The Apostate Gospel of works

W

Oh please. We can do without the condescension (not to mention the fact that your critique is not valid anyway).

Simply untrue - there is an entire block of verses that refer a coming judgement where Jew and Gentile both appear:

the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. 6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11For God does not show favoritism.
12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.

This is simply not material that addresses the Jew only! It is about a judgement for all men!

So I have no idea how you justify this assertion that this chapter is really only about the condemnation of the Jew.

Yes, the condemnation of the Jew features prominently, but the his entire critique of the Jew is based around a coming universal "good works" judgement for all men, with eternal life at stake.

You are misrepresenting the facts. And you beg the question by presuming salvation is not in any sense based on good works.

I have repeatedly assented to the fact that those apart from Christ cannot do good works. Please get your facts straight. I am not denying Romans 3:9-18. I simply understand it (properly) as a description of the state of man apart from being in Christ.

But as Romans 8 clearly attests, the person with the Spirit can do good works. So any kind of argument that "one cannot be saved by good works because of Romans 3:9-18 is clearly incorrect.

I stand by my statement - I suspect that I have invested at least as much as time as you in the study of Romans.

Entirely irrelevent, of course. The status of my church is not the issue - it is the texts and their proper exegesis that is the issue. You are engaging in the sad, but often used approach of trying to impugn my position on a particular theological matter by appealing to issues that have nothing to do with the actual text and its proper interpretation.

For your information, I have many theological disagreements with the United Church.

 

Please explain to me why you believe that just because Paul is addressing the Jew, this means that his statements about a universal good works judgement with eternal life at stake are purely hypothetical?

And please, enough with the Romans 3 stuff. It is clear beyond measure, from Romans 8, if not elsewhere that this argument that Romans 3 forces us to see 2:6-7 as hypothetical is simply unworkable.

Romans 8 is clear: the Christian escapes slavery to sin. So it is therefore equally clear that the person described in Romans 3:9-18 is not a Christian.

So I will agree that, yes, a non-Christian cannot be saved by good works.

But Romans 3 in no way argues against the position that the person in Christ can do good works, as enabled by the Spirit, and be saved by those works.

 

This is where all of your confusion lies.
1. According to Romans 3 a person outside of Christ, that is an unbeliever cannot do good works, and what he may consider good will not get him into heaven.
You may actually agree to that.

2. "The person in Christ can do good works...and be saved by those works," so you say.
This IMO, is a heretical statement, and definitely contradictory.
If he is "in Christ" he does not need to be saved.
If he is "in Christ" his obligation is to do good works.
If he is "in Christ" he is already saved.
If he is "in Christ," there is therefore now no condemnation to him (for he is in Christ--Rom.8:1, and that means he can never be outside Christ or lose his salvation.
This person is saved and does not need to be saved again and again and again. Only once will do.
Justification is one time event. Salvation is not a process. It happens at one point in history; when a person is justified.

Thus your confusion lies here; no doubt in your definition of what a Christian is; in your definition of salvation.

 

HP: And just when does that occur?

 

Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.
It takes place at the time one recognizes that they are a sinner and puts their faith in Christ, just as the Philippian jailor did.

Acts 10:43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
--It is a one time action.

Romans 10:9-10 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
--It is a one time action.

 

HP: So let me get this straight. Man has to do something to be saved and man cannot be saved until he does something. Is that correct? Who does the believing? Is it God that causes the believing or is it a choice man must make and as such he is the cause of believing?

 

Acts 16:30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?

You answer the question.

 

12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

1. Only two options and two kinds of people are mentioned in verses 12-14.

a. Gentiles and jews
b. those who sinned WITHOUT law
b. those who sinned in the law

2. "The law" in verse 12 is the same law in verse 13 as verse 13 only defines the standard of judgement by the law in verse 13.

3. The Gentile in verse 14 does not have "the law" described in verses 12-13 and therefore "the law" in verses 12-13 is Jewish law.

4. The Gentile fits under the category in verse 12 that is "without law" whereas it is the Jew that fits under the category "in the law"

5. There are only two contrasting categories "without law" and "in the law" and two contrasting people "Gentile" an "Jew" and the gentiles are declared to be "without law" in verses 14-15 so that leaves only the Jew "in the law" in verses 12-13.

6. Hence the gentile must be judged from a different source in verse 15 as one who does "does not have the law" because verse 12 says that those who sinned "without the law" will be "judged without the law" and the only standard in the context for such judgement is the law in verse 15 - law of conscience.


CONCLUSION: Hence, "the law" in all three verses (12-14) belongs to the Jew or the Mosaic law not to the Gentile. Since the Jew cannot be justified by the Mosaic law as even you admit then this necessarily demands that Paul is speaking hypothetically from verses 6-15 as he is dealing with those who think they will escape judgement by their works (vv. 3, 17-24) when in reality they will not (3:9-20). - case closed.

