ECT If MAD is False Why Did Paul Make the Distinction in Romans 4:16?
- Thread starter Lighthouse
- Start date
themuzicman
Well-known member
Because James is addressing a different topic than Paul is. Paul is distinguishing justification via the law (merit) from justification by faith (reckoned as righteous).
James, OTOH, is distinguishing an intellectual "faith", a mere acknowledging of facts, with real faith in God, which results in a change in one's works. Effectively James is saying that Abraham acted because of his faith, and that's the example we are to follow.
But they say that the Jews must follow the law.
Except that those who are children through the law only were being prepared for wrath, see Romans 9:6-8, 22.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Good point, although I think if you truly know Romans, 'under the law' can just be a way of saying your background like 'Armenian' or 'Floridian.' It can designate a people-group, and does so in Rom 4:16. It's one of those cases where D'ism is way too literal, and overthinks.
That is your best shot, Christ rejector, as I once again picked you apart, and your daddy the devil's "argument?" Careful, child of the devil......Your fellow children of the devil would not appreciate you using their names, "demon," so carelessly. It is not to be applied to members of the boc, such as myself.
And you are grinding your teeth, as you read this, Christ rejector, as you would not know what Christians know....
You have never accepted the love of God into your heart to know what a Christian is.
LA
Why do you make "Death Predictions" about your fellow posters? Surely that's not your ministry? Are you showing your kind of love by making such Predictions?
How would you know what one sounded like? I thought you were too busy making up "Death Predictions" about certain posters on TOL? Isn't that your job here?
Psa 64:2 Hide me from the secret counsel of the wicked; from the insurrection of the workers of iniquity:
Psa 64:3 Who whet their tongue like a sword, and bend their bows to shoot their arrows, even bitter words:
Psa 64:4 That they may shoot in secret at the perfect: suddenly do they shoot at him, and fear not.
Psa 64:5 They encourage themselves in an evil matter: they commune of laying snares privily; they say, Who shall see them?
Psa 64:6 They search out iniquities; they accomplish a diligent search: both the inward thought of every one of them, and the heart, is deep.
Psa 64:7 But God shall shoot at them with an arrow; suddenly shall they be wounded.
Psa 64:8 So they shall make their own tongue to fall upon themselves: all that see them shall flee away.
Psa 64:3 Who whet their tongue like a sword, and bend their bows to shoot their arrows, even bitter words:
Psa 64:4 That they may shoot in secret at the perfect: suddenly do they shoot at him, and fear not.
Psa 64:5 They encourage themselves in an evil matter: they commune of laying snares privily; they say, Who shall see them?
Psa 64:6 They search out iniquities; they accomplish a diligent search: both the inward thought of every one of them, and the heart, is deep.
Psa 64:7 But God shall shoot at them with an arrow; suddenly shall they be wounded.
Psa 64:8 So they shall make their own tongue to fall upon themselves: all that see them shall flee away.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
LA the Great Judge of All Mankind has issued a verdict.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Gen 24:64 (KJV)
In this case Israel is the followers of Christ under the dispensation preached by the 12. Those of Israel outside of the were the lost sheep of the house of Israel. The lost sheep could convert to the NC while it was still going on. They could also convert to the BoC after it started. And once the NC was put on hold the BoC was the only option for following Christ.
They can be called either. But in discussion when the differentiation is necessary there are a few names for them.
No. If they were followers of Christ before Paul then they remained in the "kingdom."
Can you elaborate?
Agreed.
Could Israelites who didn't follow Christ convert to the program of the 12 even after Paul?
See above.
Can you show that or is that just what you've always been told from the pulpit?
What would have happened if they hadn't? And what happened to those who followed the law but not in faith?
You mean the time of Jacob's Trouble? What of it?
That must be it, because you can't possibly be wrong. MAD must be wrong, at all costs, even if you have to jump through logical hoops of convoluted reasoning to make it so...
Lighthouse, re my question on the following link...
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...tinction-in-Romans-4-16&p=4864285#post4864285
Where I wrote the following...
"Also, that an unsealed Believing remnant still out there after Paul, who needed to hear Paul's preaching, then ended up in the Body."
What I'd meant by that is that some (very few) hold that in Acts an aspect of Paul's ministry involved his supposedly having been out there attempting to track down what remained of Israel's Believing remnant not yet saved or what have you, that he might get them saved into the Body.
I do not hold that view.
The Believing remnant (election of grace) refers to those of the nation Israel who had believed (that Jesus was the Christ) and were all sealed when the rest were concluded having continued in their willful blindness or hardening of heart before Paul was saved.
As for your other question, no; I do not believe their nation was availed that after God sealed those and concluded the rest under sin with the Gentiles - which is actually the sense of Peter's "no respect of persons" in Acts 10, though he is not yet clear on it til his meeting with Paul.
The unclean animals issue, together with the water baptism issue were about this unclean as a Gentile issue*
And as Paul relates in his account of his two encounters with Peter in Galatians 2, later, after Paul had cleared him up on that, he then had to remind him of this; where he makes his "not sinners of the Gentiles...but...also found sinners" remarks.
_________________
* The "experts" on here having continued to refuse to study out the issue behind water baptism in the OT.
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...tinction-in-Romans-4-16&p=4864285#post4864285
Where I wrote the following...
"Also, that an unsealed Believing remnant still out there after Paul, who needed to hear Paul's preaching, then ended up in the Body."
What I'd meant by that is that some (very few) hold that in Acts an aspect of Paul's ministry involved his supposedly having been out there attempting to track down what remained of Israel's Believing remnant not yet saved or what have you, that he might get them saved into the Body.
