musterion
Well-known member
Can't be both. One is wrong (the first one).
ECT Romans 3:30 (for STP)
- Thread starter musterion
- Start date
Can't be both. One is wrong (the first one).
Sonnet
New member
If one reads the entire passage then it is clear that there is no distinction.
But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.
Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. Because of what law? The law that requires works? No, because of the law that requires faith. For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith. Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.
Righteousness is given 'through faith' (there being no difference between Jew and Gentile) and in the same context, 'by faith'. In v.30 Paul actually says 'through that same faith' - in other words, through the same faith to which Paul had just referred to - the 'by faith' of the circumcision.
Paul couldn't be clearer - the faith of the circumcision and uncircumcision is one and the same.
Sonnet
New member
Through/by faith equality:
God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith.
This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe.
Context:
There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.
God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith.
This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe.
Context:
There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.
musterion
Well-known member
Then the Holy Spirit's choice of two distinct words there means nothing. Just a meaningless, niggling detail, yes?
Sonnet
New member
Verses 22-25 have both Jews and Gentiles attaining righteousness through faith, so the 'by faith' of the circumcision of v.30 equates to 'through'.
Why would anyone be looking for a different process of faith?
musterion
Well-known member
You didn't address the question. It's still two distinct words. See here...
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...30-(for-STP)&p=4713031&viewfull=1#post4713031
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...30-(for-STP)&p=4713031&viewfull=1#post4713031
Sonnet
New member
Tambora seems to make a sound argument but I wonder if such nuances are valid why Paul would say:
This righteousness is given through(dia) faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by(dia) faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished—
There being no difference between Jew and Gentile regarding their sinful state, then the remedy through (dia) faith applies to both.
musterion
Well-known member
If if Paul were here, you could ask him yourself. First, though, he might direct you to the presence and use of two distinct words and ask you why you keep ignoring them.
Since I'm not Paul, and since you're not listening to me, I'm going to go find something else to do.
Since I'm not Paul, and since you're not listening to me, I'm going to go find something else to do.
musterion
Well-known member
Sonnet
New member
Does Paul say that Jews are saved through (dia) faith here:
22 This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile,
?
If you can maintain the distinction there then you'd have a point.
Sonnet
New member
Why would anyone suggest there is a difference between Jew and Gentile regarding faith?
Interplanner
Well-known member
Grammatically speaking, I don't know of any use to the alternating of 'ek' and 'dia' other than they show the two can be interchanged at times. If he had been talking about the movement of a fish in water, he would have stayed with 'dia.' If the fish jumped, it would have jumped 'ek' water. But he is in abstract speech.
iamaberean
New member
There are works of the law, things seen.
There are works of faith, things not seen.
There are works of faith, things not seen.
What works do you do ?
Interplanner
Well-known member
What was nicely shown?
iamaberean
New member
I was baptized to wash my sins away, by faith. I received the Holy Ghost, by faith. Works of faith is obedience to the word of God. One shouldn't look for reasons not to do something, just do them by faith because the scripture says so. By doing so one will receive the blessing of God.
Jas 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
Jas 2:22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
Jas 2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
Jas 2:14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
Jas 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
Jas 2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
Jas 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
Jas 2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
I believe GOD made that distinction when He chose Jacob/Israel over his own twin brother Esau on the basis of election and not for being any more worthy (as the choice was made before either of them did anything at all).
If one does not trust that GOD will indeed perform His promises to Israel, then they have no basis to think that GOD is obligated to keep any promise to anyone at all.
This is not about whether Jews are more faithful to GOD (they're not), but about if GOD is faithful to Israel (He is).
It is that faithfulness of GOD (despite their worthiness) that assures us that He keeps His promises.
andyc
New member
Promises fulfilled.
The same kingdom where God dwells, Abraham, Issac, and Jacob also dwell.
It doesn't get more fulfilled than that.