Defining "the law" as used in New Testament

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DW, when you address the direct questions in post #72, we can continue.

 

[BobRyan]

Paul is dealing with two misperceptions in this context. The first is that lost people can escape judgement if they are better than other lost people. This is the thinking of some gentiles (vv. 1-5) and this is the mindset of the lost Jew (vv. 17-27).

The second misperception is that of the lost Jew in regard to the lost gentile.
.

We have a thread on Romans 2 - but to summ it up - in Romans 2 - you see the saved Jew and Gentile - with salvation going "to the Jew first and also to the gentile" - just as Paul in Romans 1 speaks of sending the Gospel to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

You also have cases of lost Jews and Gentiles - who at the future GOSPEL judgment (vs 16) do not go to heaven. Some people like to imagine that the succeding case mentioned in Romans 2 is not real - but the failing cases are real.

In Rom 2:1-3 Paul argues that the people in the church (readers of Paul’s letter to the Romans in this case) who are not the saints of Rome addressed in Rom 1:1-17 and who pass judgment on the wicked world – but then choose to engage in the same sins as the world are going to fall under the judgment of God.



Romans 2:4 the Gospel condition of the call to repentance as we see in 2Peter 3 “God is not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance”

Romans 2:4-13 the Gospel result of the perseverance of the saints and the eternal reward - applied explicitly to BOTH Jews and Gentiles.

Romans 2:13-16 the case of Gentiles who are approved in the future Gospel Judgment.

Romans 2:25-29 the explicit reference to Gentiles - who are born-again, new hearts, new creations, the work of the Holy Spirit.

Watch the Success cases in Rom 2: 7-13, 13-16 25-28

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I will repost here what I posted on "Romans 2:1-16" since you imagine that I am going outside the text:

I will gladly join you in that regard.

But the Gospel call to repentance is applicable to all the lost - for God is not willing for ANY to perish but for ALL to come to repentance. 2Peter 3:9

Therefore God calls for all men everywhere to repent. Acts 17:30

Convicting the World of sin and righteousness and judgment. John 16:8

Rom2:
7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life;
8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.
9 There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek,
10 but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
11 For there is no partiality with God.

25 for indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision.
26 so if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?
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?
28 for he is not a Jew who is one outwardly,

Do you see Gospel repentance as the starting context for Romans 2?

Rom 2
4 Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance?



2Peter 3:9 The Lord is long-suffering to usward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."
=================================


5 But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,
6 who WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS:



Do you see Gospel Perseverance of the saints as the opening context for Romans 2?

7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life;
8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.

Do you see reference to God’s Law as “doing good” and reference to the impartial nature of God’s Gospel rule?

9 There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek,
10 but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
11 For there is no partiality with God.
12 For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law;
13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.


Do you see the extreme example of “successful gentiles” passing the test of God’s Gospel rule in the future Gospel Judgment?

14 For 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,
15 in 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,
16 on the day when, according to my GOSPEL, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.
11 For there is no partiality with God.
…
25 for indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision.
26 so if the uncircumcised mankeeps the requirementsof the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?



14 For 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,
15 in 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,
16 on the day when, according to my GOSPEL, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.


Rom 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?

28 nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh.
29 buthe is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.

The Gentiles with the Law written in the heart, the holy spirit working on the heart

 

[Dr. Walter]

DW, when you address the direct questions in post #72, we can continue.

I have answered post #72 but apparently you don't understand the answer.

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:

What you are doing is interpreting this text by isolating it from its context and demanding on the basis of what it says APART from its context that the Gentile do in fact keep the natural law written upon his conscience. Based upon isolating this text from its context you demand Paul is declaring it be factual that Gentiles do keep the law written on their conscience. That is what the text says "Gentiles....DO by nature the things contained in the law." There are no conditions given to this statement but it is a statement of unconditioned fact - they "DO".

Now, let us put a little common sense in this matter of fact statement. If that is the case then those decribed in Romans 1:22-32 also "DO" obey the things contained in the law because they are Gentiles and Paul says gentiles "DO....obey the things contained in the law" so we have a contradiction between Paul in Romans 1:22-2:5 with Paul in Romans 2:14! Which Paul do we believe? The one who says the gentiles DO NOT obey law in Romans 1:22-2:5 or the Paul who unconditionally states they "DO" in Romans 2:14????

Here is the first problem with demanding Romans 2:14 demands that they do.

Second, do you know of any group of gentiles in the history of mankind that unconditionally "do" obey the law written upon their conscience?

