Some don't understand Romans 3:31. Here is a challenge.

[Frogster]

The law people love to quote Romans 3:31, which asks a question right in it which Paul answered in Rom 4, using the Psalms and Genesis to establish the OT, the “law”, the OT can be called law, he did not go into the Mosaic code to answer the question in 3:31..


Rom 3;31 Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.


We know that the law is not of faith, Gal 3:12, then right in Rom 4:14, he says the Mosaic law voids the promise and faith.

So my question is, how does this justifying faith of Jew and Greek, that is what the faith word of 31 is about, establish the Mosaic law that voids the promise, and is not of faith?

How can that which voids, also establish?


I repeat, Paul answered 31 by going into the OT, Genesis and the Psalms to establish that “law”, nomos can be used for the OT in general. Paul went there in Rom 4 to answer the question of 31, showing faith justification of Jew and Greek, Abraham and David, to answer the question, he did not go into the Mosaic code to answer his question. In 4:3, asks, “what do the scriptures say”. Guess what, he did not quote the 10 commandments in Rom 4 after asking what the text says. Did he? nope!

So, my challenge to you is this. In light of what Paul said, please contradict him, and somehow show how the Mosaic law is established in the Justification of Jew and Greek by faith.

Now if you want to read it like this, fine..


3:31. Do we overthrow the OT psalms and Genesis (called the law) by the justifying faith of Jew and Gentile? No, we uphold the OT, the gospel was upheld/hidden in the OT all along according to Rom 16, and Hab 2:4, as I, Paul quoted in Rom 1:17.

 

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

The law people love to quote Romans 3:31, which asks a question right in it which Paul answered in Rom 4, using the Psalms and Genesis to establish the OT, the “law”, the OT can be called law, he did not go into the Mosaic code to answer the question in 3:31..


Rom 3;31 Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.


We know that the law is not of faith, Gal 3:12, then right in Rom 4:14, he says the Mosaic law voids the promise and faith.

So my question is, how does this justifying faith of Jew and Greek, that is what the faith word of 31 is about, establish the Mosaic law that voids the promise, and is not of faith?

How can that which voids, also establish?


I repeat, Paul answered 31 by going into the OT, Genesis and the Psalms to establish that “law”, nomos can be used for the OT in general. Paul went there in Rom 4 to answer the question of 31, showing faith justification of Jew and Greek, Abraham and David, to answer the question, he did not go into the Mosaic code to answer his question. In 4:3, asks, “what do the scriptures say”. Guess what, he did not quote the 10 commandments in Rom 4 after asking what the text says. Did he? nope!

So, my challenge to you is this. In light of what Paul said, please contradict him, and somehow show how the Mosaic law is established in the Justification of Jew and Greek by faith.

Now if you want to read it like this, fine..


3:31. Do we overthrow the OT psalms and Genesis (called the law) by the justifying faith of Jew and Gentile? No, we uphold the OT, the gospel was upheld/hidden in the OT all along according to Rom 16, and Hab 2:4, as I, Paul quoted in Rom 1:17.

Clever!

But I fail to see the practicality.

We are not lawless; we have Jesus Christ our Law for the Word of God.

 

[Frogster]

Clever!

But I fail to see the practicality.

We are not lawless; we have Jesus Christ our Law for the Word of God.

Thank you, but I am right, Paul was not establishing the legal code in 31, as some law people try to use the verse that way, for their belief system.

 

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

Thank you, but I am right, Paul was not establishing the legal code in 31, as some law people try to use the verse that way, for their belief system.

Now I am obliged to admit I also misunderstood when I said, 'Clever!'.

 

[BobRyan]

It is true that some don't understand the Law of God --

10 Commandments are –
“Commandments of God” Neh 10:29
“Law of God” Neh 10:29
“Word of God” Mark 7:13
“Commandment of God” Mark 7:6-13
NT “Scripture” James 2:8
NT “Law” – James 2:9-11
NT Commandments Eph 6:2, Rom 13:9, Romans 7:7-10

Paul speaks of it in Romans 3 frequently pointing out that it condemns all the world under sin.

And then ends with this point "Do we then abolish the Law of God by our faith? God forbid!! In fact we ESTABLISH the LAW" Rom 3:31

in Christ,

Bob

 

[yesyoushould]

I don't find anything wrong with the law and grace. Love for all.

 

[BobRyan]

When Paul quotes Moses in Heb 3 Paul says "The Holy Spirit says" -- far from abolishing Moses - Paul upholds it as the still binding - Word of God.

So also with his "ALL SCRIPTURE" inspired statement in 2Tim 3:16-17.

 

[listed]

The law people love to quote Romans 3:31, which asks a question right in it which Paul answered in Rom 4, using the Psalms and Genesis to establish the OT, the “law”, the OT can be called law, he did not go into the Mosaic code to answer the question in 3:31..


