Protestantism

» pink101 - An Indictment

..
There is an attitude expressed by some who participate here that can be seen as boasting in so far as a condemnation is laid down against all those who have not got in line and confessed the points of certain fundamental doctrines.
.
The context of Romans 3:23 deals with the idea of a person in a court of law claiming or boasting of right standing in some way or another.
.
The point, as I see it, is that persons do not create their own righteousness in court; but, that the rights involved are established by a higher authority--and in the case of Romans, chapter 3, that authority is God. [He] is the one that bestows the righteousness that justifies the individual being charged. Reading, in particular, verse 21 and to the end of the chapter--those two paragraphs seem to express the point quite clearly. The righteousness on which a person stands justified come from God and not from anything a person says or does. It kinda blows organized religion--as we know it--out of the water.
.
It seems like the Glory of God is that [He] is the supreme being that bestows justice on all existence. I think the chapter is an indictment against the priesthood. I know my position is very unpopular--why wouldn't it be?
.
Are we talking about unalienable rights here?
.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» Brian Tubbs - When you look in the mirror...

In response to When you look in the mirror... posted by Migisi:

Adam was not God. That takes it too far.

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» Brian Tubbs - An Indictment

In response to An Indictment posted by pink101:

There is an attitude expressed by some who participate here that can be seen as boasting in so far as a condemnation is laid down against all those who have not got in line and confessed the points of certain fundamental doctrines.

The attitudes of the participants here have no bearing whatsoever on the truth or falsehood of the doctrines in question. Let's not get sidetracked.
.
The context of Romans 3:23 deals with the idea of a person in a court of law claiming or boasting of right standing in some way or another.

Paul is putting everyone on the same page. We are ALL sinners, therefore one sinner doesn't have the right to personally judge or look down on other sinners. We're all in the same boat.

The point, as I see it, is that persons do not create their own righteousness in court; but, that the rights involved are established by a higher authority--and in the case of Romans, chapter 3, that authority is God.

Let's not confuse righteousness with 'rights.' Righteousness refers to an absolute holy standing before God. A person who is righteous is "right" before God. Paul is saying that there is NO ONE who is righteous - not a single living human being. No one.

..is the one that bestows the righteousness that justifies the individual being charged. Reading, in particular, verse 21 and to the end of the chapter--those two paragraphs seem to express the point quite clearly. The righteousness on which a person stands justified come from God and not from anything a person says or does. It kinda blows organized religion--as we know it--out of the water.

It blows 'organized religion' out of the water IF organized religion sets itself up as the arbiter of who is 'righteous' and who isn't.

It seems like the Glory of God is that [He] is the supreme being that bestows justice on all existence. I think the chapter is an indictment against the priesthood. I know my position is very unpopular--why wouldn't it be?

I think you're reading your own bias into the passage. That said, there is SOME truth to what you're saying. Paul is making clear that no one - priests included - can set themselves up as holy and righteous. God is holy. God is glorious. And all of us - every single one of us - falls short of that. That is Paul's point in Romans 3:23.

Are we talking about unalienable rights here?

no

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - An Indictment

In response to An Indictment posted by BrianTubbs:
.
no.
.
I think you might be wrong.
.
Let's not confuse righteousness with 'rights.' Righteousness refers to an absolute holy standing before God. A person who is righteous is "right" before God. Paul is saying that there is NO ONE who is righteous - not a single living human being. No one..
.
One's standing is a court refers directly to their rights.
.
I think what Paul is saying is that no one is righteous outside of the rights they get from God. I'm saying that the rights we get from God are unalienable and I think there are a lot of people who agree with me. The idea here is that you cannot earn your righteousness; but, that your rights come from God.
.
The idea that God is the one that bestows us with those rights and that we are thereby justified in our being is to God's glory.
.
There is a tendency to overly simplify these particular points to make them fit into Old Testament theology--that is one of the main problems with Fundamentalist Theology. At least, in my thinking. But, who am I? Right?
.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - Same Page

In response to An Indictment posted by BrianTubbs:
.
Paul is putting everyone on the same page. We are ALL sinners, therefore one sinner doesn't have the right to personally judge or look down on other sinners. We're all in the same boat.
.
It isn't so much that Paul is putting everyone on the same page as it is that he is addressing himself to those who think or act as though they have some special standing before God. He tells them that they are on the same page as those they accuse of not having right standing. So, he doesn't address himself to the street bum; but, to the pious-among-us.
.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» Migisi - An Indictment

In response to An Indictment posted by BrianTubbs:
.
Righteousness refers to an absolute holy standing before God. A person who is righteous is "right" before God. Paul is saying that there is NO ONE who is righteous - not a single living human being. No one.
.
Confused. Your reference to Romans 3:10 above: If Paul is correct that "There is no one righteous, not even one;", doesn't this mean that all the Bible characters -- Abraham, Moses, Joseph, John the Baptist, Simeon, Cornelius, etc. (who were purported to be 'righteous' and 'holy' before God) -- were ~not~ righteous?
.
It blows 'organized religion' out of the water IF organized religion sets itself up as the arbiter of who is 'righteous' and who isn't.
.
Which 'organized religion' doesn't do that?

-- posted by Migisi

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - An Indictment

In response to An Indictment posted by Migisi:
.
I think what Paul is saying in Romans 3:10 is that we are all without rights except those we receive from our Creator--or--another way of saying that is that we all have the SAME rights--the ones we receive from our Creator.
.
It took nearly 1800 years for that to sink in and to come out as inalienable rights.
.
The Eighteenth Century IS the one that presents Western Civilization with the ability to break the traditionalist mind set that had always prevailed in human thinking. It was not JUST the Founding of America; but, it was across the board in Western Civilization that human beings were set free from tyranny of all kinds. It is of major importance in history that the eighteenth century is a turning point in time. Our Constitution breaks the hold religion has on humanity with its First Amendment and that is in direct contradiction to the idea that America is founded on Christian principles. So much for saying America is a Christian nation. We are a Secular Society--Straight Arrow.
.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» Migisi - An Indictment

In response to An Indictment posted by pink101:
.
I see Paul's remarks as more of a pronouncement of equality -- all are under the indictment of sin. This gave Gentiles equal 'status' with the Jews within Paul's churches... equality the Jerusalem Church likely would've opposed. Paul prefaces his scriptural quotes (from Psalms 14&53) with "We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin." (vs9) And he repeats it in vs23 - "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God". He says "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.." (vs 29/30) He goes on to say that, in the same way, all ~believers~, regardless of their heritage ("There is no difference"), are made righteous through Jesus and share in salvation equally.
.
Did Paul's remarks influence Western justice and the Constitutional concept of equality? I suppose they could've.
.

-- posted by Migisi

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - Endowed By Their Creator

In response to An Indictment posted by Migisi:
.
The idea of unalienable--inalienable--rights is that all human beings own those rights in equal and complete measure.
.
My impression is that the apostle Paul puts the idea across in a negative sense. The positive way of putting the idea over would have been for him to have said that all humans are equally endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights.
.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» Migisi - Endowed By Their Creator

In response to Endowed By Their Creator posted by pink101:

.
My impression is that the apostle Paul puts the idea across in a negative sense.
.
My impression too.

-- posted by Migisi

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds