Discussion Questions

Paul quotes Leviticus 18:5 (“the man who does those things will live by them”) and argues that even perfect law-keeping promised only “long days” in this present life, not eternal life; what does that claim suggest about God’s purpose in giving the Mosaic Law, and how does it challenge common Christian assumptions about “Old Testament salvation”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If even perfect obedience to Moses’ Law only promised a long life on earth, what was God’s main reason for giving the Law? How does this challenge the idea that people in the Old Testament were saved the same way Christians often assume?

Origen is quoted contrasting “the righteousness of Christ” (eternal life) with “the righteousness of the law” (temporal life); how does that early Christian framing reshape the way you read Paul’s “law vs. faith” language in Romans 10 without turning it into “law bad / grace good” slogans? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If “Christ’s righteousness” brings eternal life but “law righteousness” brings only earthly life, how should that change how you read Paul’s “law vs. faith” in Romans 10? How can you avoid turning it into a simple “law bad, grace good” slogan?

Paul applies Deuteronomy 30 (“do not say in your heart, who will ascend/descend…”) to Christ and Chrysostom stresses “do not say in your heart” as a warning even against internal doubting; what kinds of “heart objections” do modern Christians quietly entertain about Christ’s accessibility and salvation’s simplicity? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What quiet doubts do Christians carry in their hearts about how close Jesus really is and how “easy” salvation sounds? What makes us think it must be harder or farther away?

Chrysostom says salvation is so near that “if you do not wish to cross so much as the threshold of your door, you may be saved even while you sit at home,” citing Cornelius and the Philippian jailer; how should that immediacy shape the way we think about evangelism, catechesis, and the role of community without making salvation feel casual or cheap? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If salvation is that near and immediate, how should that shape evangelism, teaching new believers, and the need for Christian community? How do we keep salvation from feeling cheap or casual at the same time?

The lesson says Romans 10:9–11 describes the “initial stage of salvation” and requires “little theology” (believing Jesus is Lord and God raised Him); how do you hold together that simplicity with the later demands Paul makes in Romans about perseverance, doing good, and judgment “according to works”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How do you hold together the simple starting point in Romans 10 (trusting Jesus is Lord and God raised him) with Paul’s later calls to keep going, do good, and face judgment “by works”? How can both be true?

The transcript contrasts modern altar calls (a recent innovation) with Acts, where public confession occurred at baptism; what would need to change in church life if we treated baptism—not the altar call—as the normal moment of public confession, and what resistance would we expect (practically and theologically)? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If baptism, not an altar call, was the normal public confession, what would have to change in how churches operate? What pushback would you expect, both practical and theological?

Origen rebuts those who claim belief and confession can coexist with “lack the honors of good works,” saying true confession means submitting to Christ’s kingdom and repudiating Mammon, greed, immodesty, and falsehood; what concrete patterns in your life would actually reveal whether “Jesus is Lord” is a lived confession rather than a verbal one? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What specific habits in your life show whether “Jesus is Lord” is real and not just words? Where do money, desires, honesty, and pride reveal who you actually serve?

Origen’s line is unsettling: “what will it profit me to know and believe that God raised Jesus… if he has not been resurrected within me personally?”—what does it mean for Christ to be “risen within” someone, and how does that confront modern notions of assurance that are detached from transformed habits? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does it mean for Jesus to be “raised within” a person, not just believed as a fact? How does that challenge the idea of assurance that doesn’t include changed behavior?

On “the Lord is rich to all who call upon Him,” Ambrosiaster says God is generous “only to those who call upon Him,” and the lesson adds that He grants both salvation and “various eternal rewards”; how does this early Christian way of speaking about generosity, calling, and rewards differ from evangelical instincts about equal outcomes for all believers? JumpstartAnother way to ask: How is the early Christian idea—God is generous to those who call on him, and he gives different rewards—different from the idea that all believers end up with the same outcome? What does that difference change about how you think of salvation and reward?

The lesson insists “whoever calls” doesn’t mean mere verbal invocation—Jesus’ “Lord, Lord,” pagan Romans calling on God in storms, and Proverbs “when you call on me, I will not hear” are all used to show calling must be “in faith” and “ready to obey”; what practices or self-tests could a church adopt to help people distinguish true calling from empty religious language without sliding into legalism? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What could a church do to help people tell the difference between real faith-filled calling on the Lord and empty religious words? How can it do that without becoming legalistic?