvesting more faith for himself. Seeing the new believers gives him even more faith to perform the work God has commissioned him to do.

I come to this conclusion because of key phrases in the passage (in bold)...

Romans 1:8-15

First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is proclaimed in all the world. For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I mention you always in my prayers, asking that somehow by God's will I may now at last succeed in coming to you. For I long to see you, that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to strengthen you— that is, that *we* may be mutually encouraged by *each other's* faith, both yours and mine. I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that I have often intended to come to you (but thus far have been prevented), in order that I may reap some harvest among you as well as among the rest of the Gentiles. I am under obligation both to Greeks and to non-Greeks, both to the wise and to the foolish. So I am eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome.

Paul longed to see them so that he *also* could be encouraged by *their* faith (as they would be encouraged by his when they finally saw him); this is what he wanted to receive from them: encouragement. Then comes the line where he says "I indent to come to you so I may reap some harvest among you as well as among the rest of the gentiles."

..."some harvest" of what? Well it has to be what he just stated he wanted to receive from them. Paul wanted some harvest (i.e. some measure) of encouragement to grow his faith even more. Remember, this is a relatively "young" movement at this point that's catching fire, and Paul hasn't been in Rome yet to see these new believers, and seeing them would get him even more "fired up" than he already was.

Elin · Jan 19, 2014

Hoffco said:

In the light of the whole counsel of God, they were chosen for sanctification, obedience, justification,

not chosen by sanctification and obedience for justification.

Righteousness/justification is from God, by faith (Ro 1:17, 3:21), not from the sanctification of my obedience.

That is anti gospel.

Yahshua · Jan 19, 2014

chubbena said:

Yes Paul did quote Habakkuk 2:4

"Behold, his soul is puffed up; it is not upright within him, but the righteous shall live by his faith."

...I'm trying to keep this thread about Paul's letter to the Romans, but when he quotes passages I understand it necessitates gaining further context from those passages so I'll try to address Habakkuk...but after this, if you'd like to explore Habakkuk even deeper we can start a similar thread for it.

---

The context of "the righteous shall live by his faith" is God's answer to Habakkuk's complain found in chapter 1 of that book, where Habakkuk complains how the Law is paralyzed and its justice never seems to be given and if it is given it's perverted because of wicked people from other nations (Hab 1:4).

Getting more specific, Habakkuk complains about the man who prides himself on his actions to live a comfortable & luxurious life (Hab 1:15-16) by taking advantage of the righteous man for gain (Hab 1:13), and killing/spoiling nations (Hab 1:17). These are unrighteous actions...or (how Paul would say) "evil works". God answers Habakkuk saying "THAT man is prideful and not righteous" (i.e. "it is not upright within him"), comparatively the righteous [man, mentioned in Hab 1:13] will live by his faith" (the context is "as opposed to how the unrighteous man lives which is through his self-seeking actions: deceit, warring and spoiling).

---

I'm hoping to establish an unbroken chain of context for Romans, and that's why post #2 is reference for my interpretation of passage Romans 1:16-17. So of course, if you disagree with Post #2, you won't agree with Post #5 (and so on...and so on...). But since you've given your alternative for post #2 please feel free to give your alternative to post #5 and other subsequent interpretations...just PLEASE remember to follow *your* context.

This is a request to all.

There should be an unbroken chain of context in your posts that others can logically follow from Paul's very first point (you make) to his last (that you make), as Paul wrote a single coherent letter...not multiple independent passages.

In other words, he didn't write the letter to the Romans in such a way that they - gentiles - needed exegesis, using other letters Paul wrote to other people, to understand what each of Paul's interdependent thoughts meant. They wouldn't have had those other letters. So Paul would have clearly explained whatever he was trying to say in the letter itself otherwise the letter wouldn't have made any sense. So likewise, our interpretations/conclusions should logically build from each previous points of Paul that we've shared.

If we need to jump to conclusions, something's wrong with our interpretation.