Here is the second problem with demanding Romans 2:14 demands that they do. - It violates common sense.

So, you are forced to interpret CONDITIONALLY by the immediate and overall context of Scripture rather than just isolating it and demanding this is an unconditional FACT.

Therefore, since it must be interpreted by context, that is exactly what I have done and offered you that Biblical and contextual interpretation in all the above posts.

He is simply following the line of false thinking by the man in verse 3 and the Jew in verses 17-24. The Jew denies that Gentiles will be justified before God at all because they are not Jews and do not have the written law as they perceive that RELATIVE obedience to the written law is necessary to escape judgement just as long as your good works outweigh your bad works. This is the same misconception held by the man in verse 3 as that is the only basis he can THINK he will escape judgement even though he is guilting of doing the same things - he simply believes he is not AS BAD and that God uses a SLIDING SCALE instead of absolute judgment.

Therefore, in verse 14 Paul informs the Jew that God has provided the Gentile NATURAL LAW and the Gentile does not need JEWISH LAW, and therefore does not need to become a Jew, as keeping that law will escape judgement as much as keeping Jewish law will escape judgement.

However, the overall context is the denial by Paul that either keep the law given them as God defines keeping it. He demands that gentiles do not keep natural law but SUPRESSES and disobeys it in Romans 1:18-32. That neither the self-righteous Gentile (Romans 2:1-5) or the self-righteous Jew (Romans 2:17-24) keep the law but both violate it.

It is these SELF-RIGHTEOUS Gentiles and Jews that wrongly THINK they can escape judgement because they wrongly perceive the standard of judgement to be a SLIDING SCALE and will approach God expecting to escape judgement "according to their works" as they believe the good will outweigh the bad and thus justify them while condemning those described in Romans 1:18-32.

This is why Paul tells THEM (self-righteous) that God will indeed judge them according to their works but it will be judgement by what God defines as "righteous" (Rom. 2:5b) and according "the truth" (Rom. 2:8) rather than according to their wrong THINKING.

Their wrong thinking is YOUR wrong thinking as well and that is exactly why YOUR conclusions of this passage are in direct contradiction to Paul's stated conclusions of this passage (Rom. 3:9-21). Romans 3:9 takes the reader back to Romans 1:18 forward as Romans 1:18 is where the heathen/gentiles are first regarded as sinners.

 

[Dr. Walter]

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:

Do the gentiles keep the law of nature written upon conscience or do they not? Is it an abolute fact that they do? Then explain Romans 1:18-32!

If you point to the word "when" to make this a conditional statement, then you are admitting that it is not factual but only refers to those gentiles who do keep it. This brings us to the next question. What does it mean to keep it versus violating it?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DW: Therefore, this person's self-conception in verse 3 as well as the Jews self-perception in verses 17-24 is based upon a misconception of the Law's standard of righteousness. They believe it is a SLIDING SCALE or RELATIVE and therefore does not require ABSOLUTE obedience to escape judgement or requires obedience to ALL points of the Law to be justified righteous.

HP: I would agree that obedience to what one perceives as the law must be obeyed implicitly, whether by that which is written upon the heart as primitive as that might be or by way of having been given the written commandments as well, but I am having difficulty with it not being a sliding scale or relative to the knowledge and light one has been given.

Even in the passage of Romans we have been discussing it clearly shows all will not be judged the same. Verse 12 makes this point: Ro 2:12 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;.

Christ also pointed out that sin depends on the ‘sliding scale of the amount of light one has been given. Joh 9:41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.

The apostle James states about the same thing in this passage. Jas 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.” This passage clearly takes into consideration the amount of light one has when considering guilt.

It would appear to me that Dr. Walter has drawn a stiff uncompromising stance on the law of God and as to what obedience entails, and has not given careful reflection to passages that clearly tie guilt to ones sliding scale of understanding. Lu 12:48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DW: 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:

Do the gentiles keep the law of nature written upon conscience or do they not? Is it an abolute fact that they do? Then explain Romans 1:18-32!

HP: Verses 18-32 simply show that regardless of the law they might abide by, the wrath of God is revealed against all the unrighteousness committed.


