T
trinichiqn
Guest
Each Gospel is different. My fave is Luke simply because all the canticles for the Liturgy of the Hours come from Luke. The Benedictus, The Magnificat and the Canticle of Simeon.
Yes, but it says this in condemnation of all men, not in the sense of justifying them. Paul is leading up to the crux of his argument that man needs Christ as his justification. Note that it is right after Romans 3:4 that Paul then says that No one is righteous, no not one. Here he is using the known evil of man’s works to condemn him before God before he then begins his good news in Romans 3:19 where he delivers to us the good news that through Christ we are justified by faith apart from works. You cannot read Romans 3 backwards, because it destroys the entire flow of Paul’s argument.Romans 3:4 says a man will be justified by his words, works; and Romans 3:30 says we do not overthrow the law; but uphold it.
Respectfully admire ones reply nicely said also!He taught that those that do the will of the Father will enter the Kingdom. That’s works. Now, this tells me that we are justified by faith and works; since salvation cannot be separate from justification. Our Lord’s Teaching is replete with teaching about works; like selling all you have, giving to the poor and following Him. Jesus told His disciples to follow Him; not just believe in Him and letting them live their lives.
Example…Woman were stone to death if they committed adultery? With Jesus not so…those with out sin throw the first stone? Seems woman in OT are held to their sins, man not so much. Did Jesus know man had their hands all over it?There is no Commandment that says… Only Woman thou shall not commit adultery and does not apply to man does it?
Jesus tells us does he not?Did Jesus come to restore, fulfill give the full measure of the Law, return to the True Teaching of His Spoken Word and his Laws? Now Jesus compounds the Law, even if one thinks, of committing adultery one has committed it?
Jesus seems to teach us the correct Biblical Verses repeats from OT…Ten Commandments, Sermon on the Mount…
Return to me
Renew
Repent
Restore, be truly sorry with a contrite heart, make one self whole again?
In Luke Elizabeth and Zechariah were found blameless and were righteous before the Lord how? Obeyed the CommandmentsHow?
Make an internal change within?
Change our Thoughts?
Change our Ways?
Change our harden hearts of stone?
Change and become the fullness of Love within?
If we are justified by our faith, why do good works matter at all. In my view one cannot have faith without works, thus works are too required. But aside from this point, if faith alone is what matters, why couldn’t a serial killer who believes in Jesus also inherent the Kingdom of God? Wouldn’t we argue that this person has broken the commandments of not killing many times and thus is in grave sin, for Catholics mortal sin. But if he is saved by his faith, then why not indulge in impurity and pleasure and riches because we are saved by our faith not what we do. Seems like if this is the case then Jesus lied at Matthew 19:24And as we discussed before, our responsibility before God and before our neighbor does not go away just because we have been justified by Christ.
Because God saved us for a reason. God still gives a rip about his creation, and as his redeemed, so do we.If we are justified by our faith, why do good works matter at all.
Oh no, I did not assume that you were, I meant the Christian faith in general is not antinomian.First off: I’ve seen faithful Lutherans and Protestants live holy lives; albeit with out the fullness of the Faith. I do not accuse you of antinomianism.
Well, I would answer that the Lord taught exactly what Paul taught. That we are saved by grace through faith. And that we are still obligated to serve God and serve our neighbor, and that our faith drives our actions. If you have a specific passage you want to reference, I would be glad to discuss it with you in detail. Also, I do not draw the false distinction between Christ (I am assuming that is who you are speaking of when you say Lord) and the rest of the Godhead. So I reject any argumentation that divorces the revelation of St. Paul from the revelation of Matthew or whomever you might cite to support a particular doctrinal position.Well, I see that you have neatly sidestepped what I asked: What did Our Lord teach?
We could certainly have long conversations about both of these things, but I fear that you probably have the standard misconceptions about what these doctrines mean to begin with. If you care to do so in private, I would be glad to discuss what they mean in their historic context and offer a working definition. Then we can examine the scriptures and see if your claim that they are taught no where by our Lord.Nowhere did Our Lord teach sola fide, nor sola scriptura. These are highly unbiblical doctrines that contradict Our Lord’s Teaching. Jesus taught faith and works; living out His Teaching with a sincere and repentant heart.
