The use of the term "law" in Romans 2:27

[Dr. Walter]

[/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR]
I think your analysis is absolutely correct.

Some people - and I suspect Dr. Walter is one of them - seem to think that Paul really does not believe what he writes in Romans 7, that some will indeed attain eternal life based on their deeds. But if this is not so, it seems hard to see how it makes sense to warn the hypocrite at the beginning of the chapter. A warning, after all, only functions as a warning if the person being warned has the possiblity of coming out on the right side.

Your logic is simply amazing! You think it is unreasonable to expose hypocrisy and warn hypocrits of judgement??? How do you read and interpret Matthew 23 and the words and actions of Christ?????????????

You and Bob are exactly the type of person Romans 2 is exposing and warning! Both of you believe what these self-rigteous hypocrits believe. You believe that you can ultimately be justififed according to your works thus despising the satisfaction Christ provided by his own works.

 

[Andre]

He is contextually arguing that "ALL JEWS" who fit the contextual descriptions provided in Romans 2:1-5 and 17-25 are hypocrits who will come under the condemation of the Law justly applied.

With you so far.

Their hypocrisy is that they think they can "according to his works" without grace, without Christ, without the New Covenant, can be justified solely by their professed obedience to the Law of God when in actually they have violated it (vv. 3,5,23-24).

I see no textual support for this position. You appear to be going beyond what Paul actually writes. We know for certain that the critique he levels at the Jew is not levelled at all Jews (Paul describes himself as "blameless" in respect to the Law).

And more importantly, there is no evidence at all that Paul is critiquing the idea that Jews can be justified by obedience to the Law. He makes that argument elsewhere, and how this all works together needs to be carefully nuanced.

But you must be reading something into the chapter 2 text - there is no evidence at all that Paul is critiquing the notion of being justified by the Law of Moses in this text.

 

[Andre]

You believe that you can ultimately be justififed according to your works thus despising the satisfaction Christ provided by his own works.

What utter falsehood.

You have a short memory - you (like so many) simply misrepresent my position. You are either lying, or you have a short memory. I will be charitable and assume the latter. Perhaps its been some time, but I have repeatedly explained how final justification by works coheres perfectly with the centrality of the cross, and how the "saving works" are not "my" works, but rather the works of the Holy Spirit.

These debates always go the same way - I see it on other boards as well. When a poster (such as me) argues that final salvation is based on Spirit-produced works, we are misrepresented as arguing that "we save ourselves".

 

[Andre]

You and Bob are exactly the type of person Romans 2 is exposing and warning! Both of you believe what these self-rigteous hypocrits believe. You believe that you can ultimately be justififed according to your works thus despising the satisfaction Christ provided by his own works.

OK, give us actual text - actual words that Paul writes in Romans 2 - that supports this notion that Paul is critiquing the Jew for believing that he can be justified by following the Law of Moses.

There are no such words, but I will be interested in seeing what you come up with.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Peter says that they are condemned who "obey not the Gospel".

Paul defines this obedience as INWARD and in regard to the heart (Rom. 10:8-10) in submission to the substitionary works of Christ that fully satisfied the Law's total demands against the believer.

in Matt 7 Christ said that those who do the Will of the Father are saved not the mere sayers of "Lord Lord"

You totally misrepresent the text and these people. They denied mere faith in Christ saved as their "Lord, Lord" continued to include GOOD WORKS which they claimed to have performed "in thy name." This group characterises you type of soteriology. Take note that there is no distinction between the houses (good works) that went through the storms! What saved one and not the other was not the materials the house was made of, but the foundation upon which they stood (1) solid rock - Jesus Christ alone; or (2) mixture between Christ and your works = sand! The same exact analogy in 1 Cor. 3:11-15! It is the foundation that saves not the "works" good or bad (vv. 14-15).

In Rom 2:13 Paul says that those who are DOERS of the Law are justified in the future judgment.

Bob, what does the law require to be a DOER of the Law? Does your requirement contradict James requirement (James 2:10)? I think so! Does it contradict Paul's definition (Gal. 3:10-11)? I think so! You have another standard for DOING the Law of God other than God's standard!

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.

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 the mean while accusing or else excusing one another

1. How are you going to prove from this context that God is not a respector of persons with the Gentiles?

2. Paul defines the law that is used to judge the Jews but where is the standard God will use in this context to judge the Gentile?