According to Romans 2:14 I would say some indeed do keep it at least in some limited degree. I would agree with you that their obedience in one point does not negate the fact they violated it in another. My point is to show that obedience to the law is not an impossibility, nor do men need to be granted special abilities to obey. Our guilt before God is not one from lacking abilities but rather from lacking ‘the will’ to act in accordance to our abilities. The law of God is not something so hard to comply with that it is a natural impossibility to obey. De 30:11 ¶ For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off.
12 It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?
13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?
14 But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.
15 ¶ See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil;
16 In that I command thee this day to love the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his judgments, that thou mayest live and multiply: and the LORD thy God shall bless thee in the land whither thou goest to possess it.
17 But if thine heart turn away, so that thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve them;
18 I denounce unto you this day, that ye shall surely perish, and that ye shall not prolong your days upon the land, whither thou passest over Jordan to go to possess it.
Mic 6:8 He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?

DW: If you point to the word "when" to make this a conditional statement, then you are admitting that it is not factual but only refers to those gentiles who do keep it. This brings us to the next question. What does it mean to keep it versus violating it?

HP: Scripture says clearly to me that again, some do keep at least portions of the law they know of. To keep it merely means they are willing in accordance to that which they understand. To violate it means to will in opposition to what they intuitively know is right.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Ro 2:12 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 above passage gives no sliding scale but gives one absolute scale - if what you do is judged by the law to be sin then you PERISH - period.

Joh 9:41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth

There is no sliding scale in the above passage. You either "have NO SIN" or you have "SIN" - period. Indeed, if you claim you see but then commit something contrary it condemns you as a sinner.

Jas 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.”

There is no sliding scale in James 4:17 but an abolute contrast - if you don't do good it is sin.

There is no sliding scale in James 4:17 as that would contradict James 2:10.

The Law of God does not have TWO standards of Righteousness - PERFECT and ALMOST perfect. The law reveals the RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD and God is not ALMOST perfect.

The absolute standard is reflected by Christ when he told a young man who was seeking to keep the law for eternal life - "THERE IS NONE GOOD BUT ONE AND THAT IS GOD."

Here is the foundational problem for all who attempt to be justified by God's law to enter heaven - they must reject God's standard of righteousness -

For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

James is not addressing the lost but professed saved justified people. The "whosoever" means "whosoever"!

HP: I would agree that obedience to what one perceives as the law must be obeyed implicitly, whether by that which is written upon the heart as primitive as that might be or by way of having been given the written commandments as well, but I am having difficulty with it not being a sliding scale or relative to the knowledge and light one has been given.

Even in the passage of Romans we have been discussing it clearly shows all will not be judged the same. Verse 12 makes this point: Ro 2:12 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;.

Christ also pointed out that sin depends on the ‘sliding scale of the amount of light one has been given. Joh 9:41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.

The apostle James states about the same thing in this passage. Jas 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.” This passage clearly takes into consideration the amount of light one has when considering guilt.

It would appear to me that Dr. Walter has drawn a stiff uncompromising stance on the law of God and as to what obedience entails, and has not given careful reflection to passages that clearly tie guilt to ones sliding scale of understanding. Lu 12:48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Ro 2:12 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 above passage gives no sliding scale but gives one absolute scale - if what you do is judged by the law to be sin then you PERISH - period.

HP: The word ‘if’ you use clears up that point. IF what you do is sin, THEN you perish. I agree. On the other hand IF you honestly have no light that something is sin, it does not become sin until you do. The sliding scale I am referring to is the one that judges something as sin according to the light one has. I may be able to do something that is not sin to me that is in fact sin to you, or the other way around.

Joh 9:41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth

There is no sliding scale in the above passage. You either "have NO SIN" or you have "SIN" - period. Indeed, if you claim you see but then commit something contrary it condemns you as a sinner.

HP: Again, the sliding scale has to do with the amount of light one has as to whether or not sin is imputed. I fully agree that WHEN one has the light, and THEN acts in opposition to it, all are judged as sinful.

 

[Dr. Walter]

My friend, "if" does not change the abolute to a sliding scale but only determines the distinction between what the absolute scale defines as sin versus righteousness. If you are without knowledge of what sin is, like an infant, or a child before they understand the difference between right and wrong then they are not judged as law breakers as long as they remain in that state of incomphension of what sin is. However, as soon as they violate what they KNOW to be righteous then they are SINNERS by the absolute standard of God's law - James 2:10

You are pitting scripture against scripture and anyone who pits scripture against scripture to defend a theological position is wrong any way you cut it. For example, You have James 4:17 pitted against James 2:10 when the subjects addressed by both ARE CHRISTIANS. Hence, you cannot claim that James 2:10 defines the law by a sliding scale for the lost or for the saved.

