I disagree. Paul is not talking about “before salvation” and “after salvation”. That is a just not there in the text! The words are never mentioned. Consider reading Romans 2 and 3 again. Paul is not talking about people before they are saved are wicked! First of all, Romans 2 shows that people have a law written on their hearts (placed there by God). Consider the following passage:
“Tribulation and anguish [shall be] upon every human soul that does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek; but glory, honour, and peace to everyone that works good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no respect of persons with God. For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law (for not the hearers of the law [are] just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified; for when the Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature that which is of the law, these, not having the law, are a law unto themselves; which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, accusing and also excusing their reasonings one with another)” Romans 2:9-14
First, even the “saved” Jew, the one who proudly bragged about their law, will be judged on whether they do evil. They are not saved by being born of the flesh of Abraham. That includes Greeks, as well. See, the judgment is based on whether one does good or not – and this includes Greeks! Note, Paul attacks the source of pride of the Judaizers, the Law. “as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law”. – The doers of the Law will be justified, not just those who hear it. Jesus Himself says this in Matthew 7:21:
“Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of the heavens, but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in the heavens”
Next, we have the Law written even on the Gentile’s hearts – our conscience. It is placed there by God. If we obey it, if we fulfill this Law written on our hearts, we will be justified, as Paul says. And of course, this presumes that it is done in Christ – even those who do NOT know Christ (those who love know God). So what Paul is saying is summed up at the end of Romans 2:
For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, neither is circumcision that which is done outwardly in the flesh, but he [is] a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision [is that] of the heart, in the spirit [and] not in the letter, whose praise is not of men, but of God
Thus, a saved person, one of God, a son of Abraham by faith, is not of the flesh, but of the spirit – one who walks in faith. Whether a person follows the Decalogue and the Mosaic Law, or whether one follows the Law written on their hearts, a person IS A JEW, one of the people of God – a member of the Church, as I have described so long ago.
In Romans 3, Paul continues his assault on the proud Jews who think they are saved because they are of the flesh of Abraham. He brings up a veritable litany from the Old Testament Psalms. Unless you read the context of those Psalms, you will become confused and will not get what Paul is talking about. In each case, Paul is quoting many Psalms written by David against JEWS. There were wicked Jews pursuing David, and David wrote Psalms against them, saying that they never followed God, that they were foolish, etc. Use your Bible and go to those Psalms noted in Romans 3. You will find in each case that it is Paul charging the “saved” Jews of being wicked, just as David did 1000 years before. THEY were wicked – while the Gentiles were open to the Word of God.
Continuing in Chapter 4, Paul delivers the coup de grace by reminding them that Abraham was declared righteous BEFORE he was circumcised, the ultimate initiation ritual for the Jew, what separated them from the Gentile. By pointing out the futility of relying on their human heritage to show they were “saved”, Paul points to the REAL message of the Bible (even the OT), that man is saved by Faith in God…
All this other stuff that ALL men are evil and do not follow God totally misses the point of Romans 2-4 and Paul’s attack on the self-righteous Judaizers. Paul is merely quoting OT Scriptures to point out that the Jews were no better than the Gentiles as a group. Look again to Romans 2 and the quote above and you will find that is the premise of Paul’s discussion in this section.
No one is righteous in his nature when born. All of the elect are righteous in God's sight after salvation. No wicked person would ever seek out the Lord. God gives grace to those whom He will, and then they seek the Lord.
True. But it is not what Paul is talking about here.
But your whole argument is based on silence, (regarding Mary) isn't it? The standard for you is much stricter because you are making the positive argument. You are saying "look at all this non-evidence, therefore it must be so." :) Just in your above, you use "if" for two ideas, and "perhaps" for two conclusions.