3. If you jerk verses 14-15 out of context to refer to regenerated Gentiles then where in this context does Paul provide a just standard to Judge the Gentiles?

4. What is the standard given in this context that accuses or excuses what the Gentile does?

5. What aspect of the Gentile's heart is Paul referring to "the conscience"??

Provide the standard that Paul gives in this context that God will judge the Gentile by????

 

[Dr. Walter]

I think your analysis is absolutely correct.

Some people - and I suspect Dr. Walter is one of them - seem to think that Paul really does not believe what he writes in Romans 2, that some will indeed attain eternal life based on their deeds. But if this is not so, it seems hard to see how it makes sense to warn the hypocrite at the beginning of the chapter. A warning, after all, only functions as a warning if the person being warned has the possiblity of coming out on the right side.

The thoughtful reader can easily see there are no examples given in this entire chapter of either "successes" or "failures." There is simply the criteria for success and failure presented and declarations that the subjects addressed in Romans 2:1-5 and 17-24 have already failed with the conclusion that there can be no success through outward personal obedience to the law.

 

[Andre]

The thoughtful reader can easily see there are no examples given in this entire chapter of either "successes" or "failures." There is simply the criteria for success and failure presented and declarations that the subjects addressed in Romans 2:1-5 and 17-24 have already failed with the conclusion that there can be no success through outward personal obedience to the law.

I cannot speak for others but I certainly have never stated that Paul is saying that there can be success "outward personal obedience to the law".

It is indeed clear that Paul beleives that there is indeed an "obeying of the law" that can, and is, achieved:

(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.

No doubt you will try to argue that, despite the wording, Paul does not believe that these Gentiles can indeed "do by nature the things required by the law". Of course, this is what you need to do to preserve your position.

You seem to be arguing thus:

1. In verses 1-5 and 17-24, we have Paul critiquing someone who is failing at "keeping the law";

2. Therefore, one cannot "keep the law".

The problem with this is obvious - you cannot simply assume that Paul's critique is universal.

Now before you misrepresent me, I will underscore that I agree that no one can be successful through outward personal obedience to the law. But that does not mean that there is a "non-outward obeying of the law" that will result in success. I suggest that this is what Paul is indeed saying, as I will argue in a follow-on post.

 

[Andre]

In Romans 2, Paul writes 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 Gentile 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). For reasons spelled out in detail elsewhere, the word “instinctively” is arguably a misleading translation – a better translation of the relevant fragment of verse 14 would be:

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

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.

Note also this famous text from Deuteronomy 30:

Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. 12 It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, “Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 13 Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, “Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 14 No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. 16 For I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in obedience to him, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess

This is the very same text that Paul directly quotes in Romans 10 in relation to matters of law – so let’s not pretend Paul does not have the Deuteronomy text in mind as he dictates his letter to the church at Rome. This Deuteronomy text is smack-dab in the middle of a treatment of God’s promised future renewal of his covenant with Israel. So to the extent that we believe that Jesus’ work comprises the renewal of the covenant (and while I think that this is so, there is no space to argue for it in this post), this text is fulfilled for the Jew + Gentile church, and not just the nation of Israel
precisely because the church is the “true Israel”.

What is the point of all this? In both the Jeremiah text and the Deuteronomy text, we have images of the “law” being written on the heart of the believer, enabling obedience to that law.

Paul is deeply knowledgeable of Old Testament concepts and would more likely than use “law written on the heart” language in the same way it was used in the Old Testament. Therefore, it is most reasonable to conclude that Paul does indeed believe that this “law written on the heart” can indeed be obeyed.

To be frank, the only reason why the position of Dr. Walter has so much traction, and is so widely accepted, is Old Testament ignorance. Once we see that Paul is picking up a covenant renewal theme, from texts like Jeremiah, Deuteronomy and indeed others, we need to take that seriously. And when we do, we realize that Paul is connecting into a theme whereby God indeed makes it possible for people to obey such a law. Dr. Walter’s position requires us to see obedience as “impossible”. Yet that is clearly not Paul’s intent, unless it is an incredible co-incidence that Paul uses the language of law written on the heart in a manner entirely inconsistent with its Old Testament use – where the believer (at the time of covenant renewal) is indeed enabled to obey the law.

Not at likely for a Biblically literate Pharisee like Saul of Tarsus.

 

[Dr. Walter]

With you so far.