If one point doesn't logically follow the context of one's previous point, something's wrong with our interpretation.

Elin · Jan 19, 2014

Hoffco said:

Not according to Hebrews: "It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away (remit) sin."

There is no salvation where there is no taking away (remission) of sin.

And not according to Paul: their salvation was not bought until the cross when God's justice was satisfied, and their sin was then taken away (remitted). (Ro 3:25).

Such anti-gospel is astounding. . .

Yahshua · Jan 19, 2014

Thanks again to you who've posted your interpretations following the format as best as possible. I'm going to continue through chapter 4 of Romans after I ask for explanations of some posts here.

If a disagreement develops into a debate (especially of other passages not in Romans) please quote the post and move it to its own Thread, as this is for a reading/interpretation of Romans.

Thanks!

Yahshua · Jan 19, 2014

Elin said:

Elin can you further explain how in Romans 2:6-11 is Paul saying this is how God "used to" judge mankind (past tense). Paul uses future tense ("God will judge...") in this passage and speaks about eternal life vs God's wrath.

In the previous verse (Romans 2:5), Paul says "But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed." (future tense). So I'm trying to see from your POV how this is Paul calling back to a time before Christ's death.

Elin · Jan 19, 2014

chubbena said:

Elin said:

Was Paul here giving definitions of the words "gospel" and "grace" which the readers of this letter had already received? Isn't gospel preaching in His name repentance and forgiveness of sins which Paul later elaborated in chapters 5, 8 and 10?

The text reads: the gospel of God. . .concerning his Son. . .who was declared to be the Son of God.

The gospel is "The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!" (Mk 1:15)

It also encompasses the nature and work of Christ.

Elin · Jan 19, 2014

Yahshua said:

God's basis of judgment (sentence) for one's eternal destiny,
during the old covenant (the time of the Jews) before the death of Christ,
was according to the law for the Jews, and according to conscience for the Gentiles.

God's basis of judgment (sentence) for one's eternal destiny,
after the old covenant and the death of Christ,
is according to faith in Christ Jesus, for both Jews and Gentiles.

But in both cases, for those before and after the death of Christ,
his righteous judgment (sentence) for one's eternal destiny
will be revealed at the end of time,

in contrast to his temporal judgment in Ro 1:18-32, which is not a sentence of eternal destiny.

For example, God can judge a nation with famine,
but it is not a judgment (sentence) of their eternal destiny.

Now, how about you say what I just said in a much better and more simple way for me.

Elin · Jan 19, 2014

Con't.

Under the law, the basis of judgment was obedience, to the law or to one's conscience.

After the law, the basis of judgment is faith, not law keeping.

< But true faith obeys. Where there is no obedience, there is no true faith. >

Yahshua · Jan 19, 2014

Elin said:

Haha!

lol

Elin said:

...thanks for your whole explanation Elin.

----

By the way, I'm going to continue through Romans. You've concluded there's "anti-gospel" a few times. Even if you believe what I post is, I'd hope you and others continue to provide your alternatives interpretations to passages - as your time allows - so people can see, agree, disagree, and/or seek further explanation. Thanks!

Hoffco · Jan 19, 2014

Elin, you are true to the fudging reform believers. They make a dogmatic claim , "Justification by Faith alone", the then modify it ,to be more Biblical, "But, faith that abides alone is not saving faith." This is how Calvin and all half baked reform believers act, talked. If you hold them to the heat, they change their dogmatic, one side ,false claim. I always seek to be more Honest to Scripture. Luther was more honest, He rejected the book of James because of James dogmatic statements of "justification by WORKS and not faith only". James2:24. Rom. 2:13 is literally true, only holy , God fearing, obeying the law persons will be save, justified by works. as James and Jesus taught. Hoffco

The Letter to the Romans...

Senior Member

Senior Member

Hoffco

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Hoffco

Guest

Hoffco

Guest

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Senior Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Senior Member

Hoffco

Guest