If it's True That Justification by Faith ...

[prism]

If it's true, that 'justification by faith' is the article by which the church stands or falls, then why did not Paul write the book of Romans first, since the book of Romans is foundational to the article of justification?
Instead, most scholars believe it was 1 Thessalonians. At least Martin Luther was consistent in this that he placed Romans as the first written epistle

 

[Fred]

If it's true, that 'justification by faith' is the article by which the church stands or falls, then why did not Paul write the book of Romans first, since the book of Romans is foundational to the article of justification?

Doesn't the Book of Galatians teach the same?

 

[prism]

Doesn't the Book of Galatians teach the same?

I believe Galatians teaches the danger of mixing law with faith. But some believe that Galatians was written first. It's just that the Epistle to the Romans goes into more detail on justification by faith than Galatians does

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Would it matter?

I believe each letter is written to direct problems with a specific issue in that church

The romans road is one of the best gospel messages around (romans 1 - 8)

 

[makesends]

If it's true, that 'justification by faith' is the article by which the church stands or falls, then why did not Paul write the book of Romans first, since the book of Romans is foundational to the article of justification?
Instead, most scholars believe it was 1 Thessalonians. At least Martin Luther was consistent in this that he placed Romans as the first written epistle

Justification by faith is in the OT.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Justification by faith is in the OT.

Abraham believed God and God acreditedor accounted it to him as righteousness (justification)

 

[prism]

Justification by faith is in the OT.

Obviously. I have never doubted that.

 

[EarlyActs]

If it's true, that 'justification by faith' is the article by which the church stands or falls, then why did not Paul write the book of Romans first, since the book of Romans is foundational to the article of justification?
Instead, most scholars believe it was 1 Thessalonians. At least Martin Luther was consistent in this that he placed Romans as the first written epistle

He was pastoral . He talked about what ever was the issue.

 

[prism]

He was pastoral . He talked about what ever was the issue.

Justification by faith ALONE is and always has been the foundational issue.

 

[makesends]

Abraham believed God and God acreditedor accounted it to him as righteousness (justification)

And...?

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

And...?

I was agreeing with you. And helping you by posting a note which proves what you said was true.,

 

[EarlyActs]

Justification by faith ALONE is and always has been the foundational issue.

that's true but was it an issue at the Thess church? No. They wanted to know about some current events and also the particular question about how believers reunite with those who are gone, etc. You might also say that some sexual misconduct and income making responsibilities were minor issues below those.

If there was an issue in a church, it came up.

You are thinking that your view is what all NT history and situations were about. It is not. And I believe entirely on justification by Christ.

 

[prism]

that's true but was it an issue at the Thess church? No. They wanted to know about some current events and also the particular question about how believers reunite with those who are gone, etc. You might also say that some sexual misconduct and income making responsibilities were minor issues below those.

If there was an issue in a church, it came up.

You are thinking that your view is what all NT history and situations were about. It is not. And I believe entirely on justification by Christ.

Excuse me, but I'm not so dense as to believe my view is that all NT history and situations were about. I do know what led to the Dark Ages, and that Justification by faith alone led us out of the Dark Ages... Besides, you don't know what I or anyone else thinks. I identify more withe letter to the Romans than the Epistle to the Thessalonian Church.

 

[ReverendRV]

If it's true, that 'justification by faith' is the article by which the church stands or falls, then why did not Paul write the book of Romans first, since the book of Romans is foundational to the article of justification?
Instead, most scholars believe it was 1 Thessalonians. At least Martin Luther was consistent in this that he placed Romans as the first written epistle

Asking this question is like asking why Saint Paul didn't write that in every one of his Epistles?

Why ask why? Perhaps Saint Paul didn't need to include to the Romans, not to fool around with your father's Wife?

 

[EarlyActs]

Excuse me, but I'm not so dense as to believe my view is that all NT history and situations were about. I do know what led to the Dark Ages, and that Justification by faith alone led us out of the Dark Ages... Besides, you don't know what I or anyone else thinks. I identify more withe letter to the Romans than the Epistle to the Thessalonian Church.

That’s good that you know that.

Another consequential idea in the 1st century was whether to follow the zealots down their path or not. It is related to justification by Jesus. But meant certain things in relation to the Roman admin of Judea, and about Messiah.

 

[makesends]

Obviously. I have never doubted that.

Then, your point that Paul should have written Romans first is groundless.

 

[EarlyActs]

This is the type of condescending remarks I was speaking of. I could bring up others, but I can't access earlier pages right now.

[MOD EDIT: Rule-violating text removed from post.]

re the standing or falling article: it was that at certain places in Paul's work, for sure. But there were others in other places/situations. For ex., the term doesn't get used in Ephesians which we now know might have been a circular--almost a publication, because the recipient slot is blank in the best originals.

 

[prism]

Then, your point that Paul should have written Romans first is groundless.

ok, but I don't follow, since the cry of the Church since the reformation has been justification, is that doctrine by which the Church stands or falls. Wouldn't you agree? In constructing a building, we should start with the foundation. Or do you think a different doctrine should be the foundation of the Church?

 

[prism]

[MOD EDIT: Rule-violating text removed from post.]

[MOD EDIT: Rule-violating text removed from post.]

re the standing or falling article: it was that at certain places in Paul's work, for sure. But there were others in other places/situations. For ex., the term doesn't get used in Ephesians which we now know might have been a circular--almost a publication, because the recipient slot is blank in the best originals.

Yes, each church had its issues. But the issue here is "Is the foundation of the Church the doctrine of justification by faith alone", the doctrine by which a Church stands or falls?
Or should it be something like five steps to a happy marriage? Or how to keep the law more perfectly? (which for many today seems to be the calling card).

 

[EarlyActs]

[MOD EDIT: Rule-violating text removed from post.]

Yes, each church had its issues. But the issue here is "Is the foundation of the Church the doctrine of justification by faith alone", the doctrine by which a Church stands or falls?
Or should it be something like five steps to a happy marriage? Or how to keep the law more perfectly? (which for many today seems to be the calling card).

I see. Another major one is the apostle's understanding of the enthronement of Christ and of the imperative kingdom (that which is supposed to be). This is the key 'standing or falling' issue of Acts 2-4, that becomes pronounced also in Eph 1, Phil 2, Rom 1 and Heb 1.

Another is that the zealots replaced the Gospel promise as the fulfillment of Israel's history with the Law. This is partly debated in Gal 3, Rom 15, Acts 13.

In Hebrews, it would be to accept the arrival of the New Covenant, not unlike 2 Cor 3-5.

Could you send an example of your last point? --a calling card of keeping the law more perfectly. Is it things that are Judaic?

If I were to pick an item that was 'standing or falling' among low-information believers today it would be endorsement of modern Israel as prophecy fulfillment.