Rom 3;31 Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.


We know that the law is not of faith, Gal 3:12, then right in Rom 4:14, he says the Mosaic law voids the promise and faith.

So my question is, how does this justifying faith of Jew and Greek, that is what the faith word of 31 is about, establish the Mosaic law that voids the promise, and is not of faith?

How can that which voids, also establish?


I repeat, Paul answered 31 by going into the OT, Genesis and the Psalms to establish that “law”, nomos can be used for the OT in general. Paul went there in Rom 4 to answer the question of 31, showing faith justification of Jew and Greek, Abraham and David, to answer the question, he did not go into the Mosaic code to answer his question. In 4:3, asks, “what do the scriptures say”. Guess what, he did not quote the 10 commandments in Rom 4 after asking what the text says. Did he? nope!

So, my challenge to you is this. In light of what Paul said, please contradict him, and somehow show how the Mosaic law is established in the Justification of Jew and Greek by faith.

Now if you want to read it like this, fine..


3:31. Do we overthrow the OT psalms and Genesis (called the law) by the justifying faith of Jew and Gentile? No, we uphold the OT, the gospel was upheld/hidden in the OT all along according to Rom 16, and Hab 2:4, as I, Paul quoted in Rom 1:17.

The pro law folks read

Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: no keeping the law is required.

Nothing else in Romans or other writings of Paul have any bearing on this in their thinking.

They must think that faith is the mere acknowledgment of God. Or to say it another way faith is only believing there's a god.

I say so what even the devils believe that.

 

[listed]

It is true that some don't understand the Law of God --

10 Commandments are –
“Commandments of God” Neh 10:29
“Law of God” Neh 10:29
“Word of God” Mark 7:13
“Commandment of God” Mark 7:6-13
NT “Scripture” James 2:8
NT “Law” – James 2:9-11
NT Commandments Eph 6:2, Rom 13:9, Romans 7:7-10

Paul speaks of it in Romans 3 frequently pointing out that it condemns all the world under sin.

And then ends with this point "Do we then abolish the Law of God by our faith? God forbid!! In fact we ESTABLISH the LAW" Rom 3:31

in Christ,

Bob

Where did the OP suggest the law of God was misunderstood?

 

[listed]

I don't find anything wrong with the law and grace. Love for all.

Who finds something wrong with the law and grace?

 

[listed]

When Paul quotes Moses in Heb 3 Paul says "The Holy Spirit says" -- far from abolishing Moses - Paul upholds it as the still binding - Word of God.

So also with his "ALL SCRIPTURE" inspired statement in 2Tim 3:16-17.

No, Paul does not say any such thing.

If "ALL SCRIPTURE" is inspired as you referenced, why do you not accept all of what Paul wrote? Peter calls it Scripture in 2 Peter 3:16. I think you don't accept the entire NT as Scripture.

 

[Frogster]

It is true that some don't understand the Law of God --

10 Commandments are –
“Commandments of God” Neh 10:29
“Law of God” Neh 10:29
“Word of God” Mark 7:13
“Commandment of God” Mark 7:6-13
NT “Scripture” James 2:8
NT “Law” – James 2:9-11
NT Commandments Eph 6:2, Rom 13:9, Romans 7:7-10

Paul speaks of it in Romans 3 frequently pointing out that it condemns all the world under sin.

And then ends with this point "Do we then abolish the Law of God by our faith? God forbid!! In fact we ESTABLISH the LAW" Rom 3:31

in Christ,

Bob

sure he also does condemn with law, but then do you only see the law as a negative restraint?

Also, yes the world under sin, but how do you "establish" if for the justified church?

You do quote it here alot, how are you tyring to "establish" the law when you quote it here?

besides, the issue is that faith, is not established by the law. We live by faith now, it says BUT NOW in Rom 3:21.

And you're still not interpreting the actual verse properly.

 

[Frogster]

When Paul quotes Moses in Heb 3 Paul says "The Holy Spirit says" -- far from abolishing Moses - Paul upholds it as the still binding - Word of God.

So also with his "ALL SCRIPTURE" inspired statement in 2Tim 3:16-17.

lol..don't even quote hebrews, the book is a rebuke to those who wanted to return to Judaism, which would include food laws, Sabbath, and all of the rest!

They were being told to stay in grace, not revert to law. Text available upon request.

 

[Frogster]

The pro law folks read

Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: no keeping the law is required.

Nothing else in Romans or other writings of Paul have any bearing on this in their thinking.

They must think that faith is the mere acknowledgment of God. Or to say it another way faith is only believing there's a god.

I say so what even the devils believe that.

Exactly, keeping is required, and they are wrong.