I see no textual support for this position. You appear to be going beyond what Paul actually writes. We know for certain that the critique he levels at the Jew is not levelled at all Jews (Paul describes himself as "blameless" in respect to the Law).

The problem is that you are incapable of seeing (1 Tim. 4:2) as it is plain to anyone who can read the king's English! Verses 1-5 identies the subject as lost hypocrits who think they will escape judgement (v.3) "according to his works" (v. 6). Nothing could be plainer. I dare you or Bob to find one word in verses 1-5 that such persons are saved or even contemplated as possibly being saved! Look at the pronouns in verses 1-3 and in verse 5! These are people who believe they will escape judgement due to what they conceive as their own good works JUST LIKE YOU!

Both you and Bob slaughter verses 11-16. Paul is establishing that God is not a respector of persons (v. 11) and will judge according to the light they are given (vv. 12-13). By jerking verses 14-15 out of this context and presuming it applies to saved people you have removed the only just basis to judge lost Gentiles - the law of conscience according to what their conscience approved and condemned.

I dare you to find one word in verses 17-24 that the Jews are saved or can be saved as described!

There is a huge difference between defining the criteria for two possible consequences and providing examples success and failures (vv. 6-10).

And more importantly, there is no evidence at all that Paul is critiquing the idea that Jews can be justified by obedience to the Law. He makes that argument elsewhere, and how this all works together needs to be carefully nuanced.

But you must be reading something into the chapter 2 text - there is no evidence at all that Paul is critiquing the notion of being justified by the Law of Moses in this text.

Look at verse 17 and ask what is the boast identified by Paul for the Jew??? No person boasts in the law but in Christ! Only those who believe in being justified by their own personal "good works" as defined by the law of Moses or by the law of conscience boast in the law! When Paul said he was "blameless" he was speaking about his preregenerate state and from the same perception of those being described in Romans 2:17-19!

You can't see because you refuse to see! It is plain as the nose on your face but you can't see it without a mirror!

 

[Dr. Walter]

In Romans 2, Paul writes 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 Gentile 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). For reasons spelled out in detail elsewhere, the word “instinctively” is arguably a misleading translation – a better translation of the relevant fragment of verse 14 would be:

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

This is such an abuse of the context! Look at the line of thought being developed from verse 11. Paul is declaring that God is no respector of person when it comes to judging works (v. 11). Paul is declaring that God's judgement is fair - according to a just standard - vv. 12-13. What is a just standard? For the Jew the just standard is the Law of Moses but is that the just standard to judge the Gentile by? Verses 12-13 clearly deny that it is just to judge the Gentile by the law of Moses. They must be judged "without the law" of Moses? BY WHAT STANDARD?

You and Bob ignore this contextual development and destroy any answer to the question demanded by verses 12-13 as definitive of the standard to judge Gentiles by! YOu destroy it by your perverted insertion and corruption of verses 14-15.

You admit that by "birth" they have a "law unto themselves" that must be used to judge them but what is that law? Verse 15 is the only text in this context that defines, identifies exactly what law God uses to justly judge the Gentiles works.

The context is developing the just basis to JUDGE their works! You tell me what is the JUST standard PROVIDED IN THIS CONTEXT by which God will JUDGE gentiles! You cannot do it because you pervert, twist and destroy the only text provided in context to define that just basis for judgement!

Even verse 16 continues the theme of JUDMENT not salvation! The righteousness revealed in the Mosaic law and in the conscience is the righteousness revealed in the gospel (Rom. 1:17; 3:21-22; 24-26) and it is the PERSONAL rightousness provided by Jesus Christ in his life.

Verse 17-24 does not say one word about possible success cases or saved persons but people JUST LIKE YOU who make their boast in the law (not in being a Jew) but their boast is in "the law" - v. 17. Their boast is in performing what the law defines as GOOD - vv. 18-20 - boasting in being teachers of what the law demands as acceptable in God's sight!

You cannot see because you refuse to see this text any other way. This text never once provides examples of successes or failures but declares what is the criteria for success and failure according to the law and denies those in verses 1-5 and 17-25 will escape the judgement of God and denies that circumcision is of any profit to any Jew seeking to be justified by their boast in the law.

 

[Andre]

The problem is that you are incapable of seeing (1 Tim. 4:2) as it is plain to anyone who can read the king's English!