No. Catholics use many arguments that converge to tell us that Mary was sinless. We do not rely solely on the absence of something in Scripture to point out that “Mary is a sinner because it doesn’t specifically state that”. That is an argument from silence. There is no other evidence to prove that statement, thus, it rests totally on the lack of evidence, a logical fallacy. We, on the other hand, utilize the various writings of men to ascertain what the common beliefs of the time were. “How did Christians consider Mary during the first few centuries”? In the writings of the first Christians, we note that men are mulling more profoundly over that treasure called the Apostolic Teachings – both Scripture and Tradition – to mine the meanings of what God gave men. We see evidence that notes, from different sources, that Mary was considered special, not only in Scripture, but in the Apostolic Tradition and writings that followed. Thus, we use inferential evidence to determine that Mary is sinless, rather than empirical.
I wrote : “Paul does NOT say that Jesus is the only sinless person in Romans 3. Thus, Paul (and the Spirit) leave room for exceptions to the universal "all". “
You responded : An argument from silence is a lousy argument. ... :)
LOL! That’s not an argument from silence – as elsewhere in Scripture, we KNOW that Paul doesn’t mean that Jesus has sinned:
For we [do] not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted like as [we are], yet without sin.” Hebrews 4:15
Thus, we infer that Paul cannot mean that “All” is universal, because elsewhere, Jesus is mentioned as being sinless. Since Scripture cannot contradict, we infer that Paul has exceptions in mind.
Brother in Christ
I appreciate your thematic explanation that Paul was talking to the Jews. I see it even more broadly, that he was talking about the righteousness of Jews and gentiles alike. I respectfully disagree that salvation is achieved by doing good works, as you appear to say. Salvation is achieved by grace through faith. You know that Abraham's FAITH was accorded to him as righteousness, not his works.
I thought this whole line of discussion started with whether "all" really meant "all" in 3:23. Let's look at the whole thought:
Rom. 3:21-24 : 21 But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22 This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.
I believe Paul is talking about righteousness for all, not just to the Jews. The righteousness comes TO ALL WHO BELIEVE, whether Jew or gentile. (Unless, of course, if this "all" doesn't mean "all" either.) What does THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE mean to you? To me it means that there is no difference between Jew or gentile, there is no difference between prostitute, tax-cheat, or murderer. ANYONE who comes to Christ will be saved. All have sinned and are unworthy on our own. Only Christ saves. Judgment is based on faith. True faith DOES result in works.
We, on the other hand, utilize the various writings of men to ascertain what the common beliefs of the time were. “How did Christians consider Mary during the first few centuries”? ... Thus, we use inferential evidence to determine that Mary is sinless, rather than empirical.
Another popularity contest to determine truth. There is nothing at all in the Bible that proactively supports a sinless Mary. To the contrary, there is plenty in scripture to prevent it. The best you can do is massage all those verses to ALLOW for it. But even then, you have no explanation as to why such an exception only applies to Mary and no one else. It seems like a ton of work to go through to prove that the Bible doesn't say what it says.
“Paul does NOT say that Jesus is the only sinless person in Romans 3. Thus, Paul (and the Spirit) leave room for exceptions to the universal "all".
FK: An argument from silence is a lousy argument. ... :)
LOL! That’s not an argument from silence – as elsewhere in Scripture, we KNOW that Paul doesn’t mean that Jesus has sinned:
Yes, it certainly is an argument from silence. :) I know your point is not to say that Paul thought Jesus was sinless. Everyone knows that. You are arguing that "all" does not mean "all", and therefore Mary was also sinless. That's arguing from silence. You are saying that because Paul gives Jesus a pass, he must have meant that others get a pass too. That just isn't there. You all have to make that part up completely with extra-Biblical work.
Since Scripture cannot contradict, we infer that Paul has exceptions in mind.
There you go again, arguing from silence. Why do you use "exceptions" plural? We agree that Paul gave one pass to Jesus, after all, He is a special case. You then must make a huge leap to say that Paul had other exceptions in mind. No scriptures support you in this, they are silent as to any other exceptions. It is totally made up, Biblically speaking.