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

[Frogster]

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]

Hebrews inconvenient? not to us on this side, it rebukes them for trying to go back to the Old cov, as spurning the blood, and the Spirit of grace in 10:29, so you may mant to check out your facts here a bit.

 

[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.

Nothing unusual here. Just more ignoring of the Scripture even while quoting it.

 

[Soyeong]

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.

The only Scripture that Timothy had available to him as a child was the OT. Even at the time that 2 Timothy was written, not all of the other NT books had yet been written. That is not to say that the NT isn't Scripture or isn't God-breathed, or that it didn't quickly become regarded as Scripture, just that what Paul had in mind was the OT.

 

[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, 15and 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.

So then specifically the point of Paul's statement in actual scripture.

14 But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15and 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.

Nothing unusual here. Just more ignoring of the Scripture even while quoting it.

Every time a focus goes to this part of Paul's writing you responding with something about ignoring the scripture.

Why not just address the details in the actual post? the text.

The only Scripture that Timothy had available to him as a child was the OT. Even at the time that 2 Timothy was written, not all of the other NT books had yet been written. That is not to say that the NT isn't Scripture or isn't God-breathed, or that it didn't quickly become regarded as Scripture, just that what Paul had in mind was the OT.

Good point and no matter how quickly Paul's letters were accepted - there is no question that Timothy was reading the OT as a child and Paul knew it. This was what I was writing about in my post -and it is the point that Paul makes in the text.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Hebrews inconvenient? not to us on this side,

Glad to hear that!

Because Hebrews tells us that the NEW Covenant is the same as is stated in Jer 31:31-33 with the LAW of God known to Jeremiah and his contemporary readers - written on the heart.

Hebrews inconvenient? not to us on this side, it rebukes them for trying to go back to the Old cov, as spurning the blood, and the Spirit of grace in 10:29, so you may mant to check out your facts here a bit.

Turns out - Hebrews 8 is still in the book of Hebrews.

And ... Heb 3 still refers to the OT as 'The Holy Spirit says".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Frogster]

The only Scripture that Timothy had available to him as a child was the OT. Even at the time that 2 Timothy was written, not all of the other NT books had yet been written. That is not to say that the NT isn't Scripture or isn't God-breathed, or that it didn't quickly become regarded as Scripture, just that what Paul had in mind was the OT.

Sure, the OT is scripture, but again, like 3:31, what was in the scriptures that Paul wanted? It was faith righteousness, not the law for the churches. So the righteousness, in the writings was about faith unto salvation, Paul was not talking about the law there, as we see from the surrounding text.

2 Tim 3:14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom[a] you learned it 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,

 

[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"

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.

Your argument is "with the text". Responding to me as if I authored it does not work.

The fact that Paul uses the same term in Romans 3 to condemn the lost and shows how that SAME Law is "ESTABLISHED" rather than "abolished" is irrefutable.

It is not me "proposing" that Rom 3:31 be written or be included in the Bible. I point to the fact that it is already there.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Paul clearly teaches that this same moral law of God is not abolished under the Gospel or "by faith" of the saints - but rather it is ESTABLISHED "we ESTABLISH the Law" says Paul when speaking of the faith of the saints.

And of course the NEW Covenant says that this LAW is "written on the heart and mind".

No wonder that the majority of even pro-sunday scholarship is so quick to accept the continued authority of God's - TEN Commandments.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Frogster]

Glad to hear that!

Because Hebrews tells us that the NEW Covenant is the same as is stated in Jer 31:31-33 with the LAW of God known to Jeremiah and his contemporary readers - written on the heart.




Turns out - Hebrews 8 is still in the book of Hebrews.

And ... Heb 3 still refers to the OT as 'The Holy Spirit says".

in Christ,

Bob

Question for you..

You say the laws are written on our hearts, which ones?

if the same laws applied, we would have to follow every law externally, if every law were written internally. No?

Then why don't SDA folks, keep feasts, are those not written on hearts, while somehow laws that say i can;t have shrimp scampi are?

See what i mean? Under the law they could not pick-n-choose, they had to follow all of the laws.

So are feasts written on our hearts too? if so, you have to keep those too, you can't just select food laws.

I don;t keep that stuff, but I am not promoting the law.

PS, Hebrews was a strong rebuke to those who were seeking to go back under the Old cov!

 

[BobRyan]

Question for you..

You say the laws are written on our hearts, which ones?

if the same laws applied, we would have to follow every law externally, if every law were written internally. No?

Then why don't SDA folks, keep feasts, are those not written on hearts, while somehow laws that say i can;t have shrimp scampi are?

See what i mean? Under the law they could not pick-n-choose, they had to follow all of the laws.

So are feasts written on our hearts too? if so, you have to keep those too, you can't just select food laws.

I don;t keep that stuff, but I am not promoting the law.

PS, Hebrews was a strong rebuke to those who were seeking to go back under the Old cov!

Jer 31:31-33 the Holy Spirit says that under the NEW Covenant the "LAW is written on the heart and mind" - you say in your post -- that I said it.

I am not the Holy Spirit - Jer 31:31-33 is still scripture so Paul quotes it in Heb 8 reminding us that this is STILL the text and statement of the NEW Covenant.

Your argument is WITH the text and even the majority of pro-sunday scholarship admits to this point where it is the TEN Commandments that are included in that MORAL LAW of God under the New Covenant.

The moral law remains -- even though the LAW based in animal sacrifice ends as Heb 10 and the Law with earthly priesthood ends according to Heb 7 - still "the remains" the moral law of God that as Paul says in Gal 3 and Romans 3 condemns all the world as sinners.

Here is one example of that continued TEN Commandment Bible fact accepted even by pro-sunday scholarship --

So then what would be an example of such pro-Sunday scholarship that pertains to the 7 point summary list just posted?

Here we have section 19 of the Westminster - and of course you already have a few posts of mine quoting the "Baptist Confession of Faith"

[FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]Westminster Confession of Faith Section 19[/FONT][/FONT]

"Westminster Confession of Faith"

[FONT=&quot]Chapter XIX[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]Of the Law of God[/FONT]​

[FONT=&quot]I. God gave to Adam a law, as a covenant of works, by which He bound him and all his posterity, to personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience, promised life upon the fulfilling, and threatened death upon the breach of it, and endued him with power and ability to keep it.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][1][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
II. This law, after his fall, continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness; and, as such, was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai, in ten commandments, and written in two tables:[/FONT][FONT=&quot][2][/FONT][FONT=&quot] the first four commandments containing our duty towards God; and the other six, our duty to man.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][3][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
III. Besides this law, commonly called moral, God was pleased to give to the people of Israel, as a church under age, ceremonial laws, containing several typical ordinances, partly of worship, prefiguring Christ, His graces, actions, sufferings, and benefits;[/FONT][FONT=&quot][4][/FONT][FONT=&quot] and partly, holding forth divers instructions of moral duties.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][5][/FONT][FONT=&quot] All which ceremonial laws are now abrogated, under the New Testament.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][6][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
IV. To them also, as a body politic, He gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together with the State of that people; not obliging under any now, further than the general equity thereof may require.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][7][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
V. The moral law does forever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof;[/FONT][FONT=&quot][8][/FONT][FONT=&quot] and that, not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator, who gave it.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][9][/FONT][FONT=&quot] Neither does Christ, in the Gospel, any way dissolve, but much strengthen this obligation.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][10][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
VI. Although true believers be not under the law, as a covenant of works, to be thereby justified, or condemned;[/FONT][FONT=&quot][11][/FONT][FONT=&quot] yet is it of great use to them, as well as to others; in that, as a rule of life informing them of the will of God, and their duty, it directs and binds them to walk accordingly;[/FONT][FONT=&quot][12][/FONT][FONT=&quot] discovering also the sinful pollutions of their nature, hearts and lives;[/FONT][FONT=&quot][13][/FONT][FONT=&quot] so as, examining themselves thereby, they may come to further conviction of, humiliation for, and hatred against sin,[/FONT][FONT=&quot][14][/FONT][FONT=&quot] together with a clearer sight of the need they have of Christ, and the perfection of His obedience.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][15][/FONT][FONT=&quot] It is likewise of use to the regenerate, to restrain their corruptions, in that it forbids sin:[/FONT][FONT=&quot][16][/FONT][FONT=&quot] and the threatenings of it serve to show what even their sins deserve; and what afflictions, in this life, they may expect for them, although freed from the curse thereof threatened in the law.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][17][/FONT][FONT=&quot] The promises of it, in like manner, show them God's approbation of obedience,and what blessings they may expect upon the performance thereof:[/FONT][FONT=&quot][18][/FONT][FONT=&quot] although not as due to them by the law as a covenant of works.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][19][/FONT][FONT=&quot] So as, a man's doing good, and refraining from evil, because the law encourages to the one and deters from the other, is no evidence of his being under the law: and not under grace.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][20][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
VII. Neither are the forementioned uses of the law contrary to the grace of the Gospel, but do sweetly comply with it;[/FONT][FONT=&quot][21][/FONT][FONT=&quot] the Spirit of Christ subduing and enabling the will of man to do that freely, and cheerfully, which the will of God, revealed in the law, requires to be done.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][22][/FONT]


​

Section 21 of the Westminster and Section 22 of the Baptist both address point 7 "the change" the edit of the Sabbath commandment from the 7th day starting from creation and all through the OT and NT Gospel until the cross where it is "changed" in their mind -- to point to week-day-1.