I suggest that you do not want to turn this into a context of "who can read and who cannot" - I suspect that it will not turn out at all to your liking.

In any event, why are you talking about 1 Timothy 4:2 - you are committing the mistake of arbitrarily importing material from another letter. In any event, the fact that both in Romans, and in Timothy, hypocrites are on the table does not change the relevant point. And that is there is nothing in Romans 2 that suggests that people cannot be "justified" by the good deeds their lives manifest.

No one is saying that there are not hypocrites. Or that, at several places in Romans 2, Paul criticizes them. But there is no basis for taking a critique directed at hypocrites and suggesting that all people are subject to that critique.

Verses 1-5 identies the subject as lost hypocrits who think they will escape judgement (v.3) "according to his works" (v. 6). Nothing could be plainer. I dare you or Bob to find one word in verses 1-5 that such persons are saved or even contemplated as possibly being saved!

Your logic is clearly not correct. Yes, these verses are addressed to hypocrites. But there is simply no basis for then presuming that Paul cannot talk about other things in Romans 2! Where is this mysterious rule that Paul cannot take his argument in different directions?

No one is suggesting that those identified in verses 1 to 5 are necessarily going to be saved. But there is simply no textual evidence that would lead to the conclusion that they are necessarily going to ultimately be lost. Let's not commit the further fundamental error of arguing as follows:

1. There is no statement that the person in verses 1 to 5 can be saved.
2. Therefore, the person in verses 1 to 5 cannot be saved.

That would be incorrect logic.

 

[Andre]

These are people who believe they will escape judgement due to what they conceive as their own good works JUST LIKE YOU!

You lie.

You know full well that what you are saying about the belief I hold is, in fact, a misrepresentation of my belief.

 

[Andre]

Both you and Bob slaughter verses 11-16. Paul is establishing that God is not a respector of persons (v. 11) and will judge according to the light they are given (vv. 12-13). By jerking verses 14-15 out of this context and presuming it applies to saved people you have removed the only just basis to judge lost Gentiles - the law of conscience according to what their conscience approved and condemned.

I have already explained in detail why it is clear that verse 14-15 apply to believers - Paul is drawing on a recurrent Old Testament image of how the law gets written on the heart of the "true" Israel at the time of covenant renewal.

And the time of covenant renewal is the time of Jesus' work. And the true Israel is the Jew + Gentile church.

What part of the above would you dispute?

I dare you to find one word in verses 17-24 that the Jews are saved or can be saved as described!

Well I dare you to find one word that says that they cannot. In any event, the Biblical texts are more subtle than you suppose. As I have shown, Paul is drawing on an Old Testament theme about how, at the time of covenant renewal, the "law" will be written on the hearts of "true Israel" so that they can "do this law". I am sorry but it is there clear as day in Deuteronomy 30 (which we otherwise know Paul has on his mind since he quotes it in Romans 10).

Your view on this has to quash this connection to the clear Old Testament promise that, at the time of covenant renewal, the law will be written on the hearts of the true people of God, enabling them to follow it.

 

[Dr. Walter]

But there is simply no textual evidence that would lead to the conclusion that they are necessarily going to ultimately be lost. Let's not commit the further fundamental error of arguing as follows:

1. There is no statement that the person in verses 1 to 5 can be saved.
2. Therefore, the person in verses 1 to 5 cannot be saved.

That would be incorrect logic.

You are clearly mistaken as verses 1-5 as well as verses 12-24 describe a certain TYPE which can never be saved. Proof?

Rom. 2:5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;

Paul is describing a TYPE of sinner and this TYPE cannot be saved under any circumstances.

Romans 2:23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?
24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.

Paul is talking about a TYPE of Jew - one who makes his boast in the law but is breaking the law and this TYPE of Jew is described by Scripture - "as it is written."

It is this TYPE that the Paul confronts with the JUST judgement of God in verse 6-16. This TYPE precedes and this TYPE follows it. Verses 6-16 does not set forth success and failure cases but declares the just criteria and consequences for being judged "according to his works" UNDER LAW and Law alone! Not one word of "grace"! Not one word of "faith"! Not one word of "saved"! This is the JUST criteria and consequences in facing God "according to his works" without Christ's works - ONLY THEIR WORKS which have been already pronounced condemned (vv. 1-5) and continues to be condemned (vv. 17-25) as no outward works can obtain the righteousness they need to be justified by the law (vv. 25-29).