HP: The word ‘if’ you use clears up that point. IF what you do is sin, THEN you perish. I agree. On the other hand IF you honestly have no light that something is sin, it does not become sin until you do. The sliding scale I am referring to is the one that judges something as sin according to the light one has. I may be able to do something that is not sin to me that is in fact sin to you, or the other way around.



HP: Again, the sliding scale has to do with the amount of light one has as to whether or not sin is imputed. I fully agree that WHEN one has the light, and THEN acts in opposition to it, all are judged as sinful.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DW: The absolute standard is reflected by Christ when he told a young man who was seeking to keep the law for eternal life - "THERE IS NONE GOOD BUT ONE AND THAT IS GOD."

HP: I feel you are taking that comment by our Lord to mean something not intended. You also failed to mention the last portion of that verse. “Mt 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.”

I would believe that Jesus was simply questioning the young man as to if he really knew who he was speaking to. It was a reference to His Diety, NOT making a point about the moral character of all men. There is more than one reference of men who were perfect before God and righteous, wholly following the law.

DW: Here is the foundational problem for all who attempt to be justified by God's law to enter heaven - they must reject God's standard of righteousness –

HP: You jump to unwarranted conclusions DW if you believe for a minute that I believe one can, in this dispensation, be justified by the law. The law has absolutely no ability to cleanse one from the least sin, and God now calls ALL men to repentance. On the other hand, if you believe one can be justified ‘apart from’ obedience to the law, you are promoting antinomianism. If salvation does not bring us into obedience with God’s law, such a one is deceiving themselves as to their standing before God. I am certain there are some of us that would see one thing as being part of God’s law and another disagree, but whatever one sees as God’s law must of necessity be complied with to have a clear conscience before Him. Any man that has a conscience not void of offense, has no just grounds to believe they are in right standing with God.

Of a truth, man is NOT justified by the law, but neither will any be justified apart from obedience to the law. If one desires to have the Apostle Paul's assurance, he needs also to have his conscience, one void of offense before God and man.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Here are the facts whether or not you want to accept them:

1. James 2:10 is written to Christians and denies any kind of sliding scale. That destroys your interpretation of all the other texts you try to pit against James 2:10.

2. You don't know the differnce between justification and progressive sanctification or you would say what you do below.

3. Every text you give can be intepreted harmoniously and perfectly with the demands of James 2:10.

4. The rich young ruler placed himself on the level of Christ by saying "GOOD master, what GOOD thing can I DO." This is why Jesus responded by saying "there is NONE GOOD but ONE and that GOD." However, Jesus knew this man didn't believe that but believed he was capable of doing good enough to obtain eternal life. So, he directed him to the law because the law is designed to REVEAL sin and this man saw himself AS GOOD AS JESUS and proved it when he replied I HAVE KEPT ALL THESE THINGS FROM YOUTH UP and yet NO MAN HAS who understand what the law demands (James 2:10; Rom. 3:9-22) and this man PROVED he was not "good" or capable of doing good by the law's standard as he went away in DISOBEDIENCE to the practical command of Christ which summarized both tablets of the ten commandments (GIVE to other, follow me).

My friend, all you are going to do is pit scripture against scripture because your understanding of the law is EXACTLY that of the person in Romans 2:3 and this precisely why you CONTRADICT Paul's conclusion of the same people in Romans 3:9-21.

There is no point to discuss this further as you cannot deal with a point blank definition of the law's standard that is being given to CHRISTIANS in James 2:10.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DW: If you are without knowledge of what sin is, like an infant, or a child before they understand the difference between right and wrong then they are not judged as law breakers as long as they remain in that state of incomphension of what sin is. However, as soon as they violate what they KNOW to be righteous then they are SINNERS by the absolute standard of God's law - James 2:10

HP: No disagreement here.

DW: You are pitting scripture against scripture and anyone who pits scripture against scripture to defend a theological position is wrong any way you cut it.

HP: That happens to be a VERY subjective conclusion seen through the rose colored lenses of ones own opinions. It adds nothing to meaningful debate.

 

[Dr. Walter]

No, it is not a subjective conclusion. James 2:10 is addressed to Christians and yet your position openly contradicts this clear and explicit definition of what it means to violate and keep God's Law.

HP: No disagreement here.



HP: That happens to be a VERY subjective conclusion seen through the rose colored lenses of ones own opinions. It adds nothing to meaningful debate.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DW: No, it is not a subjective conclusion. James 2:10 is addressed to Christians and yet your position openly contradicts this clear and explicit definition of what it means to violate and keep God's Law.

