Romans 3:19-20

[Dr. Walter]

First, you have not addressed my challenge - you have not explained why God would use the concept of "those under the law" in Romans 2 to denote Jews only - which he obviously does - and yet a few sentences later in Romans 3 use the exact same concept "those under the law" to now refer to all humanity.

Please explain why you think Paul would do such a thing.

Paul does the same synergism between natural and Jewish law in Romans 2:14-15 as he does in Romans 3:9-20.

Although the Gentiles and Jews were under two forms of ONE LAW (Rom. 2:12) they were both "under sin" and in verses 14-15 there is a synergism between what is written on conscience and what is written on stone - ONE MORAL LAW. The same moral law is simply written upon two different materials but the SAME LAW whether it is written upon conscience or upon stone - it is the same law authored by the same God and will be the same basis for judgement.

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:

The same "things" contained in the Mosaic law are written upon the conscience of the Gentile. Hence, the SAME LAW originating from the SAME GOD just written on two different materials but yet beomes the "law unto themselves."

Likewise, in Romans 3:9 Paul says that both Jew and Gentile are equally both "UNDER SIN." Romans 3:10-11 is a quotation from Psalm 14:2-3 where the Psalmist says that God looked down upon the "CHILDREN OF MEN" not the children of "Israel." man" The Psalm 14:2 text is talking about UNIVERSAL SIN UNDER UNIVERSAL MORAL LAW to prove that "both Jews and Gentiles are all under sin."

There is a syngerism between moral law written on Gentile conscience and moral law written upon stone as it is ONE LAW from ONE GOD regardless of the material it is written upon.

The same syngerism in Romans 2:14-15 between Moral law of Moses and Moral Law upon conscience is the same synergism between the things written on conscience that are "contained in" the Mosaic law as one universal moral standard that all mankind have violated and thus are all "under sin" because they are all "under law" the same law found in Moses that is found in conscience. It is ONE LAW simply written upon two different materials.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Romans 3:27

Romans 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

It is clear by the double application of the term "law" in verse 27 that Paul does not have in view any particular "law" but rather uses the term "law" to mean a "principle" as he uses it equally with "faith" as he does "deeds." He is constrasting justification by the PRINCIPLE of "faith" versus "deeds." Hence, what is being contrasted is "faith" as opposed to "deeds" as the priniciple for justification.

EVIDENCE:

1. There is no definite article before either use of "Law"

2. The term "law" is equally applied to "faith" as it is to "deeds."

3. The omission of the definite article conveys grammatically that Paul is stressing what is characteristically and equally true of both "faith" and "deeds" as COMPETING principles in regard to justification.

4. Paul does not have any LEGAL view of "faith" or "deeds" in view but only has in mind "faith" and "deeds" as contrasting PRINCIPLES with contrasting characteristics.

5. Whenever "faith" is contrasted to "deeds" in Biblical contexts especially dealing with justification it is a contrast between "hearing" versus "doing" (Gal. 3:2,4; Rom. 10:17). It is a contrast of HEART EXPRESSION (Rom. 10:8) versus physical expression (James 2:18 - "Shew me thy faith by thy works").

6. In this immediate context (Rom. 3:19-27) they are also contrasted with each other. Justification by faith is consistently expressed as faith "IN" Christ and the gospel (Rom. 3:24-26) rather than any kind of works being performed by the believer. In contrast "deeds" are consistently characterized by either doing or not doing actions prescribed or condemned by conscience or Mosaic legislation (Rom. 2:14-29; 3:9-21; 4:1)

7. In the provided Biblical illustration of Abraham this contrast continues so that faith is "without works" (4:5-6) and without law keeping (4:13-15) without personal active participation (4:16-22).

8. Therefore justification by any "principle" that characterizes "deeds" no man shall be justified before God.

9. Therefore, since the Mosaic law is characterized by "works" it is therefore inclusive inclusive of that PRINCIPLE OF DEEDS. By repudiation of justification by the Mosaic law since it is not faith gives EQUAL BASIS for the Gentiles to be justified before God on the PRINCIPLE OF FAITH as faith does not require ones own "deeds" for justification but rather faith "IN" Christ's deeds of justification. This provides LEVEL GROUND for the Gentiles with the Jews to be justified before God:

Rom. 3:29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:
30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.

10. Faith "IN" Christ does not only provide equal and level ground for the justification of Gentiles with Jews before God but it also makes God "Just" as the "Justifier of those who believe in Christ (Rom. 3:26) because Christ fully satisifes every demand of the law for punishment and righteousness thus validating rather than invalidating the Law of God - v. 31

Rom. 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

Rom. 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.




CONCLUSION: Therefore, in every context where they are intentionally contrasted with each other in regard to justification, faith as a PRINCIPLE is characteristically opposite to deeds as a PRINCIPLE. Paul in Romans 3:27 is saying in the clearest terms that justification by faith is "IN" the object not in the actions of the believer as the actions of the believer cannot justify anyone before God. What justifies a person before God is the person and actions of Jesus Christ alone "without" YOUR "deeds" simply because HIS deeds are SINLESS and YOURS are not and HIS death paid the sin debt in full and neither YOUR death or actions can ever do that.

 

[Andre]

Paul does the same synergism between natural and Jewish law in Romans 2:14-15 as he does in Romans 3:9-20.

Although the Gentiles and Jews were under two forms of ONE LAW (Rom. 2:12) they were both "under sin" and in verses 14-15 there is a synergism between what is written on conscience and what is written on stone - ONE MORAL LAW. The same moral law is simply written upon two different materials but the SAME LAW whether it is written upon conscience or upon stone - it is the same law authored by the same God and will be the same basis for judgement.