I do not hold that view.
The Believing remnant (election of grace) refers to those of the nation Israel who had believed (that Jesus was the Christ) and were all sealed when the rest were concluded having continued in their willful blindness or hardening of heart before Paul was saved.
As for your other question, no; I do not believe their nation was availed that after God sealed those and concluded the rest under sin with the Gentiles - which is actually the sense of Peter's "no respect of persons" in Acts 10, though he is not yet clear on it til his meeting with Paul.
The unclean animals issue, together with the water baptism issue were about this unclean as a Gentile issue*
And as Paul relates in his account of his two encounters with Peter in Galatians 2, later, after Paul had cleared him up on that, he then had to remind him of this; where he makes his "not sinners of the Gentiles...but...also found sinners" remarks.
_________________
* The "experts" on here having continued to refuse to study out the issue behind water baptism in the OT.
whitestone
Well-known member
that is the correct direction I think Acts 10-15 and Paul’s comment in Galatians 2,,,he says he was doing something for "show". Not that I see things as filthy in regards, but that often times the scriptures also point out weaknesses I.e. David,Solomon,Moses,Paul,Peter ect. ...the scriptures don’t seek to hide these things but rather records them to discern left from right on a matter.
Interplanner
Well-known member
In this case Israel is the followers of Christ under the dispensation preached by the 12. Those of Israel outside of the were the lost sheep of the house of Israel. The lost sheep could convert to the NC while it was still going on. They could also convert to the BoC after it started. And once the NC was put on hold the BoC was the only option for following Christ.
They can be called either. But in discussion when the differentiation is necessary there are a few names for them.
No. If they were followers of Christ before Paul then they remained in the "kingdom."
Can you elaborate?
Agreed.
Could Israelites who didn't follow Christ convert to the program of the 12 even after Paul?
See above.
Can you show that or is that just what you've always been told from the pulpit?
What would have happened if they hadn't? And what happened to those who followed the law but not in faith?
You mean the time of Jacob's Trouble? What of it?
That must be it, because you can't possibly be wrong. MAD must be wrong, at all costs, even if you have to jump through logical hoops of convoluted reasoning to make it so...
The only reason MAD is wrong is because of the D. D'ism said 2P2P was the indispensable organizing idea of the Bible instead of Christ. Once you let Christ (the Gospel) organize the Bible you do not need to worry about Israel's land promise because of Eph 2-3.
themuzicman
Well-known member
Here we see that Paul is contrasting those works that would be due some result (i.e. righteousness) with faith, for which righteousness is counted, rather than merited.
And Paul then ties those works to the law via circumcision, demonstrating that Abraham was made righteous before circumcision to show that all (circumcised, under the law, and uncircumcised, not under the law) are made righteous by this same faith.
And continuing to Romans 9, where Paul deals with this subject further:
So, the Jews were pursuing righteousness by merit, by obeying the law, and have failed to obtain it. This points back to Romans 4, where the Jews wanted righteousness because it was their due for works, that being obeying the law.
James, OTOH, begins chapter 2 by calling out his readers for giving better treatment to the rich than the poor, and calling them out, because this is sinful. This is the setting in which James continues into the section in question:
So, James' point is that works are a necessary result of our faith.
And he reinforces this point:
So, James is chiding believers regarding the nature of their faith, that it impact their lives so as to show through their actions.
And in this context James says:
So, the point isn't that works are required for salvation, but rather that faith requires works that represent that faith. Had Abraham said he believed, but refused to obey God in sacrificing his son, would that have been real faith? Of course not. Likewise with Rahab. If she believed that God was going to give Jericho into Israel's hands, but didn't help the spies, would that be real faith? Of course not.
So, what we see isn't that works are added to faith for salvation, but rather that the nature of our faith needs to be such that our actions reflect that faith.
See Romans 9.
Romans 9 has nothing to do with "Jacob's trouble."
Interplanner
Well-known member
Yes, it was referring to the wrath of God on some of Israel. The reason it is some of Israel is that not all Israel is Israel. The reason it was wrath was because of unbelief. All that remains is whether it was coming shortly in the destruction of the country. That was the time of trouble.
themuzicman
Well-known member
More specifically, those in Israel who were hardened and did not receive mercy were prepared for wrath.
turbosixx
New member
That’s complicated. I believe it’s much simpler.
If I understand you correctly, you are dividing things based on what they are called. Something referred to by different names can be the same thing but things that are different cannot be called by the same name or that would create confusion. For example, Jesus and Satan can be referred to by many different names but both cannot be referred to by the same name.
I see grace, the church, the faith and the body of Christ the same way, they can be called by different names and still be the same.
Here Paul uses church and body interchangeably.
Eph. 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body.
Here Paul calls the church the church of God.
1 Cor. 1:2 To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus,
Here Paul says he persecuted the church of God before his conversion. If it’s not the same church as the one in 1 Corinthians 1, then this is a confusing statement.
1 Cor. 15:9 For I am the least of the apostles, and not fit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
Also, Paul says people were in Christ before him.
Rom. 16:7 Greet Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners, who are outstanding among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.
What established the church and the body? The same thing, Christ’s death, burial and resurrection.
Eph. 2:16and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross,
Acts 20:28.. to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
Paul said he was a minister of the new covenant.
2 Cor. 3:6 who has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
He said communion is blood of the new covenant.
1 Cor. 11: 25 In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me."
It is simpler and makes more sense to me that the church and body were established by Jesus’ sacrifice and on Pentecost 3,000 plus souls were added to the church. The Jews were to hear the gospel first and they did. Then the Gentiles were later grafted in once they heard the same good news, Jesus is savior of us all.