What is Romans 3 talking about

[Pathway2]

I wanted to to ask based on the Greek Translation which Martian Luther had apparently got the “Faith alone” concept. However the Eastern Orthodox church doesn’t preach the faith alone concept rather something possibly similar (This is what I am assuming)to the Catholic Church. what is Romans 3 really talking about and how does it affect the Gospel?

 

[ProdglArchitect]

It is talking about justification and salvation. It’s saying that salvation is a gift from God, through the sacrifice of His son. It’s not saying that faith is all you need.

 

[Pathway2]

so what is Paul talking about circumcision?

 

[ProdglArchitect]

During the OT, circumcision was a requirement for inclusion in God’s chosen people. After Christ’s resurrection and ascension, there was an argument between the Jewish converts and the gentile converts. The Jewish converts claimed that inclusion in the new covenant also required converts to follow of the old covenant laws, such as dietary restrictions and circumcision.

Paul is writing to explain that observance of the old covenant’s cultural laws was no longer necessary for inclusion in the kingdom of God. Gentile converts did not need to be circumcised, and did not have to follow the dietary restrictions that the Jewish people had historically observed.

 

[po18guy]

It must be taken with in the context of the entirety of scripture. Christianity was in the slow, arduous process of overcoming the very DNA of the Jewish psyche - that of obedience to the Law of Moses via works righteousness. It in no way overrides James, or anything else Paul wrote. If you google the number of times that Paul wrote of good works in the christian realm, you might be surprised. In fact, the Epistle of James (“not by faith alone”) may be in the 1545 Luther Bibel only because his lieutenant, Philipp Melanchthon, specifically wrote an apologia harmonizing James with Paul.

In all things Pauline, we must also remember that Saint Peter specifically wrote that Paul’s writings were difficult to understand and that even 2,000 years ago they were twisted. We are not a Church that was founded on any scriptures. We are not a Church that lurches from verse to verse, trying to make sense of it all. Think: seamless garment.

For a little more clarity, have a read here: http://haydock1859.tripod.com/confraternity/id133.html

 

[steve-b]

It must be taken with in the context of the entirety of scripture. Christianity was in the slow, arduous process of overcoming the very DNA of the Jewish psyche - that of obedience to the Law of Moses via works righteousness. It in no way overrides James, or anything else Paul wrote. If you google the number of times that Paul wrote of good works in the christian realm, you might be surprised. In fact, the Epistle of James (“not by faith alone”) may be in the 1545 Luther Bibel only because his lieutenant, Philipp Melanchthon, specifically wrote an apologia harmonizing James with Paul.

As an aside, because of the teaching of James, Luther was going to ditch James from his bible. It went against Luther’s teaching. He also was going to ditch Jude, Hebrews and Revelations as well.

 

[po18guy]

Old Marty, may he rest in peace, was a hard sell. I pray only that he is extremely thankful for purgatory…

 

[steve-b]

Old Marty, may he rest in peace, was a hard sell. I pray only that he is extremely thankful for purgatory…

Unless he had a valid priest hear his confession before he died, given he was excommunicated, and in mortal sin, purgatory might be a stretch