This argument does not solve the problem. The facts are simple. Here in Romans 2, Paul clearly carves up humanity into two groups - those "under the law" and those "without the law":

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;

Do you agree that those "without the law" are Gentiles and those "under the law" are Jews? I would be surprised if anyone tries to deny this.

Fine. Now what do we get in Romans 3?

Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God

The challenge for you is this. Paul has used the phrase "those under the law" in chapter 2 to refer to Jews to the exclusion of Gentiles. And now in chapter 3 - a few short sentences later - he uses the same phrase - those "under the law".

On your position, he has used the phrase "those under the law" in Romans 3 in a manner entirely inconsistent with how he has used it in Romans 2. In Romans 3, you have Paul speaking about all humanity when he refers to "those under the law".

Can you explain why Paul would be so careless with his terminology?

No one is denying that the Jewish Law of Moses embodies many of the moral precepts that inform the "natural" law which Gentiles are "under".

But that does not make them the same thing, and it certainly does not mean the Gentile is "under" the Law of Moses, a written code which was given to Jews and Jews only.

 

[Dr. Walter]

He is not careless, it is a matter of context. In Romans 2:11-15 he is attempting to show the distinction between between Jews and Gentiles. In Romans 3:9-21 he is attempting to show the commonality between Jews and Gentiles.

However, your interpretation demands Paul is still trying to show a distinction between Jews and Gentiles in Romans 3:9-21 when in fact, He is not.

This argument does not solve the problem. The facts are simple. Here in Romans 2, Paul clearly carves up humanity into two groups - those "under the law" and those "without the law":

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;

Do you agree that those "without the law" are Gentiles and those "under the law" are Jews? I would be surprised if anyone tries to deny this.

Fine. Now what do we get in Romans 3?

Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God

The challenge for you is this. Paul has used the phrase "those under the law" in chapter 2 to refer to Jews to the exclusion of Gentiles. And now in chapter 3 - a few short sentences later - he uses the same phrase - those "under the law".

On your position, he has used the phrase "those under the law" in Romans 3 in a manner entirely inconsistent with how he has used it in Romans 2. In Romans 3, you have Paul speaking about all humanity when he refers to "those under the law".

Can you explain why Paul would be so careless with his terminology?

No one is denying that the Jewish Law of Moses embodies many of the moral precepts that inform the "natural" law which Gentiles are "under".

But that does not make them the same thing, and it certainly does not mean the Gentile is "under" the Law of Moses, a written code which was given to Jews and Jews only.

 

[Andre]

He is not careless, it is a matter of context. In Romans 2:11-15 he is attempting to show the distinction between between Jews and Gentiles. In Romans 3:9-21 he is attempting to show the commonality between Jews and Gentiles.

Well, then you are placed in the very difficult position of explaining why, in chapter 2 he uses the term "those under the Law" to refer to Jews only, whereas in in chapter 3 - literally a few sentences later - he uses the exact same term to refer to a group that includes Gentiles.

However, your interpretation demands Paul is still trying to show a distinction between Jews and Gentiles in Romans 3:9-21 when in fact, He is not.

My interpretation does not demand that Paul is saying something fundamentally different about Jew and Gentile. What I am saying is that Paul is saying fundamentally the same thing about Jew and Gentile, but that he does identify them as distinct groups.

My "intepretation" assumes that Paul is consistent with use of terminology ands would not use the term "under the law" to mean two widely different things in the course of the same discourse.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Well, then you are placed in the very difficult position of explaining why, in chapter 2 he uses the term "those under the Law" to refer to Jews only, whereas in in chapter 3 - literally a few sentences later - he uses the exact same term to refer to a group that includes Gentiles.

In Romans 2:12 Paul is making a judicial distinction in regard to the EXPRESSION of Law as given to Gentiles versus Jews - written on stone/parchment versus written on conscience. Gentiles did not receive the same expression of God's Law as the Jews.

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;


However, Romans 2:14-15 teaches these two different expressions have a common ground where they converge in things commonly shared between these two law expressions - moral right and wrong.

Rom. 2:14 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:
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


In Romans 3:9-21 Paul is taking up this area of convergence where they are united in regard to moral right and wrong (Rom. 2:14-15) - moral law - and makes this clear by quoting from the Mosaic Law only those aspects that are UNIVERSAL in application, demonstrating one common basis for judgement - moral law - which is "the law of God."

In Romans 3:9-18 this is made self evident by the use of UNIVERSAL all inclusive terms "none...not one.." and UNIVERSAL moral applications.

In Romans 3:19-20 this is again made self evident by the use of UNIVERSAL all inclusive terms "every mouth" "all the world" and "no flesh" to demonstrate that the "law of God" and "deeds of the law" has reference to the COMMON GROUND of the Law of God whether it is revealed in nature, conscience or in stone - it is ultimately the MORAL BASIS for judgement and justification before God rather than the added ceremonial and civil applications.

It is this principle of "deeds" by common law of God that is contrasted and opposed to the priniciple of "faith." By denying the "prinicple' of "deeds" as the basis for justification, then Paul repudiates all forms of God's Law as well as the common ground where both laws converge as the basis for justification before God. Thus only what characterizes "faith" as described in Romans 3:24-26 which has its value for justification because it is "IN" the Person and works of Christ provides COMMON GROUND for justificaiton between Jews and Gentiles (Rom. 3:27-30) while at the same time vindicates God making him "Just" (Rom. 3:26) for justifying "the ungodly" through faith (Rom. 4:5) without works (Rom. 3:27; 4:6) because Christ satisfied all the just demands of the law in behalf of the "ungodly" (Rom. 3:31).

Therefore COMMON LAW condemns both Jews and Gentiles and the COMMON FAITH justifies both Jews and Gentiles.