The Apostate Gospel of works

I disagree and suggest that when Paul writes about Jesus' obedience, he is actually referring to Jesus being obedient to the vocation of Israel. More about this in later posts.

Do you not agree that, as per the argument I have provided, there is Old Testament precedent of apocalyptic "end of the world" kind of language being used to denote events that actually have nothing to do with the end of the world.

Many have been misled because they do not recognize a particular style of Jewish metaphor. I suggest that there is every reason to believe that Jesus is never intending us to take his statement about "heaven and earth passing away" literally.

 

I don't think so. The "law" written on the heart in Romans 2 involves a reference to the believer, not to people in general. Only a believer has the law written on the heart. The person in Romans 1:18-20 is not a believer.

In Romans 2, there is a statement about the “law” being written on the heart of the Gentile:

13for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. 14For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, 16on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.

Although this text is widely seen as suggesting that God’s “law” is written on the hearts of human beings in general, Paul here is instead describing the writing of the “law” on the hearts of believers (and in this context, specifically Gentile believers).

The entire discussion turns on the Greek word that has been translated here in the NASB as “instinctively” in verse 14. I am going to argue that this rendering does not properly express Paul’s intent. I will argue that Paul basis assertion is not this:

“when Gentiles who do not have the Law instinctively do the things of the Law…”

…but instead this:

“when Gentiles who do not have the Law by birth, do the things of the Law….

The reader should note that while the first rendering indeed suggests that pagan Gentiles have a form of law written on their hearts, the second rendering in no sense preferentially supports such a reading over a reading where it is only believing Gentiles that have the law written on their heart (the position that I hold).

The greek root word at issue is “fusei”, which is often translated as “by nature” (although not in the NASB rendering of 2:14 where it is rendered as “instinctively”). The western reader should be careful to understand this properly. Paul uses this very same word, in other contexts, to denote what is true of someone by virtue of the circumstances of their birth. One example is Ephesian 2:3:

We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles

Clearly, Paul means "by birth" here. He is not asserting that Jews are born with fundamentally different inner constitutions than Gentiles.

Perhaps more tellingly, we have this same root “fusei” used just a few verses further on in Romans 2:

27And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law?

The same Greek root “fusei” is rendered here as “physically” and as “instinctively” in verse 14. Note how the word is rendered in the YLT translation of 2:27:

and the uncircumcision, by nature, fulfilling the law, shall judge thee who, through letter and circumcision, [art] a transgressor of law.

Clearly the term “fusei” should be understood as having a “by birth” meaning here in verse 27 – being uncircumcised is a circumstance of birth for the Gentile. It seems only reasonable that Paul uses this same greek root in the same “by birth” sense only a few verses back in 2:14.

Thus, it is highly plausible that what Paul is saying in about the law in verse 14 is that the Gentiles do not possess it by the circumstances of their birth, and not that the unregenerate Gentile has an innate, or instinctive sense of the law.

In fact, note how Jeremiah, uses very same “law written on the heart” concept:

But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days," declares the LORD, "I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people

Note how the prophet uses “law written on the heart” language to describe something that will happen in the future and will which will be effective only for believers. Paul is deeply knowledgeable of Old Testament concepts and would more likely than not use “law written on the heart” language in the same way it was used in the Old Testament.

 

I am not playing games - I agree with your interpretation, but that does not challenge my position.

 

This is a statement of your position. Fair enough, but it is not an argument. I could equally simply "state" that the primary issue is indeed ethnicity. But that is simply not an argument, it is merely the assertion of a position.

And I have defended that position extensively in other posts. Obviously, you are not convinced.

You are speculating and have no evidence to support your statement here.

 

I find the title of this thread funny. If you hold to most reformed theology you cannot apostate. However, the theology of Works Based Gospel is here being called apostate. But in order for it to be apostate at some point the Gospel of works had to have been acceptable. Which it can't be according to reformed theology. Its either antithetical to the gospel or not it cannot be apostate gospel of works.

