User Tag List

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 65

Thread: The letter from Paul to the Romans

  1. #31
    STAND UP Tambora's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    43,750
    Thanks
    133,578
    Thanked 39,495 Times in 24,514 Posts

    Mentioned
    149 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)



    Rep Power
    2148086
    Quote Originally Posted by Totton Linnet View Post
    Tams I believe used to be a School Miss
    Sunday school.
    I was never a teacher in the public school system.

    God Bless America

  2. #32
    TOL Legend Jerry Shugart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Luis Potosi,Mexico
    Posts
    9,887
    Thanks
    1,087
    Thanked 7,419 Times in 4,815 Posts

    Mentioned
    82 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147780
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick M View Post
    I am sorry you don't like it, the part where people did in fact keep the law to earn life.
    So what is said here is in error?:

    "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (Jn.3:16).

    So in some cases "whosoever" believes is not saved unless they believe and do works? You fail to understand that those who lived under the law were saved by grace through faith:

    "Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all" (Ro.4:16).

    Perhaps you do not understand that if it takes "works" then it cannot be said to be of grace:

    "Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt" (Ro.4:4).

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Jerry Shugart For Your Post:

    Tambora (August 10th, 2017)

  4. #33
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    13,627
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,294 Times in 2,467 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1111801
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick M View Post
    First is his audience.
    7 To all who are in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints:
    13 Now I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that I often planned to come to you (but was hindered until now), that I might have some fruit among you also, just as among the other Gentiles.

    They are gentiles in Rome. Gentiles mean those that are not Israel. But they were gentiles that were proselytized to Israel as he says here:
    17 Indeed you are called a Jew, and rest on the law, and make your boast in God,

    So these gentiles are going to be familiar to the promises made to Israel. They came to God through Israel, exalting her and keeping of the law. What Paul wants to do is share his gospel with these gentiles. His gospel is not the same as Israel’s good news. They have the same savior but a different ministry and mission. They in Rome knew they were to show their faith by their works. They did not have his good news.
    15 So, as much as is in me, I am ready to preach the gospel to you who are in Rome also.


    The audience is gentiles that were proselytes to Israel, they know of the law and they know they are required to keep it. They are called Jew as a result. And Paul is now ready to share his gospel with them.
    Thought I'd share my understanding of that. Admittedly, it is an older A9D view. As a result, it will differ some from what you proposed.

    I do believe the flow of the text bears it out. Perhaps we might compare further each's starting premise. No offence intended.

    From Romans 1:18 to 3:20, Paul is dealing with the issue of how the Gentile ended up far from God, and deserving of His wrath, Gen. 11, and now the Jew also, this side of Israel's fall, for its failure to believe the Law and the Prophets, that Jesus was the Christ, Acts 7.

    Paul is laying that out in contrast to the wrath of God the righteousness of God demands upon both without distinction now, but that that righteousness His Son accomplished on behalf of both, has appeased, Rom. 3:21 forward, albeit "til the fullness of the Gentiles be come in," Rom. 11:25.

    [At which point, God will "cut off" this offer of His Grace and Peace in His Son that Paul often starts his Epistles with, and the world will then begin toward that short work in righteousness upon the earth, Rom. 9:28, as the world heads towards Daniel's 70th week, 2 Thess. 2.]

    Towards this contrast, Paul first tackles the issue of how the Gentiles ended themselves up in their predicament by their own hand, Rom. 1:18-32.

    Then in Rom. 2:17 to 3:20, he deals with the Jew in his boast that he is called of God, and has all the answers, all the while causing His name to be blasphemed among the Gentiles that God had allowed Israel to end up ruled by per Moses, for their continued disobedience of the Law they claimed they walked in, see Daniel 9's prayer.

    This is the same sense of Ephesians 2:11's "that which is called the circumcision made by hands" the sense of which is "that which is the so called circumcision - with its resting in the fact of its being made by hands" - Romans 2: 24's "For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written."

    It is what Paul is referring to in Gal. 2:15-17's "We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles... we ourselves are found sinners..."

  5. #34
    Silver Member SaulToPaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    18,456
    Thanks
    3,096
    Thanked 19,596 Times in 11,379 Posts

    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2146725
    Quote Originally Posted by Danoh View Post
    Thought I'd share my understanding of that. Admittedly, it is an older A9D view. As a result, it will differ some from what you proposed.
    You didn't know there were three of us that believe the Romans were not yet saved!

    sister heir the dilligent, STP the adequate, and Nick M the magnificent.
    Quote Originally Posted by Interplanner View Post
    They can't compete with a real writer and grammar scholar
    Quote Originally Posted by Interplanner View Post
    You're too literal to get it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Interplanner View Post
    The New Covenant preceded the Old Covenant.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to SaulToPaul For Your Post:

    Tambora (August 13th, 2017)

  7. #35
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    18,256
    Thanks
    8,364
    Thanked 26,366 Times in 13,294 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    77 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147738
    Quote Originally Posted by SaulToPaul View Post
    You didn't know there were three of us that believe the Romans were not yet saved!

    sister heir the dilligent, STP the adequate, and Nick M the magnificent.