 

[Dr. Walter]

I have already explained in detail why it is clear that verse 14-15 apply to believers

You have gone OUTSIDE the context and jammed non-related scripture back into the text! Your explanation makes the contextual argument complete nonsense! Your explanation repudiates the very point Paul is logically and rationally making and that is namely - what just grounds gentiles will be judged by!

Well I dare you to find one word that says that they cannot.

The context from verse 3 is speaking about the judgement of God! Verse 5 introduces the thought of a RIGHTEOUS judgement! Verses 6 introduces what will be judged - works! Verses 7-10 provide the just criteria and consequences for judging works! Verse 11-13 demand that a just standard must be used to judge both Gentiles and Jews. Verse 14-15 provides the just standard to judge Gentiles by! It is just that simple and just that clear and you are perverting the Word of God to suit your own false doctrine.

You cannot find one word in this entire chapter that DECLARES that anyone being described are justified by faith, justified by grace or saved or that righteousness has been imputed! You are taking DEFINITIONS and perverting them into declarations! It just ain't so!

 

[ituttut]

, answering Dr. Walter][/COLOR]I cannot speak for others but I certainly have never stated that Paul is saying that there can be success "outward personal obedience to the law".

It is indeed clear that Paul beleives that there is indeed an "obeying of the law" that can, and is, achieved:

If I understand you correctly, This is true. It's like being born TO good works. It is now our nature, that the works we do are Good. Likewise we saved ESTABLISH THE LAW.

The Law could never save, but condemned, and no one born, of woman and man, could live without breaking the LAW. We are told this by Peter in Acts 15:10. Neither he nor any that made covenant with God could keep the Law. So Peter agrees with Paul to let the Gentiles alone, and quit trying to bring them to Bondage of the Law or Moses, and under the Law of Circumcision, and all other rituals not to be practiced by the Heathen.

Moses can testify to both Laws, which could bring death to the Covenant people. One by not having faith in the flesh, so get rid of it and then the other impossible to keep.

Today, we in these bodies continue to sin, but God sees the BLOOD. The Curse of the Law to God's People cannot apply to us today, so let no one try and put a YOKE on our neck. As Paul says in Philippians 3: 9 to the Saints in Christ Jesus, that through His faith we come to the righteousness which is of God by faith.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Here is your problem! Ask yourself what design does the Bible give for the law? Positively, it was given to reveal sin (Rom. 3:20). Negatively it was never given to obtain eternal life (Gal. 3:21). Therefore "NO FLESH" can be justified by the law at NO TIME under NO CONDITIONS!

We are created "in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 2:10a) as that is the sphere of justification in God's sight as there is no salvation, no justification, no spiritual life, no acceptance OUTSIDE of Christ. Hence, "good works" do not obtain entrance "in Christ" but are the CONSEQUENCES of having already been created (Aorist tense) "in Christ" (Eph. 2:10b) and that is precisely why it is "UNTO good works" rather than "BY" good works we obtain entrance into Christ!

Therefore, good works AFTER being created "in Christ" do not obtain salvation, eternal life, justification as that is the position of being "in Christ." What "good works" obtain is present blessings and future rewards (1 Cor. 3:14-15) nothing more and nothing less.

If I understand you correctly, This is true. It's like being born TO good works. It is now our nature, that the works we do are Good. Likewise we saved ESTABLISH THE LAW.

The Law could never save, but condemned, and no one born, of woman and man, could live without breaking the LAW. We are told this by Peter in Acts 15:10. Neither he nor any that made covenant with God could keep the Law. So Peter agrees with Paul to let the Gentiles alone, and quit trying to bring them to Bondage of the Law or Moses, and under the Law of Circumcision, and all other rituals not to be practiced by the Heathen.

Moses can testify to both Laws, which could bring death to the Covenant people. One by not having faith in the flesh, so get rid of it and then the other impossible to keep.

Today, we in these bodies continue to sin, but God sees the BLOOD. The Curse of the Law to God's People cannot apply to us today, so let no one try and put a YOKE on our neck. As Paul says in Philippians 3: 9 to the Saints in Christ Jesus, that through His faith we come to the righteousness which is of God by faith.

 

[Andre]

You are clearly mistaken as verses 1-5 as well as verses 12-24 describe a certain TYPE which can never be saved. Proof?

