Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Romans 3:1 Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Romans 3:1 Then what is the advantage of the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? |
Subject: old versus new testament |
Bible Note: Dear bowler, Before speaking to your post, I have to take an aside for a moment and explain a theological term. Since the earliest days of the church, primarily beginning in the teaching of the apostles, there is doctrine that we call grace. Often we define it as unmerited favor. Certainly that is an aspect of what it means, but it is only one aspect. (The profundity of truth is such that it rarely admits of a single, simple definition.) Thayer's Greek Definitions defines grace much more completely as "the merciful kindness by which God, exerting His holy influence upon souls, turns them to Christ, keeps, strengthens, increases them in Christian faith, knowledge, affection, and kindles them to the exercise of the Christian virtues." Now keep that definition in mind and let me introduce another phrase common to Christian thinking: means of grace. By this phrase we speak of the God ordained (expressly decreed) mechanisms by which He dispenses His grace. For example, Paul tells us that faith is by hearing, but hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17). God has ordained this particular way through which saving faith is gifted to the elect. The means of grace include, but are not limited to, Bible study, prayer, meditation, the preaching of the Word, worship with other believers, and fellowship with other believers. As Baptists, our roots reflect a generally, strong Reformed influence. We are also much influenced by one Reformer in particular, Huldrych Zwingli. Consequently, we take great care to distance ourselves from the teaching of the Romanists. Baptists of all stripes reject the notion that baptism imparts grace salvific nature. Therefore, we often speak of baptism as "a symbol." It certainly is that, for it pictures the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ (Romans 6:4-6). All Baptists would assert that if a lost person is immersed in baptism, all that happens is that they get wet. The ordinances of our Lord Jesus Christ (baptism and communion) are for the sole use of the redeemed, and are entirely unfit for ignorant or ungodly people. Yes, these things are pictures. However, they are also God ordained means of grace. Through them we publicly identify with Christ, declaring the gospel, as people changed by the gospel and being changed by the gospel. Remember that God takes a very dim view of having any of His pictures "messed up." Think about Moses striking the rock, divorce, and the warning of taking communion unworthily. In conclusion, although the Baptist divines would have chosen different terms than those used by the elders of the church in the sixth century, they would have, nonetheless, been willing to accept the ideas as expressed in your quote from the Canons of Orange. Christian orthodoxy finds different expression depending on its historical context. However, by the immediately involved and informed influence of the Holy Spirit, orthodoxy remains orthodoxy. I apologize for glossing over these things without more extensive deliberation. However, it is past my bedtime. Perhaps we'll have future occasion to discuss these important doctrines of the church. In Him, Doc |