 

Paul always, everywhere and without exception argues from the presupposition of the ONE LAW the Great Commandment, upon which "all the law hangs" or depends, whether 'moral' so-called or 'ceremonial' so-called; whether called by himself 'heh entoleh' or 'ho nomos' or 'xeirographon' or whatever. Every possible duty or obligation or 'must' of the Christian man when dealt with by Paul, is dealt with from the all-encompassing perspective of the Great Commandment, the Command to "Love God above all else and one's neighbour as yourself". In Romans, in Colossians, in Galatians, in every letter of his.

 

What you've quoted is a summary of the entire law. How then is it one law rather than two precepts? And is this a works based faith? And is this the same sort of thing the Messianics talk about when they refer to one law?

 

The Scriptures always refers to “the law” as a singular whole. However, the scriptures also distinguish various application to the Jewish life (religious and social). But the religious/ceremonial and social/civil are but applications of the same moral law. This is quite obvious in the civil application of the law to the Jewish government as the civil laws are based upon the moral law/ten commandments.

The ceremonial application is not as readily discernable as it involves interpretation of types and symbols. However, the ceremonial law is stated to be for the purpose to discern that which is “clean” versus “unclean.” The ceremonial applications all have moral precepts behind them. Much of the ceremonial law pictures Christ in the sacrifices, temple structure and furniture or moral characteristics of the believer and unbeliever.

The law as given and applied to the Jew is simply a comprehensive application of righteousness to every aspect of their behavior and areas of life (moral, religious, civil).

The very same law in condensed form is written upon the conscience of every human being and acts as a judge of approving or disapproving every thought and action of life.

Thus what is written upon stone and applied to every area of the Jewish life is what is written in principle upon the conscience and they are thus the same law.

This is why Paul can say in regard to both Jew and Gentile (Rom. 3:9) that there is NONE good, no, NOT ONE (Rom. 3:10-12). This is why he can say that “the law” shuts “EVERY mouth” and “ALL the world” is condemned and that “NO FLESH” is justified by “the deeds of the law.” For the same law written upon stone (Ten commandments) is the same law written upon conscience. The Jew will be judged “by the law” as delivered to him (Rom. 2:12-13) while the Gentile does “not have the law” as given to the Jew (Rom. 2:14) in such a comprehensive written form but he has the same law written in a condensed form upon his conscience (Rom. 2:15) as well as the light of nature (Rom. 1:19-20) so he is without excuse and will be judged by that law.

 

Doesn't really answer my questions save what is meant by One law. However, you've indcated two laws. Moral/civil and Ceremonial. So when one law is mentioned is it to Moral/Civil or both?

 

Perhaps I did not make myself as clear as I thought. I believe that civil and ceremonial are simply two different areas of application of ONE LAW - the Ten commandments. The ceremonial application is the moral law expressed in symbolic religious expression. The civil is the moral law expressed in social relationships in a society. It is a comprehensive application to all aspects of Jewish life.

 

I do indeed agree with this.

You are obviously begging the very question at issue. What we are arguing about is indeed whether there will be a "good works" judgement with eternal life at issue.

You cannot simply claim your position - that a person who is "in Christ" is saved in a manner entirely disconnected from doing good works.

You are mistaken on both counts. And that you are is borne out by Paul, at various points, referring to both justification and salvation as both present and future events.

What our disagreement is fundamentally all about is the matter of taking Paul seriously. I take him at his word, and when he refers to a justification in the future, I believe him. You, apparently, do not. And when he refers to a salvation procured in the future, I, again, believe him. You apparently do not.

This is all about the degree to which we make the choice to listen to Paul, on the one hand, or listen to our traditions, on the other.

 

Here in Romans 2, Paul places justification in the future:

for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.

Note the future tense. This statement is made in the context of a description of a coming judgement. Now I am not denying that there is also a "present" justification.

But it cannot be denied- Paul also places justification in the future.

Behind all these discussions is the matter of whether we take Paul at his word - whether we actually listen to what he is telling us.

Here Paul describes justification as a future event. So rather than try to rationalize this statement away, we need to take it as written - there is a sense in which justification is a future event.

 

There is no argument about that. What the argument is about is whether Christians will be in that judgement. John 5:24 says they will not - "shall not come into judgement". I have proven that those who do come into that judgement are only those who come before God based upon their works alone - all the lost - Rom. 2:6-15/Rev. 20:11-15.

I have proven that by demonstrating contextually that Romans 2:13 is explanatory of judgement by "the law" in Romans 2:12 and that Romans 2:14 denies that "the law" spoken of in vv. 12-13 was ever given to the Gentiles. Thus it is Jewish law. You admit that no Jew can be justified under that law and therefore this proves that Romans 2:6-24 is nothing more than hypothetical in response to those lost gentiles and Jews who think they can escape judgement by their works (vv. 3,17-24) but the reality is that neither will (Rom. 3:9-20).

He isn't claiming that! He is simply claiming a person is not savied BY their "good" works as Paul clearly demonstrates in 1 Cor. 3:11-15.

