The Apostate Gospel of works

This is simply untrue to Paul's actual words. You seem to think you have the licence to change what Paul says. And it is very hard to argue against someone who takes such a "loose" approach to exegesis.

Paul does indeed say that people will be justified! That is precisely what this english statement means:

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

Now I understand that you think that the "Law" here is the Law of Moses. And you then reason, correctly, from Romans 3 that no one can be justified by the Law of Moses.

But here is the critical problem with your view (and that of many others): Without "admitting" to it, you place Paul in the position of being a deeply incompetent and confused writer.

No competent person would write about a future event that is only hypothetical unless they explicitly prefaced their statement to that effect. You have Paul saying things that are only hypothetically true even though Paul nowhere, repeat nowhere, tells the reader that he is talking about something that is only hypothetical.

Yes, Paul says he says in Romans 3. But the better approach is to see how we can take him at his word in both Romans 3 and this statement from Romans 2.

And even though I will not make the case in this post, there is a strong argument that Paul is not referring to the Law of Moses in the statement from Romans 2.

Again, I cannot emphasize this enough: your line of reasoning makes Paul into a bumbling, deeply confused writer who says one thing in chapter 2, never once suggesting he does not mean it, and then goes on to say something in chapter 3 that forces us to conclude that he did not mean what he wrote back in chapter 2.

I have a much higher opinion of Paul than that. More later.

 

The judgement is not hypothetical! What is hypothetical is that anyone's works can be justified under the literal criteria of that judgement which is the Mosaic law and the law of conscience. - Rom. 2:12-15

I have thoroughly debunked your eisgetical position. You have not even dared respond to the exposition I have given of Romans 2:12-14 in the last five posts. Why? Your whole position is at stake if you cannot respond! You claim you have evidence but you are unable to produce it. Why? Because no such evidence exists except in the fertile heresies of your own mind.

Your position makes Paul a bumbling fool! There is no evidence that Romans 2:12-15 is not the law of Moses! I dare you to present any evidence to support that outrageous eisgetical claim!!!!! I dare you to attempt to over throw the exposition I have given of Romans 2:12-14. I dare you to leave it to the readers to judge who really has the Biblical evidence to support their position!

The immediate context before (Rom. 2:1-5) and after (Rom. 2:17-3:8) is about LOST PEOPLE who believe they can escape judgement by their works (Rom. 2:3). Paul simply sets forth the criteria that God will implement for judging works (Rom. 2:6-16) and then sets out to demonstrate thoroughly that no lost person can be justified by that criteria (Rom. 3:9-20).

However, you postion make Paul a bumbling idiot. Paul thoroughly denies that anyone can be justified by "works" and "deeds" of "the law" but rather they are justified by faith in Christ. The very "works" of the law Paul denies can justify them is the very law being used as the basis for judging works (Rom. 2:12-14; 3:19-20). You are pitting Paul against himself.

 

Andre has admitted that his whole exposition of Romans 2:6-16 stands on his exposition of Romans 2:13 and whether or not “the law” is the Jewish law. He admits that if Paul has in reference the Jewish law then his position is proven wrong. Andre nor anyone else on this forum can simply jerk Romans 2:13 out of its context and define “the law” any way they please.

I give the following absolute proofs from the context that the words “the law” used in Romans 2:12-29 is the Jewish law:

A. PROOF #1: Romans 2:12 provides only two possible options to be judged by in the day of judgment by God. People who have sinned “without law” will be judged “without law” and people who have sinned “in the law” will be judged “by the law.” Either “the law” in question is the Jewish law or the Jewish law will not be used in the day of Judgement. The ten commandments is the Jewish Law. The civil and ceremonial laws are the Jewish law. Andre must take the position that what is uniformly called “the law” of God in both Old and New Testaments will not be used in the day of judgment to judge any man by if he rejects this is the Jewish law.

B. PROOF #2: Romans 2:13 describes “the law” used in the day of judgment as something the one being judged HEARD and thus it was law that was WRITTEN that could be READ to ALL those not being judged “without law.” What law of God is WRITTEN and can be READ and thus HEARD to all who are “in the law” other than the Jewish law of Moses?