Rom. 2:5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;

Paul is describing a TYPE of sinner and this TYPE cannot be saved under any circumstances.

I think it is very reasonable to read this statement as a "here is what will happen to you if you stay on the path you're on" kind of statement.

But this is not really the key issue. Even if you are right about the certain fate of this hypocrite, this does not mean that some will not be saved by "persistence in doing good" as per verse 7.

It is this TYPE that the Paul confronts with the JUST judgement of God in verse 6-16. This TYPE precedes and this TYPE follows it.

I agree, but this is not a good argument for suggesting that there will not be those who will indeed be saved as per the content of verses 6-13. You are basing your position on a demonstrably incorrect pre-supposition - that if an author is talking A, he cannot then widen his scope of treatment before then again returning to A.

You have Paul in the decidedly odd position of saying that there will be those given eternal life according to their deeds and yet having us believe that the number of such persons will be, yes, ZERO.

Highly odd, I suggest.

 

[Andre]

Here is your problem! Ask yourself what design does the Bible give for the law? Positively, it was given to reveal sin (Rom. 3:20). Negatively it was never given to obtain eternal life (Gal. 3:21). Therefore "NO FLESH" can be justified by the law at NO TIME under NO CONDITIONS!

I agree that Paul believes that the Law of Moses - the written code given to Jews and only Jews - cannot "save". This is why I have tried to use the word "law" with quotation marks - suggesting that Paul has a "second" law in mind.

In short, here is what I believe Paul is saying:

1. The written code of the Law of Moses can save no one who is not otherwise regenerated by the Spirit of God;

2. There is a mysterious "second law" that gets written on the heart of Jew and Gentile believer alike. This law can be obeyed and must be obeyed if final salvation is to be achieved.

Paul's concept of "law" is complex precisely

Again - Paul refers to a law that is written on the heart that is obeyed by Gentile believers. Your position falls with the fact that there is an Old Testament promise that, at the time of covenant renewal - which is clearly what the work of Christ accomplishes - the law will be written on the heart so that, yes, it can be obeyed:

if you obey the LORD your God and keep his commands and decrees that are written in this Book of the Law and turn to the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 11 Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. 12 It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, “Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 13 Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, “Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 14 No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it. 15 See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. 16 For I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in obedience to him, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live

I suggest this is exceedingly damaging to your position. It is inconceivable that a sophisticated, Biblically literate Pharisee like Paul would use "law written on the heart" language as he does in Romans 2 and not be tying into the promise that, at covenant renewal, the people of God will indeed be able to obey that law, just as the Deuteronomy text spells out.

 

[Dr. Walter]

I think it is very reasonable to read this statement as a "here is what will happen to you if you stay on the path you're on" kind of statement.

There is no "if" or subjective mode used here! This is a simple declaration of the just criteria and consequences rather than any kind of prescription.

But this is not really the key issue. Even if you are right about the certain fate of this hypocrite, this does not mean that some will not be saved by "persistence in doing good" as per verse 7.

Previous context does not provide any basis that "works" in connection with "the law" (Rom 2:6-15) can obtain salvation (Rom. 1:1-17)! Following context denies that "works" in connection with Law can obtain salvation (Rom. 3-5:2. There is no context for salvation "according to his works" in connection with Law!

I agree, but this is not a good argument for suggesting that there will not be those who will indeed be saved as per the content of verses 6-13. You are basing your position on a demonstrably incorrect pre-supposition - that if an author is talking A, he cannot then widen his scope of treatment before then again returning to A.

As argued above, there is no basis in the immediate context to intepret Romans 2:6-13 as possible for salvation by works in connection with the Law. The preceding context (vv. 3-5) argues for a JUST basis to judge this TYPE of person "according to his works" and that JUST basis is the criteria and consequences in connection with the Law provided in Romans 2:6-16! There is not one word in Romans 2:6-16 that anyone one being considered was "saved" or "justified by grace" or "justified by faith" or is even regarded as a Christian!

Paul is dealing with a TYPE of person who believes they will "escape" the judgement of God (v. 3) and the only reason they believe that is because they do not understand that God's judgement is based upon "RIGHTEOUSNESSS" (v. 5) under a just standard or law that has just criteria and just consequences when it comes to judging a person "according to his works" (vv. 6-16). NO SAVED PERSON IS EVEN HINTED AT in this context but only THIS TYPE of lost person who will not pass the judgement of God.