Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 7
The speaker accuses “demons” (and teachers like Jeff Durbin as an example) of inserting “alone” into Romans 3:28 and treating “apart from works of the law” as meaning “faith by itself”—how persuasive is the speaker’s “apart from doesn’t equal alone” illustration (Jalil sitting apart from Josiah), and where do you think the real interpretive fault line is?
Another way to ask: The speaker says Romans 3:28 means “apart from works of the law,” not “faith alone.” How convincing is his example that “apart from” doesn’t mean “alone,” and where do you think the real disagreement in interpretation is?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
The speaker’s illustration is meant to show that “apart from works of the law” does not logically require “faith alone,” because something can be separated from one thing without being isolated from everything. The transcript suggests the real fault line is whether Paul is excluding only “works of the law” (like circumcision) or excluding all forms of obedient, love-filled faith from justification.
- He critiques the added word: people say, “justified by faith alone apart from the works of the law,” but “it doesn’t say it.”
- His analogy: “Jalil is sitting apart from Josiah… does that mean Jalil is alone? No… a bunch of people around her.”
- He argues “justified by faith” still includes other biblical realities: “justified freely by his grace… in Christ Jesus… by the Spirit… by his blood,” so “you still are not alone.”
- He accuses teachers of inserting meanings: “they just insert it wherever they want it to.”
- He connects this to the context of circumcision: Romans 3–4 is filled with “works of the law… circumcision,” not a blanket rejection of all obedience.