>>536079
>What is the house?
According to this text it is manservants and maidservants.
>It can also be the body
No it can't, because in this text it is household, meaning family and/or property.
>According to you
To be in Christ is to be counted in Christ. That is what in means here
>judged based on their actions
Yes, reprobates are judged based on their actions.
>What exegesis?
The exegesis you ignored when you dismissed my view
>I suppose it's based on Romans 4
It's based on Romans 7. Paul tells us that the law is only binding on a living person, and that through Christ we are have died to the law, so therefore there is no condemnation for us because we have already been punished in Christ.
>The alternative brought up in the previous verse would make God a debtor to man
If God's grace requires co-operation He is a debtor to man. If I am a bum, and a rich man comes to me and takes pity on me and gives me a job, that is pure grace, I did not deserve the job offer. But if I take the job and do it now it is merit and I am owed the payment.
>was nothing in comparison to being reckoned righteous by faith which Abraham received before his circumcision
It was nothing at all. Circumcision had nothing to do with his justification because he was justified by faith alone before any works of the law.
>Now the blessing pronounced on the man whom God reckons this righteousness is this
The blessing is the reckoning of righteousness apart from works. "Pronounces" I feel is a terrible translation, because it implies activity on David's part. David says "Blessed is", not "I bless". All Paul is saying is that David is describing this blessing, not giving it himself. And the blessing he describes according to Paul is the reckoning of righteousness apart from works. This is why he says "whose sins are covered", because their sins (past, present and future) are perfectly covered over by the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ, not removed by an infused righteousness.
>This is taken from Psalm 32
I must point out that you are going back to Paul's prooftext to develop an interpretation independent of Paul's to come back and argue against the plain meaning of Paul's own words. Your argument is with Paul, not me.
>Another useful psalm on this topic is Psalm 51
This has what relevancy to Paul's interpretation of Psalm 32? None whatsoever
>So the same topic, but there is still a bearing of punishment
David does not claim to have been condemned again after being justified, he merely describes when he repented unto life.
>So the blessedness is the forgiveness of sins
Forgiveness from what? The imputation of righteousness, which covers the sins and blots out transgressions.
>>536080
>I'm not seeing this
Their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, because by their rejection the apostles went to the Gentiles. Their acceptance meaning life from the dead can only mean their acceptance brings the ressurection of the quick and the dead, as a sign ushering in the end.
>I don't see how you get St Paul as writing nations because Romans was written to the faithful at Rome, not to Rome the empire, and so it makes no sense for him to say "I am speaking to you gentiles" as to mean "to gentile nations" when he has never addressed it in such a way before this chapter
He begins the chapter saying "For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin". He describes the nation he is a member of.
>Now if this was referring to nations and not individuals it would mean a nation had converted, but no such conversion had taken place. Rome was still pagan as was every other nation
Of course, at that time, but we should not force time into this text. Paul could clearly see the way the wind was blowing, he knew whole nations would convert. This text must be understood as addressing all nations which convert, and a warning to them. (Of course, this does not bar it from being a warning also to those Gentiles at Rome in those days, since Paul did not know when Rome would convert.)