 

[BobRyan]

When Paul quotes Moses in Heb 3 Paul says "The Holy Spirit says" -- far from abolishing Moses - Paul upholds it as the still binding - Word of God.

So also with his "ALL SCRIPTURE" inspired statement in 2Tim 3:16-17.

No, Paul doesn't say any such thing.

Turns out he does say exactly that.


14 But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15 and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

If "ALL SCRIPTURE" is inspired as you referenced, why don't accept all of what Paul wrote?

All accepted.... and "in context"

Peter calls it Scripture in 2 Peter 3:16. I think you don't accept the entire NT as Scripture.

For reason that cannot be explained.

No, Paul doesn't say any such thing.

If "ALL SCRIPTURE" is inspired as you referenced, why don't accept all of what Paul wrote? Peter calls it Scripture in 2 Peter 3:16. I think you don't accept the entire NT as Scripture.

I see that 2 Tim 3 is not entirely in line with that statement -- as shown above.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

When Paul quotes Moses in Heb 3 Paul says "The Holy Spirit says" -- far from abolishing Moses - Paul upholds it as the still binding - Word of God.

So also with his "ALL SCRIPTURE" inspired statement in 2Tim 3:16-17.

lol..don't even quote hebrews, the book is a rebuke to those who wanted to return to Judaism, which would include food laws, Sabbath, and all of the rest!

They were being told to stay in grace, not revert to law. Text available upon request.

I quote Hebrews even when others find it inconvenient.

[FONT=&quot]1. Paul never commands gentiles to ignore the writings of Moses.

2. Paul DOES tell gentiles that Moses' writings are still authoritative scripture in 1Cor 9:8-9 and 1Tim 5:18 and binding as being "Law" and as being "scripture".

3. Paul quotes from Moses and the TEN Commandments Eph 6:2. Full 5th commandment[/FONT]

 

[listed]

Turns out he does say exactly that.


14 But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15 and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.






All accepted.... and "in context"



For reason that cannot be explained.





I see that 2 Tim 3 is not entirely in line with that statement -- as shown above.

in Christ,

Bob

Yes we know. Mind telling us bluntly what in our bible are not Scripture? Evidently you do not accept 2 Tim as Scripture while quoting it as such. :o

 

[BobRyan]

It is true that some don't understand the Law of God --

10 Commandments are –
“Commandments of God” Neh 10:29
“Law of God” Neh 10:29
“Word of God” Mark 7:13
“Commandment of God” Mark 7:6-13
NT “Scripture” James 2:8
NT “Law” – James 2:9-11
NT Commandments Eph 6:2, Rom 13:9, Romans 7:7-10

Paul speaks of it in Romans 3 frequently pointing out that it condemns all the world under sin.

And then ends with this point "Do we then abolish the Law of God by our faith? God forbid!! In fact we ESTABLISH the LAW" Rom 3:31

sure he also does condemn with law, but then do you only see the law as a negative restraint?

Also, yes the world under sin, but how do you "establish" if for the justified church?

You do quote it here alot, how are you tyring to "establish" the law when you quote it here?

besides, the issue is that faith, is not established by the law. We live by faith now, it says BUT NOW in Rom 3:21.

And you're still not interpreting the actual verse properly.

The law is "ESTABLISHED" for the justified believer according to Paul in Rom 3 -- even while it condemns the lost.

"Do we then abolish the Law of God by our faith? God forbid!! In fact we ESTABLISH the LAW" Rom 3:31

It does so for the saints because in both OT and NT the New Covenant is "written on the heart and mind" as Paul points out in Heb 8 - quoting Jer 31:31-33.

so then "what matters is keeping the Commandments of God" as Paul says in 1Cor 7:19

The point is "irrefutable"

 

[BobRyan]

Yes we know. Mind telling us bluntly what in our bible are not Scripture? Evidently you do not accept 2 Tim as Scripture while quoting it as such.

I find you logic "illusive" just then - feel free to explain how it is that appealing to 2Tim 3 is to reject it.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Frogster]

The law is "ESTABLISHED" for the justified believer according to Paul in Rom 3 -- even while it condemns the lost.

"Do we then abolish the Law of God by our faith? God forbid!! In fact we ESTABLISH the LAW" Rom 3:31

It does so for the saints because in both OT and NT the New Covenant is "written on the heart and mind" as Paul points out in Heb 8 - quoting Jer 31:31-33.

so then "what matters is keeping the Commandments of God" as Paul says in 1Cor 7:19

The point is "irrefutable"

How, how could the law establish faith, when the law voids faith?

You still are not interpreting it proplerly.

Your line 1, how is it establishd for the believer, while it condemns the lost, all while the believer is now justified by faith, not by the condemning law?You seem to think tha that the law does everything. It does not, it can't kill, and give life, that is a fact.

you still don't see that the law word in 31, is not the code.