    And I think Paul knew his letter would change that. Which is why he wrote it the way he did as the letter went on.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to glorydaz For Your Post:

    Tambora (August 10th, 2017)

  9. #36
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    13,627
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,294 Times in 2,467 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1111801
    Quote Originally Posted by glorydaz View Post


    And I think Paul knew his letter would change that. Which is why he wrote it the way he did as the letter went on.
    I see too much having been left out of consideration when weighing these matters.

    Hopefully we can explore our differences both in approach, and resulting understanding, with out too many landmines going off, if any

  10. #37
    Over 5000 post club
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    L.A.
    Posts
    5,429
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked 698 Times in 513 Posts

    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    228161
    Quote Originally Posted by heir View Post
    There's no scriptural evidence that Cornelius was circumcised. He was a blesser (Genesis 12:3 KJV),
    n.

    Hi and Rom 2:26 explains why Cornelius was CIRCUMCISED as recorded in verse 26 READS ; Therefore , if the UNCIRCUMCISION should keep the Rifgteous Requirements of the Law ( which Cornelius DID in Acts 10:2 ) WILL NOT his Uncircumcision be counted for CIRCUMCISION !!

    DAN P

  11. #38
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    13,627
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,294 Times in 2,467 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1111801
    Quote Originally Posted by DAN P View Post
    Hi and Rom 2:26 explains why Cornelius was CIRCUMCISED as recorded in verse 26 READS ; Therefore , if the UNCIRCUMCISION should keep the Rifgteous Requirements of the Law ( which Cornelius DID in Acts 10:2 ) WILL NOT his Uncircumcision be counted for CIRCUMCISION !!

    DAN P
    Consider that if such had been the case, Peter and company not only would not have considered Cornelius unclean, but they would not have been astonished at what happened there in Acts 10, see also, Acts 11.

    While, when said issue came up in Acts 15, Peter related that otherwise was the actual case: parts and assembly included - by faith - no circumcision needed

    See also Exodus 12: 43-48; Eph. 2: 11-12.

    Romans 2:26 is talking about a different issue.

  12. #39
    TOL Legend patrick jane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    homeless
    Posts
    28,854
    Thanks
    13,849
    Thanked 14,773 Times in 11,702 Posts

    Blog Entries
    27
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    5 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147809
    Quote Originally Posted by SaulToPaul View Post
    You didn't know there were three of us that believe the Romans were not yet saved!

    sister heir the dilligent, STP the adequately STUPENDOUS, and Nick M the magnificent.
    Count me in
    1 Corinthians 15:1-2 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV -


    Colossians 1:13-14 KJV - Colossians 1:15-16 KJV - Colossians 1:17-18 KJV -

    Colossians 1:19-20 KJV - Colossians 1:21-22 KJV - Colossians 1:23 KJV -

    Colossians 1:25-26 KJV 27, 28, 29 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Ephesians 1:12-13, 14 -



  13. #40
    TOL Legend patrick jane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    homeless
    Posts
    28,854
    Thanks
    13,849
    Thanked 14,773 Times in 11,702 Posts

    Blog Entries
    27
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    5 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147809
    Quote Originally Posted by SaulToPaul View Post
    You didn't know there were three of us that believe the Romans were not yet saved!

    sister heir the dilligent, STP the adequate, and Nick M the magnificent.
    The Three MADateers !!!!
    1 Corinthians 15:1-2 KJV - 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV -


    Colossians 1:13-14 KJV - Colossians 1:15-16 KJV - Colossians 1:17-18 KJV -

    Colossians 1:19-20 KJV - Colossians 1:21-22 KJV - Colossians 1:23 KJV -

    Colossians 1:25-26 KJV 27, 28, 29 - Ephesians 1:7 KJV - Ephesians 1:12-13, 14 -



  14. #41
    This is definitely Lower Wacker Drive. musterion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    19,387
    Thanks
    3,161
    Thanked 15,262 Times in 8,930 Posts

    Blog Entries
    3
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147724
    Why did Paul lay in to his readers in ch. 2? Was it a general or hypothetical "you" to anyone who might be guilty of such, or was it specifically aimed at people in the church at Rome whom he knew were guilty of those things?

    Excellent thread.
    Last edited by musterion; October 11th, 2015 at 06:31 AM.
    Not a single cluster of living fruit was, or ever will be, harvested from the tree of legality. Law can only produce “dead works,” from which we need to have conscience purged just as much as from “wicked works.”

    C. H. Mackintosh


  15. The Following User Says Thank You to musterion For Your Post:

    Tambora (August 10th, 2017)

  16. #42
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    13,627
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,294 Times in 2,467 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1111801
    Quote Originally Posted by musterion View Post
    Why did Paul lay in to his readers in ch. 2? Was it a general or hypothetical "you" to anyone who might be guilty of such, or was it specifically aimed at people in the church at Rome whom he knew were guilty of those things?