C. PROOF #3: Romans 2:14 does not jump midstream but continues to use the words “the law” to describe what Gentiles were “not given.” If Gentiles were “not given” what Paul calls “the law” which was heard by all those “in the law” then that leaves only JEWS. What law was not given the Gentiles but was given the Jews that could be WRITTEN, thus READ to all those “in the law” so as to HEAR and DO its commands?????


D. PROOF #4: Romans 2:14 also further describes “the law” not given to Gentiles but that the Gentile did by nature in regard – “things pertaining to the law.” What law given to Jews are there “things pertaining” to it, that Gentiles do by nature??? The ten commandments? Paul answers this in verse 15 as the law written upon the “heart” (inward man) specifically identified to be that inward part called “CONSCIENCE.” Lost people have a “conscience.” Gentiles have a conscience. God can call the law written upon conscience in contrast to their responses to it as a “witness” against them in the day of judgment. Remember verse 12 says to them that have “sinned” but “without law” shall also “perish” without law. Gentiles were not given “the law” but they were given the law of conscience which corresponds to the moral law of God in principle and thus can be used in the day of judgment as a witness against them as God will expose the “SECRET” inward struggle and violations of conscience by the Gentiles.

Andre may attempt to isolate one proof from the others and dismantle it, but taken together these proofs completely expose his interpretation as error.

 

My critique is still valid. You have Paul saying that people will be justified by "the law" in Romans 2 and yet there will be zero such people. Paul is not that confused a writer.

I doubt it - I have not had time to respond to everything you have written, but I am quite confident my exegesis is closer to Paul's intended meaning than is yours.

Please do not take the low road. You are speculating and you have failed to acknowledge another possibility that I know you must be aware of, namely that I have simply not gotten around to addressing each and every one of your posts.

I will deal with this when I have time. The argument is relatively complicated.

Please do not take the low road of mud-slinging. Do you think this will intimidate me? Do you think the really intelligent reader will be convinced that you are right because you accuse me of eisegesis?

Are you intentionally misrepresenting me?

The reader who actually reads my posts will know that I have consistently and repeatedly agreed that it is not possible to be justified by the Law of Moses.

 

Agreed.

Of course, you have no evidence that I have taken things out of context.

The fact of the matter is that I simply have not had the time to make my case about 2:13.

But I hope to make it as soon as I can.

 

When Andre cannot answer a post or question his typical response is mud-slinging or name-calling; perhaps procrastination. There is deliberate condescension of the other poster that his post is not valid.
Well, Andre, I would rather see the well thought out exposition of the Word of God that has been presented here than the philosophical arguments and the denial of Scripture, as well as the brow beating of others, that you have presented here.

 

This I have got to see! I place four contextual proofs in your face and every one is directly contextually based in Romans 2:12-15 and you say I have no contextual proof??????????

You have only TWO types of law in the judgment of only TWO types of people in Romans 2:12-15. What Paul calls "the law" is not the law given to Gentiles so go figure who it is given to??? The only category left - JEWS! Now go figure what is "the law" that was given to Jews??????

Romans 2:13 says it is "the law" that can be read so that people HEAR it and can do it but it is not "the law" given to Gentiles - go figure!!!

 

You bear false witness.

I have done none of the things you claim I have done.

You have produced no evidence of condescension on my part.

You have produced no evidence of mud-slinging.

You have produced no evidence of name-calling

None of my quotes that you have re-produced involve any of these behaviours. Why are you making accusations for which you clearly have no evidence?

Keep it up and I will contact the other administrators.

 

Wait for it. Its coming.

And we shall see how your "proofs" fare when subject to careful analysis.

 

You guys need to demonstrate a little charity and not speculate about motivations of mine that you simply have no knowledge of.

You simply have no evidence that I am engaging in any "avoidance" or procrastination. Why do you assume the worst. I have other things to do and the arguments I intend to provide are not trivial to put together.

Please follow me in taking the high road and do not make this an exercise in character-assassination.

 

Great! However, if you had any "careful analysis" you could respond to the four proofs that I gave couldn't you? You haven't been able to overturn those proofs yet. All you have done is ignore them.

 

Stop lying.

You have no evidence that I am ignoring anything. So to claim that I have, in fact, ignored them, is a lie.

 

Everyone on this forum has read Post #223. DHK has commented on it directly to you! You are proving the charges that DKH made against you as correct. You are calling me a liar when in fact it is you that is lying by claiming I have never presented these proofs to you!