So then it is not "just me" and it is not "Just the Holy Spirit" in Jer 31 it is also the evangelicals such as C.H. Spurgeon's "Baptist Confession of Faith" and also the "Westminster Confession of Faith" and also D.L. Moody and also the CCC and also Matthew Henry,... and also R.C Sproul.. and also ... The list is long.

 

[Frogster]

Your argument is "with the text". Responding to me as if I authored it does not work.

The fact that Paul uses the same term in Romans 3 to condemn the lost and shows how that SAME Law is "ESTABLISHED" rather than "abolished" is irrefutable.

It is not me "proposing" that Rom 3:31 be written or be included in the Bible. I point to the fact that it is already there.

in Christ,

Bob

Then how does the law, that voids faith, uphold faith?

That faith word in the question of 31, sinks your argument big time!
Your using 31 to promote law, Paul was using it to promote faith righteousness that was in the OT all along, commonly known as the Law and the prophets.

He opens his letter talking about the OT and faith righteousness, not the code!


Here>>> the writings were not the code

Rom 1:1-3Paul, a servant[a] of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, 2 which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, 3 concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh



Here>>>Hab 2:4, what he quotes was not the code. Paul was about faith righteousness right from the beginning, the gospel, not the code!

1:17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, “The righteous shall live by faith.”[f]


He even closed talking about the gospel in the writings, faith righteousness, not found in the code! He is about the prophets in the scriptures, not the code.


16:25 Now to him that is of power to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,
26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:


Earlier in Rom 4 does he quote the code here to prove faith righteousness that was there in the OT, or does he quote the code?


4:17 As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations, before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.



Bro, you're totally wrong using 3:31 to uphold the code, when Paul was upholding the prophets and faith righteousness out of the Psalms, Genesis, and Hab 2:4, etc..

 

[Frogster]

Your argument is "with the text". Responding to me as if I authored it does not work.

The fact that Paul uses the same term in Romans 3 to condemn the lost and shows how that SAME Law is "ESTABLISHED" rather than "abolished" is irrefutable.

It is not me "proposing" that Rom 3:31 be written or be included in the Bible. I point to the fact that it is already there.

in Christ,

Bob

Same here..what was WRITTEN, he is in Genesis, still answering the quesion in 31, and he is about pre law Abraham, and faith rightoeusness, not the code..


Rom 4:22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.


written, WAS IT THE CODE HE WAS ESTABLISHING, OR GENESIS THERE?

 

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

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

I just look at Jesus and I find everything wrong with myself in regard to the Law and Grace and Love.

 

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

Some things jump far too high for me to come by ---things like <codes> 'n stuff.

 

[Frogster]

Some things jump far too high for me to come by ---things like <codes> 'n stuff.

it's easy to see...

Rom 2:27 Then he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law.

 

[bugkiller]

it's easy to see...

Rom 2:27 Then he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law.

Is that the NRSV?

bugkiller

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by 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
​

Originally Posted by Frogster

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"


​

Originally Posted by Frogster

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.
​

​

Your argument is "with the text". Responding to me as if I authored it does not work.

The fact that Paul uses the same term in Romans 3 to condemn the lost and shows how that SAME Law is "ESTABLISHED" rather than "abolished" is irrefutable.

It is not me "proposing" that Rom 3:31 be written or be included in the Bible. I point to the fact that it is already there.[/quiote]

notice that in Rom 3:31 we are talking about the SAME Law that condemns all the world even to this very day.



Rom 3:
19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,
...

29 Or is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also, 30 since there is one God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.

Same here..what was WRITTEN, he is in Genesis,

Only if you think all the "Law and the prophets" is in Genesis.

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,

Same here..what was WRITTEN, he is in Genesis, still answering the quesion in 31, and he is about pre law Abraham, and faith rightoeusness, not the code..

Rom 4:22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.


written, WAS IT THE CODE HE WAS ESTABLISHING, OR GENESIS THERE?