Any future justification of salvation is a repudiation of any completed action of justification for salvation in the past (Jn. 5:24 - "shall not come in judgement". Abraham is set forth as the example/role model "the father" of ALL who believe in regard to justification and he was justified BEFORE he was circumicised.

You do not take him seriously at all. The immediate context doubly denies your interpretation. Romans 2:12-14 denies your interpretation, Romans 3:9-20 denies your interpretation. What you do is simply ignore the context and base you whole doctrine upon one verse (Rom. 2:8) and you even take that out of context.[/QUOTE]

 

Let me place the evidence again before your eyes. Note in the following verses there is only two contrasts offered "without law" and "in the law" and that contrast is carried through from verse 11 to verse 15. Notice there are only two kinds of people contrasted "Jews" and "Gentiles."

12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

To have "sinned without law" is the same law they will also perish without. The same that have sinned "in the law" is the same law they will be "judged by the law."

13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

The last phrase of verse 12 introduces judgement "by the law" and verse 13 gives the criteria of how that judgement will be administered. The law they are judged by will not justify them on the basis of being merely "hearers of the law" but rather on the basis of being "doers of the law." However, "the law" in question is the same law in verse 12 that those "in the law" will be judged by.


14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

Those who have sinned without the law in verse 12 are here identified as the Gentiles. Thus they are not those in verse 12 who have sinned "in the law" or who will be judged "by the law" because "they have not THE LAW."

This restricts "the law" spoken of consistently from verse 12 to the Jews and the Jewish law. This is reaffirmed in verse 14 by the words "things contained in the law" as the written Jewish law or the Mosaic law. Hence the words "the law" consistently refer to the Jewish law from verses 12-14.

Thus Paul answers how the Jews will be judged (vv. 12-13). However, verses 14-15 define how those in verse 12 "without the law" shall also "perish" without the law.

His explanation is that even though the Gentiles who were not given "the law" and thus could not read about "the things contained in the law" still do by nature the things found written in the Jewish law and thus are a law unto themselves. That must be the case for verse 12 to say "SINNED without the law" because where there is no law there is no sin. However, they are explicitly said to have "SINNED without the law." This is another proof that "the law" they sinned without must be the written law of the Jews.

How can they be regarded as having SINNED without the Jewish law? They have the moral law of God written upon their conscience - every lost person does. You cannot find any society in history or in the world today that does not contain by nature principles of right and wrong that mirror the ten commandments. They may rape and kill a neigboring tribe but they know it is wrong among their own people as society in order for their own society to exist.

15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)
16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

Paul is describing the function of conscience given to all men. Genitiles have sinned by violating what they know to be right according to their own conscience. Since none can judge or examine the conscience but God, verse 16 says that "God shall jduge THE SECRETS of men" by the gospel of Jesus Christ. The gospel of Jesus Christ is about Christ and his provision of righteousness that satisfies the law's demands. The works of men will be judged by the works of Christ as Christ's works will be the standard of what it means to fulfill the law of God.

 

Again, the future tense simply is descriptive of God's criteria just as is Romans 2:7-8 in a context dealing with those who think they will be justified by their works. However, Paul is not claiming they will be justified but merely presenting the criteria for justification. It is all hypothetical as it is the Jewish law that is in view and none can be justified under that law even though the Jew believes he can. Reality is stated in Romans 3:9-20!

 

14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

No person can be "judged by the law" which has no criteria for judgement! Paul identifies the criteria for judgement by "the law" in the phrase "the things contained in the law." The ONLY law known among men, where there are "things contained" in it they can not be merely "HEARERS" of but also "doers" is the Mosaic Jewish law.

In contrast, the gentile is also said to have "sinned without the law"! The only law the Gentile is without is "the law" given to the Jews. Yet, they have sinned "without the law" and therefore there must be some kind of law they have "sinned" against and thus must have a criteria to judge them as well. What is that criteria to prove they have sinned? It is the criterial of conscience that approve and disapproved their actions. That is the criteria contained within the law of conscience that they have "sinned" against and which will judge them as conscience is not hidden from God as in the day of judgement God will expose "THE SECRET" things of men (vv. 15-16). God will bring their conscience to "bear witness" against them:

15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another
16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

 

Hence, the same God who wrote the Law of Moses wrote the law on the conscience. What is expanded in Moses is condensed in the conscience of all men.

There are no sinless humans outside the garden of Eden and the Person of Jesus Christ. All have sinned, and there is NONE, no, NOT ONE who has not violated the Law they are under. The law of conscience and the law of Moses are written by the same God and reflect the same moral law and that is why Paul can say in universal terms rather than in ethnic Jewish terms:

19 ¶ Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

The unity of "the law" whether written on stone or on conscience is the same - law and that is why Paul can completely deny that any human being is justified by "the law..of works"

27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

This is precisely why both Jew and Gentile are justified the very same way - without deeds approved or condemned by law - but by faith in the works of Christ satisfying all demands of God's laws thus making God JUST and the JUSTIFIER of him that believeth "IN Christ."