    Excellent thread.
    He was not laying in to the saints at Rome (I hold they were in the Body before Paul wrote Romans).

    Anyway, consider that this about the Roman saints, from Romans 1:

    5. By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:
    6. Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ:
    7. To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
    8. First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.

    Is not this, about how the Jew ended up losing his "natural branch" status (direct access), for his failure to access it by faith - Romans 2:

    17. Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,
    18. And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law;
    19. And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness,
    20. An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.
    21. Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? Thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?
    22. Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? Thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?
    23. Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?
    24. For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.

    To hold otherwise is the result of words and or phrases not studied out as fully as they should have been, followed by building from them, more of the same misunderstanding.

    Study out throughly, words like "beloved, called, calling, separated unto, set apart, holy, sanctified (which is where the word saint comes from), sanctification, holy," just to name a few.

    This here "17. Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God," is the end of a long process of indictment found through Israel's long, rebellious history.

    And it is in the same sense as Ephesians 2: 11's negative "that which is called the circumcision in the flesh made by hands..."

    Because Ephesians 2 is Romans 1 thru 3 and 9 thru 11.

    The Jews boasting that Paul is referring to both in Romans 2 and in Ephesians 2, being...

    Isaiah 61:

    1. But ye shall be named the Priests of the LORD: men shall call you the Ministers of our God: ye shall eat the riches of the Gentiles, and in their glory shall ye boast yourselves.

    Romans 2:17's boasting is the issue of the Jew's awareness of what his nation had been chosen unto, even as he walked against it, in his conclusion that access is the same as possession.

    John 8:

    33. They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?

    Catch that - even as they were under bondage to the Romans Empire and with that, said one more instance of Gentile Power laughing at (blasphemy of) the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Isaiah 52:5.

    John 8:

    34. Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
    35. And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.
    36. If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

    Notice - they're in, and yet out:

    37. I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.
    38. I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.
    39. They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.

    So which is it, are they Jews or not?

    40. But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.
    41. Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
    42. Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
    43. Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
    44. Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

    The same list of offenses as Romans 2's indictment - against the Jew, not, the Roman saints at Rome.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Danoh For Your Post:

    musterion (August 13th, 2017)

  18. #43
    TOL Subscriber heir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Colossians 3:3 KJV
    Posts
    9,382
    Thanks
    5,471
    Thanked 8,171 Times in 4,963 Posts

    Blog Entries
    7
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147708
    Quote Originally Posted by musterion View Post
    Why did Paul lay in to his readers in ch. 2? Was it a general or hypothetical "you" to anyone who might be guilty of such, or was it specifically aimed at people in the church at Rome whom he knew were guilty of those things?

    Excellent thread.
    I believe it's the same guy (someone Paul zeroed in on and used for an example) as the "thou" (singular in a KJB) guy (some of us call him "O man" Romans 2:1 KJV) of Romans 11. I posted about who the Romans were and of O man here some time ago:

    http://www.theologyonline.com/forums...&postcount=324
    2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

    Paul defines the word of truth as the gospel of your salvation (1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV, Ephesians 1:13 KJV). Now, study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed by rightly dividing it!

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to heir For Your Post:

    Tambora (August 10th, 2017)

  20. #44
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    13,627
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,294 Times in 2,467 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1111801
    Quote Originally Posted by heir View Post
    I believe it's the same guy (someone Paul zeroed in on and used for an example) as the "thou" (singular in a KJB) guy (some of us call him "O man" Romans 2:1 KJV) of Romans 11. I posted about who the Romans were and of O man here some time ago:

    http://www.theologyonline.com/forums...&postcount=324
    I continue to see the same problem as the very basis of what your view asserts about various matters.

    That it is based on distinctions that are not as fine as they needed to be before allowing it's conclusions.

    Reading your above about "O man," what's their name, oh yea - "O Israel" might say "oy vey," and man o man."

    Yes “thou” is a second person singular pronoun.

    But because words like man, and Jew, etc., can refer either to one individual (noun), or to a group (collective noun), the word “thou” when followed by such words can refer to a group or category, as one.

    Here, have a little interchangeability - Deuteronomy 5:

    1. And Moses called all Israel, and said unto them, Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and keep, and do them.

    6. I am the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.
    7. Thou shalt have none other gods before me.

    How about this one - 1 Corinthians 4:

    6. And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.
    7. For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?

  21. #45
    Silver Member SaulToPaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    18,456
    Thanks
    3,096
    Thanked 19,596 Times in 11,379 Posts

    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2146725
    Quote Originally Posted by Danoh View Post
    How about this one - 1 Corinthians 4:

    6. And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.
    7. For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?
    6 And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.

    7 For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?


    Quote Originally Posted by Interplanner View Post
    They can't compete with a real writer and grammar scholar
    Quote Originally Posted by Interplanner View Post
    You're too literal to get it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Interplanner View Post
    The New Covenant preceded the Old Covenant.

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to SaulToPaul For Your Post:

    Tambora (August 10th, 2017)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us