He says "The LAW" the same one that defines sin and condemns all the world and is found in "The LAW and the Prophets" -- (i.e. "scripture")

Rom 3
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,

An irrefutable point from Romans 3.

 

[Frogster]

Is that the NRSV?

bugkiller

Yep, the NRSV, NET, ESV, and the NIV, there could be a few more...

 

[Frogster]

Originally Posted by BobRyan

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

10 Commandments are &#8211;
&#8220;Commandments of God&#8221; Neh 10:29
&#8220;Law of God&#8221; Neh 10:29
&#8220;Word of God&#8221; Mark 7:13
&#8220;Commandment of God&#8221; Mark 7:6-13
NT &#8220;Scripture&#8221; James 2:8
NT &#8220;Law&#8221; &#8211; 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
​

[/B]
​

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"


[/INDENT]




[/INDENT]

Your argument is "with the text". Responding to me as if I authored it does not work.

The fact that Paul uses the same term in Romans 3 to condemn the lost and shows how that SAME Law is "ESTABLISHED" rather than "abolished" is irrefutable.

It is not me "proposing" that Rom 3:31 be written or be included in the Bible. I point to the fact that it is already there.[/quiote]

notice that in Rom 3:31 we are talking about the SAME Law that condemns all the world even to this very day.



Rom 3:
19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,
...

29 Or is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also, 30 since there is one God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.




Only if you think all the "Law and the prophets" is in Genesis.

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,



He says "The LAW" the same one that defines sin and condemns all the world and is found in "The LAW and the Prophets" -- (i.e. "scripture")

Rom 3
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,

An irrefutable point from Romans 3.

Bob, first off, you don't seem to know how fluid Paul is with the law word.


Look how in 3:19 he says condemend by law, after he just quotes all of these verses, and guess what, none of em are the Code, they are from Isaiah, the Psalms, and proverbs. So "law" in 3:19 isn't even the code.


Rom 3:10as it is written:

&#8220;None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.&#8221;
13 &#8220;Their throat is an open grave;
they use their tongues to deceive.&#8221;
&#8220;The venom of asps is under their lips.&#8221;
14 &#8220;Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.&#8221;
15 &#8220;Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 in their paths are ruin and misery,
17 and the way of peace they have not known.&#8221;
18 &#8220;There is no fear of God before their eyes.&#8221;

19 Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God.

 

[Frogster]

Originally Posted by BobRyan

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

10 Commandments are &#8211;
&#8220;Commandments of God&#8221; Neh 10:29
&#8220;Law of God&#8221; Neh 10:29
&#8220;Word of God&#8221; Mark 7:13
&#8220;Commandment of God&#8221; Mark 7:6-13
NT &#8220;Scripture&#8221; James 2:8
NT &#8220;Law&#8221; &#8211; 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
​

[/B]
​

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"


[/INDENT]




[/INDENT]

Your argument is "with the text". Responding to me as if I authored it does not work.

The fact that Paul uses the same term in Romans 3 to condemn the lost and shows how that SAME Law is "ESTABLISHED" rather than "abolished" is irrefutable.

It is not me "proposing" that Rom 3:31 be written or be included in the Bible. I point to the fact that it is already there.[/quiote]

notice that in Rom 3:31 we are talking about the SAME Law that condemns all the world even to this very day.



Rom 3:
19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,
...

29 Or is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also, 30 since there is one God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.




Only if you think all the "Law and the prophets" is in Genesis.

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,



He says "The LAW" the same one that defines sin and condemns all the world and is found in "The LAW and the Prophets" -- (i.e. "scripture")

Rom 3
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,

An irrefutable point from Romans 3.

Bob, the law and the prophets is common to mean the OT scriptures in general.

You quoted a verse that proves my point..

Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it&#8212;

How can it (righteousness) be apart from something, and yet be witnessed to by the same thing?

It can't be, apart from the law, yet witnessed to by the law? huh? The apart word sinks your idea. It proves 2 usages of nomos there also.


What it means is righteousness apart from the code, yet it, the righteousness of God by faith is in the OT all along, witnessed to by the law and the prophets, that being the OT. Hab, isaiah, the Psalms, Genesis, etc. You have to know the disticntions here.


You still have not really disected the verse. How can the law, which voids faith, uphold the law? huh?

That would be a contradiction, i can't uphold, what i void! rememebr Bob, the law is not of faith, Gal 3;12, and it voids faith, Rom 4;14, it cant void, and uphold.