Post #223 is not the first time I have presented these proofs. Indeed it is the LAST time I presented them as I have presented at least three times previous to Post #223

If you want to repost post #223 I will be happy to do so again!

 

Here is Post #223

Andre has admitted that his whole exposition of Romans 2:6-16 stands on his exposition of Romans 2:13 and whether or not “the law” is the Jewish law. He admits that if Paul has in reference the Jewish law then his position is proven wrong. Andre nor anyone else on this forum can simply jerk Romans 2:13 out of its context and define “the law” any way they please.

I give the following absolute proofs from the context that the words “the law” used in Romans 2:12-29 is the Jewish law:

A. PROOF #1: Romans 2:12 provides only two possible options to be judged by in the day of judgment by God. People who have sinned “without law” will be judged “without law” and people who have sinned “in the law” will be judged “by the law.” Either “the law” in question is the Jewish law or the Jewish law will not be used in the day of Judgement. The ten commandments is the Jewish Law. The civil and ceremonial laws are the Jewish law. Andre must take the position that what is uniformly called “the law” of God in both Old and New Testaments will not be used in the day of judgment to judge any man by if he rejects this is the Jewish law.

B. PROOF #2: Romans 2:13 describes “the law” used in the day of judgment as something the one being judged HEARD and thus it was law that was WRITTEN that could be READ to ALL those not being judged “without law.” What law of God is WRITTEN and can be READ and thus HEARD to all who are “in the law” other than the Jewish law of Moses?

C. PROOF #3: Romans 2:14 does not jump midstream but continues to use the words “the law” to describe what Gentiles were “not given.” If Gentiles were “not given” what Paul calls “the law” which was heard by all those “in the law” then that leaves only JEWS. What law was not given the Gentiles but was given the Jews that could be WRITTEN, thus READ to all those “in the law” so as to HEAR and DO its commands?????


D. PROOF #4: Romans 2:14 also further describes “the law” not given to Gentiles but that the Gentile did by nature in regard – “things pertaining to the law.” What law given to Jews are there “things pertaining” to it, that Gentiles do by nature??? The ten commandments? Paul answers this in verse 15 as the law written upon the “heart” (inward man) specifically identified to be that inward part called “CONSCIENCE.” Lost people have a “conscience.” Gentiles have a conscience. God can call the law written upon conscience in contrast to their responses to it as a “witness” against them in the day of judgment. Remember verse 12 says to them that have “sinned” but “without law” shall also “perish” without law. Gentiles were not given “the law” but they were given the law of conscience which corresponds to the moral law of God in principle and thus can be used in the day of judgment as a witness against them as God will expose the “SECRET” inward struggle and violations of conscience by the Gentiles.

Andre may attempt to isolate one proof from the others and dismantle it, but taken together these proofs completely expose his interpretation as error.

 

No one is denying that you posted proofs.

However, it is simply a lie to suggest that I am ignoring that material.

I have other things to do - I will get to it eventually.

 

Hogwash! You obviously have time to post, as you have been churning out posts in response to others. The truth is you cannot answer those proofs or you would have done so a long time ago as Post#223 is the latest in a long series. Ok! So lets see what you got?

 

You lie.

In all candor, do you think you have some kind of magic ESP and can see into my internal motivations?

I will report you if you keep making damaging personal statements that you should know are untrue. And I will be "bypassing" DHK if and when I do so.

Yes, I can take 5 minutes now and then to deal with your lies, but, right now anyway, I cannot take the hour or more it will take to address your proofs and / or present my own case about 2:13.

Please stop making false statements.

 

You are awful quick to call others lyers when I have not said a single untruth.

I can produce posts by you addressed to myself and others during the time I repeatedly posted these proofs. Hence, I did not lie about you having the time to make posts.

Although you have had plenty of time to make posts to myself and others on this same subject you have not even attempted to deal with the proofs presented. Hence, I did not lie about you simply ignoring them.

Please report me! I would love to see what the Administrators will say when they examine the posts on this thread!

 

Consider it done.

 

Andre has admitted that his whole exposition of Romans 2:6-16 stands on his exposition of Romans 2:13 and whether or not “the law” is the Jewish law. He admits that if Paul has in reference the Jewish law then his position is proven wrong. Andre nor anyone else on this forum can simply jerk Romans 2:13 out of its context and define “the law” any way they please.