I would completely disagree with this interpretation (I am assuming you are referring back to our conversation about Romans 3). Paul in Romans 1 and 2 holds the Gentiles accountable to the law, and demonstrates that the law is written on their hearts. In addition, Paul did not rail against the law, but said the law gives us knowledge of our sin and that we uphold it (even though in the same book he says that we are not bound to Sabbaths, eating of specific meats, etc.). Clearly, the law he was referring to was the moral law that he used to convict both Gentile and Jew ultimately culminating in his conclusion about sinful man in Romans 3. Which then leads us to his conclusion that we are justified by grace apart from works of the law. Also, Paul makes the distinction that grace is not worked for. I see no evidence that Paul was speaking against the Pharisees in his first three chapters of Romans which is Paul’s magnum opus on the subject of justification.The Law that Saint Paul railed against was the Pharisiacal teaching, an interpretation of Torah; that one had to be ritualistically pure and a legalistic understanding and adherence to the Torah without sincerity and mercy; while putting on a good show of holiness. As if this could gain them the world to come.
Yep, and Paul is using this section to condemn the Jews by their works. How does he say they are justified in Romans 3?Romans 2:6-7
For he will render to every man according to his works: To those who by patience in well doing seek for glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.
Works.
Exactly, Paul is condemning the Jews because their works are not righteous before God. The Jews understood that they were not righteous before God, as they were offering the sacrifices for their sins at the altar. This recognition of their sinful nature is built right into the law. A first century Jew would have no issue reading this passage and agreeing with Paul that their works condemned them rather than declared them as righteous.For it is not the hearers of the Law who are righteous before God, but doers of the Law will be justified.
Nope. Paul is condemning the Jews who possess the revelation of the law and consider themselves privileged to have it, yet who know that they are not doers of the law, and uses Gentiles who obey aspects of the law to shame them for their disobedience to it. If you continue to Chapter 3, again Paul’s conclusion is that there is NO ONE RIGHTEOUS. NOT EVEN ONE. Jew and Gentile alike are both condemned under the law. You cannot stop at Chapter 2. You have to follow Paul’s argument through to its conclusion.Chapter 2 goes on further by condemning teachers of the Law who break the law and praising Gentiles who obey the Law.
I absolutely agree that we are told to follow God’s command. This is an imperative statement telling us what we are supposed to do. That is not at question. What it is not is a descriptive statement saying that we fulfill that obligation. The problem is that Paul’s argument is that YOU DO NOT FULFILL GOD’S LAW and are therefore condemned under the penalty of the law, and are justified freely by grace through faith apart from works. The command has not gone away. But again, your works don’t justify you, Christ does. Keep reading through to Chapter 8 where Paul’s section on justification culminates with Romans 8:31-39. Ask yourself when you get there, who does Paul say is the one doing the justifying?What does Our Lord say as what are the Greatest Commandments?
Saint Matthew 22:37-39
Love the Lord your God and love your neighbor as yourself. On this hangs all of the Law and Prophets.
Love demands actions. This is what Our Lord taught.
I was using it to emphasize my point, if you are offended by that I apologize. What do you prefer? Italics, Bold? My options are limited via text medium.First off, Hodos; please don’t all caps with me.
Again, I would say that isn’t consistent with Romans considering Paul’s condemnation of all men in Romans 3, and the use of Adam to say that sin spread to all men and death through sin in Chapter 5. Otherwise, you are saying that some Jews were justified by their actions and did not need a Christ. Again, refuted by Paul’s conclusion is Chapter 3 that none are righteous, not one. Paul’s clear statement is that men’s works are not righteous before God, and that we are justified by faith in Christ apart from works.Second: Saint Paul was condemning hypocrisy and evil works.
I already did in Romans 3, but you rejected that evidence. Feel free then to look at the criminal on the cross with Jesus who repented as a concrete example of what Paul says in Romans. Again, we are justified by faith. That being said, I have already explained that we were saved for the purpose of living according to God’s will (Ephesians 2:1-10). We are saved by faith apart from works, but the fruit of faith leads to works.You have yet to show us how faith alone merits us His Kingdom.