 

What I am proposing does not have the implication you suggest. Let me explain.

1. God chose Israel to be the means by which the Adamic sin problem is dealt with for all mankind;

2. Israel did not fulfill its covenantal role in respect to item (1);

3. Jesus comes and acts on Israel's behalf, and the problem of sin is dealt with for all mankind.

So Jesus can indeed be obedient to Israel's vocation with implications for the entire world.

 

You argument is circular - you have no actual case that the Jew rests in his obedience to the Law as a ladder of good works that leads to ultimate justification. You discount, without actual justification, the possibility that the Jew is resting in the law in the sense of the law being an "ethnic marker" - only Jews "do the works" of the Law.

Now matter how much you "yell" the phrase "being instructed out of the Law" does not change the fact that Paul can be legitimately read as scolding the Jew for his hypocrisy in thinking that he (the Jew) will be justified by being part of the ethnic group that is marked out by the Law of Moses when it turns out that this Jew cannot even keep the Law of Moses.

Bottom line: There is really no argument here that Paul is speaking out against a Jewish belief that "good works save". And in fact, the emphasis on the impartiality of God in respect to the Jew / Gentile split shows that Paul is indeed scolding the Jew for a belief that ethnic privilege saves.

 

The simple fact is that the statement that the Jew is being "instructed out of the law" is entirely consistent with a Pauline critique of a Jewish belief in ethnic privilege.

As per an earlier post, Paul can be legitimately read as saying basically this: Listen Mr. Jew – you think that salvation is limited to those who do the works of the Law of Moses. Well, do you even keep the Law of Moses yourself – do you scrupulously neither steal, nor commit adultery, nor worship idols ? As I have just said in verses 6 and following, there will indeed be coming works judgement with eternal life at stake, so do not be complacent – if you do not keep the Law, you may well not pass that judgement, even though you think that, as a Jew, you automatically have salvation”.

 

I will not respond to a post where it is suggested that I am being dishonest.

You have, of course, no evidence to support this assertion. There is a lot of material flying around and I have not the time to deal with it all.

 

This "you are making God a liar" is a common tactic people in these forums use to avoid the force of an argument.

When presented with a stoutly defended case that there is Biblical precedent for the use of metaphor in respect to such "end of the world language" what do you do? Engage my argument and show that I am wrong?

No - you suggest that I am calling God a liar.

I trust the readers will realize that I have indeed made the case that there is Old Testament precedent for the use of metaphorical "end of the world" language.

 

Andre.....what do you do to get into to Heaven?

 

The law cannot be obeyed by sinners and all people were born sinners so all the prophets who came before Jesus, the Messiah, died as sinners. But because God revealed himself to them and gave them faith, God was able to get them obedient to his spoken Word and have them speak for him. Without becoming sinless, the prophets didn't receive the knowledge to learn they were created as the Word of God.

Jesus came to fulfull the law. This means the law will still be in effect for sinners until the end of this age. The penalty of sin is death so when a sinner dies, he has paid his penalty in full. There is no other penalties for him to go through so that rules out hell. His soul, which are thoughts in God, will remain in God until he gets a new body in paradise.

The disciples of Jesus and the chosen ones who came after them were now able to be made sinless saints through the process of justification. This means a chosen one has to listen to the gospel, who is the voice of God, or Word, until God reveals himself to him. This is when God gives him faith and he becomes a new believer but still a sinner. His faith, like the faith of the prophets and Jesus was needed for him to be created together with the all the saints, prophets and Jesus. This Word will take this new believer and give him commands to confess and repent of his sins so God can forgive them. Once this new believer has been made sinless, he will receive the knowledge he was created with and learn he's a new sinless saint.

God works with him until he's fully integrated from being a sinner to the Word of God. The sinful flesh of this new saint died to the world and is now in total obedience to the Word of God and not under the law anymore. Now you can see the difference between a saint being born of God through justification and a sinner being saved by the grace of God.

I experienced becoming a sinless saint so I know this process very well.

God bless you,
Brad