HP: What is ‘my opinion’ and how does it ‘contradict’ James 2:10???

 

[Dr. Walter]

Remember, you have been arguing that the law judges on a sliding scale, relative righteousness instead of an absolute scale as in James 2:10.

Remember, your response to the rich young ruler???

HP: What is ‘my opinion’ and how does it ‘contradict’ James 2:10???

 

[BobRyan]

However, the overall context is the denial by Paul that either keep the law given them as God defines keeping it. He demands that gentiles do not keep natural law but SUPRESSES and disobeys it in Romans 1:18-32. That neither the self-righteous Gentile (Romans 2:1-5) or the self-righteous Jew (Romans 2:17-24) keep the law but both violate it.

In Romans 1:1-17 Paul shows both Jews and Gentiles keeping the law - accepted as saints and approved of God.

in Romans 2:6-29 Paul shows how "both Jews and Gentiles" are receiving "immortality and eternal life". He also shows cases where there are people among both Jews and Gentiles that do not receive eternal life.

You have to read and accept the text even when it points to details that do not fit man made traditions.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Even in the passage of Romans we have been discussing it clearly shows all will not be judged the same. Verse 12 makes this point: Ro 2:12 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;.

Christ also pointed out that sin depends on the ‘sliding scale of the amount of light one has been given. Joh 9:41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.

The apostle James states about the same thing in this passage. Jas 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.” This passage clearly takes into consideration the amount of light one has when considering guilt.
.

What you say is true - but in the case of a gentile that shows the Gospel New Covenant principle with the works of the Law of God "written on the heart" - and though they follow Christ in limited light - they are covered by the perfectly spotless righteousness of Christ - which in fact meets all the demands of the Law entirely.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Dr. Walter]

Romans 1:1-17 does not say the saints kept the law of God. Instead they obeyed the gospel that calls them to trust in Christ's obedience to the law in their behalf. The gospel reveals the rightousness of God in the provision of Jesus Christ as the complete satisfaction of the Law of God for the believer (Rom. 1:17; 10:2-4).

Romans 2 shows no such thing but CONDITIONS it upon keeping the law in "truth" and "righteousness" which those in the context wrongly thought they could do (Rom. 2:3; 17-24). James 2:10 is being addressed to the saved and therefore denies that our works will be judged on a relative righteousness or a sliding scale but will be judged by the absolute scale of PERFECT versus NON-PERFECT. In James words to fail in "ONE POINT" is to fail all points and therefore to keep the law is not to fail in ANY ONE POINT.

Bob, you are teaching an "accursed" gospel.

In Romans 1:1-17 Paul shows both Jews and Gentiles keeping the law - accepted as saints and approved of God.

in Romans 2:6-29 Paul shows how "both Jews and Gentiles" are receiving "immortality and eternal life". He also shows cases where there are people among both Jews and Gentiles that do not receive eternal life.

You have to read and accept the text even when it points to details that do not fit man made traditions.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Romans 1:1-17 does not say the saints kept the law of God. Instead they obeyed the gospel that calls them to trust in Christ's obedience to the law in their behalf.

Paul's letter to the Romans calls for obedience to God's Law - in Romans 2:11-16 it is the basis for acceptance in that future Gospel judgment when "judgment is passed in favor of the saints" Dan 7:22.

You have inserted the idea that the "obedience of faith" in Romans 1 is to be divorced from the "doers of the law" in Romans 2 who are justified.

That idea does not survive the text.

The gospel reveals the rightousness of God in the provision of Jesus Christ as the complete satisfaction of the Law of God for the believer (Rom. 1:17; 10:2-4).

Agreed. But in Romans 1 and in Romans 2 Paul is not talking about Christ "obeying" in the "obedience of faith among the gentiles" nor in Romans 2 is he talking about christ being a "hearer but not a doer" of the Law.

In both Romans 1 and 2 - the choice to obey - is the choice that the saved saint makes. And it is seen in Romans 6 and 8 as well- actually DOING what they have chosen to do.

In Romans 7 we see the "choosing" and in Romans 2, 6, and 8 we see the "doing".

Hence Paul starts out the entire letter with the concept of "the obedience of faith".

Bob, you are teaching an "accursed" gospel.

I am teaching the Bible "alone" - and insisting that we not ignore texts just because they do not fit the man-made traditions of OSAS or just because they do not deny the Bible doctrine on perseverance of the saints. It is the "ONE Gospel" of all ages.

in Christ,

Bob