I give the following absolute proofs from the context that the words “the law” used in Romans 2:12-29 is the Jewish law:

A. PROOF #1: Romans 2:12 provides only two possible options to be judged by in the day of judgment by God. People who have sinned “without law” will be judged “without law” and people who have sinned “in the law” will be judged “by the law.” Either “the law” in question is the Jewish law or the Jewish law will not be used in the day of Judgement. The ten commandments is the Jewish Law. The civil and ceremonial laws are the Jewish law. Andre must take the position that what is uniformly called “the law” of God in both Old and New Testaments will not be used in the day of judgment to judge any man by if he rejects this is the Jewish law.


B. PROOF #2: Romans 2:13 describes “the law” used in the day of judgment as something the one being judged HEARD and thus it was law that was WRITTEN that could be READ to ALL those not being judged “without law.” What law of God is WRITTEN and can be READ and thus HEARD to all who are “in the law” other than the Jewish law of Moses?


C. PROOF #3: Romans 2:14 does not jump midstream but continues to use the words “the law” to describe what Gentiles were “not given.” If Gentiles were “not given” what Paul calls “the law” which was heard by all those “in the law” then that leaves only JEWS. What law was not given the Gentiles but was given the Jews that could be WRITTEN, thus READ to all those “in the law” so as to HEAR and DO its commands?????


D. PROOF #4: Romans 2:14 also further describes “the law” not given to Gentiles but that the Gentile did by nature in regard – “things pertaining to the law.” What law given to Jews are there “things pertaining” to it, that Gentiles do by nature??? The ten commandments? Paul answers this in verse 15 as the law written upon the “heart” (inward man) specifically identified to be that inward part called “CONSCIENCE.” Lost people have a “conscience.” Gentiles have a conscience. God can call the law written upon conscience in contrast to their responses to it as a “witness” against them in the day of judgment. Remember verse 12 says to them that have “sinned” but “without law” shall also “perish” without law. Gentiles were not given “the law” but they were given the law of conscience which corresponds to the moral law of God in principle and thus can be used in the day of judgment as a witness against them as God will expose the “SECRET” inward struggle and violations of conscience by the Gentiles.


E. PROOF #5: The Jews are mentioned by name in regard to the judgement day.

10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile 11 For there is no respect of persons with God.
:

The Jew is to be judged first "to the Jew FIRST" and the ONLY law the Jew can be judged by is "the law" the Jew has been under - MOSAIC LAW. There are only two options provided by Paul in the very next verse (v. 12) as standards of judgement - "as many as have sinned without law" versus "as many as have sinned in THE LAW".

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;

The Jews cannot be judged under the first category so that leaves only the second category "as many as have sinned in THE LAW." Since verse 14 denies that Gentiles have been "given THE LAW" this leaves ONLY the Jews who "have sinned in THE LAW" and thus this demands "THE LAW" is the JEWISH LAW or the MOSAIC Law.


F. PROOF #6 - Romans 3:9 says that Paul has proved both Jews and Gentiles are "ALL under sin" and Romans 3:10-12 states that NONE, no, NOT ONE among Jews or Gentiles are righteous. Roman 2:17 says that the Jew:

Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, - Rom. 2:17

Paul goes on to describe "the law" that the Jew rests in as containing the ten commandments and cermonial law as he explicitly lists "circumcision" in verses 25-29 and three of the ten commandments in verses 21-22:

21 Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?
22 Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?


However, in the day of judgement according to Romans 2:12 there is only two possible ways to condemn all "under sin" and that is either "without the law" or "in the law"

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;

Only the Jew rests "IN THE LAW":

Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest IN THE LAW, and makest thy boast of God, - Rom. 2:17

Therefore, "the law" in Romans 2:12-13 must be the Jewish Law as the Jew cannot be judged as those who have sinned "without the law."


Andre may attempt to isolate one proof from the others and dismantle it, but taken together these proofs completely expose his interpretation as error.

These five proofs is the coupe de grace of the whole Justification by "good" works interpretation of this passage. Those being judged in this passage are lost people who think their works will justifiy them. Paul simply spells out the criteria for judgement of works in Romans 2:6-16 while declaring that NONE will pass that judgment in Romans 3:9-20.