Featured The Biblical Definition of JUSTIFICATION

I hold to scripture, not to other people's opinion.

WRONG, so very wrong. The 'works' to which James is referring...:

8 Howbeit if ye fulfil the royal law, according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, ye do well:
27 Pure religion and undefiled before our God and Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world. Ja 1
15 If a brother or sister be naked and in lack of daily food,
16 and one of you say unto them, Go in peace, be ye warmed and filled; and yet ye give them not the things needful to the body; what doth it profit? Ja 2

...are the very same works by which we're all going to be judged 'on that day'.

The just:

34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
35 for I was hungry, and ye gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me in;
36 naked, and ye clothed me; I was sick, and ye visited me; I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

The unjust:

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into the eternal fire which is prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 for I was hungry, and ye did not give me to eat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink;
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in; naked, and ye clothed me not; sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Mt 25

Ye see that by works a man is justified, and not only by faith.

 

Alan and Gill are both wrong.

[add]

...you too.

 

Your problem is that all our righteous acts are like filthy rags before God (Isaiah 64:6). We need a righteousness that exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees or we shall by no means enter the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:20). We need a righteousness that is from God and is apart from the law. Now where shall we find that?

BTW, writing in big red print doesn't make your arguments any stronger.

 

Romans 3:20, KJV:
"Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified
in his sight:
for by the law
is the knowledge of sin."

 

Your problem is your inability to think on your own outside your Calvinist/Reformed box.

I challenge you to give even one instance that I've ever espoused a righteousness of our own to enter the kingdom of heaven.

I presented SCRIPTURE, not my argument.

 

13 …the doers of the law shall be justified...Ro 2

20 ...by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified... Ro 3

How do you harmonize those verses?

 

Verse 10. But glory, honour, and peace,.... Which are so many words for the everlasting happiness of the saints; which is a "crown of glory that fadeth not away" (1 Peter 5:4); an honour exceeding that of the greatest potentates upon earth, since such that enjoy it will be kings and priests, and sit with Christ on his throne to all eternity; and is a peace that passes all understanding: all which will be rendered to every man that
doth good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile; which none without Christ, and his grace, and by the strength of nature, does, or can do; not that good works are causes of salvation, but are testimonies of faith, and fruits of grace, with which salvation is connected, whether they be found in Jews or Gentiles; for neither grace nor salvation are peculiar to any nation, or set of people.

Verse 11. For there is no respect of persons with God. It will not come into consideration, at the day of judgment, of what nation men are; or from what parents they are descended; nor of what age and sex persons be; nor in what state and condition they have lived in this world; nor will it be asked to what sect they have belonged, and by what denomination they have been called; or whether they have conformed to such and such externals and rituals in religion; but only whether they are righteous men or sinners; and accordingly as they appear under these characters, judgment will proceed. Some object from hence, though without any reason, to the doctrine of particular election of certain persons to everlasting salvation. This passage respects matters of strict justice, and is a forensic expression relating to courts of judicature, where persons presiding are to have no regard to the faces of men, but do that which is strictly just between man and man; and does not respect matters of grace and free favour, such as giving alms, forgiving debts, &c. A judge, as such, is to regard no man's person, but to proceed in matters before him, according to the rules of law and justice; should he do otherwise, he would be chargeable with being a respecter of persons; but then he may bestow alms on what objects he pleases; and forgive one man who is personally indebted to him, and not another, without any such imputation. This, applied to the case in hand, abundantly clears it; for though God, as a Judge, respects no man's person; yet in matters of grace he distinguishes one person from another, as it is plain he does by the bounties of his Providence. Besides, God is not bound to any person by any laws, but acts as a Sovereign; he is not moved by anything in the creature; as his choice is not confined to persons of any particular nation, family, sex, or condition, so neither does it proceed upon anything, or a foresight of anything in them, or done by them; and as there is no worthiness in them that are chosen, and saved above others, so no injury is done to the rest: add to all this, that those that are saved by virtue of electing grace, are saved in a way of righteousness agreeably to the holy law, and strict justice of God; so that no complaint can be made against the distinguishing methods of grace, upon the foot of strict justice.

Verse 12. For as many as have sinned without law,.... This is an instance of the strict justice of God, and proves him to be no respecter of persons; for the Gentiles, who were "without law," the written law of Moses, not without the law of nature in their breasts, nor without some civil laws and statutes of their own; inasmuch as they "sinned" against the God of nature, and the law and light of nature, they

shall also perish without law: not that their condemnation and perdition will be illegal, or not in due course of law; but it will not proceed upon, or according to the law of Moses, they never had; and much less for not believing in Christ, of whom they never heard; but their perdition will be for their sins committed without the law of Moses, against the law of nature: their not having the written law of Moses will be no plea in their favour, or be a reason why they should not be condemned; their persons will not be regarded as with or without the law, but their sins committed by them, to which facts their consciences will bear witness:

and, so on the other hand,

as many as have sinned in the law; who have been in and under the law of Moses, and have sinned against it, meaning the Jews:

shall be judged by the law; and condemned by it, as they were in this world, and will be hereafter: their having this law will be no bar against their condemnation, but rather an aggravation of it; their hearing of it will be no plea in their favour; nor their doing of it neither, unless they could have done it to perfection; for perfect obedience it requires, as a justifying righteousness, otherwise it curses, condemns, and adjudges to death.

Verse 13. For not the hearers of the law are just before God,.... The apostle here shows, that the Jews were justly condemned, notwithstanding their having and hearing of the law; since hearing without doing it, will never denominate persons righteous in the sight of God, however it might recommend them in the sight of men: regard seems to be had either to the first delivery of the law by Moses to the people of Israel, when he read it to them, and they hearkened to it, and promised obedience; or rather to the reading and hearing it every sabbath day; and may include a speculative knowledge of it, without a practical obedience to it; and which therefore must fall greatly short of entitling them to a justifying righteousness; since not these,

but the doers of the law, shall be justified; by whom are meant, not such who merely literally and externally fulfil the law, as they imagine; for the law is spiritual, and regards the inward as well as the outward man, and requires internal holiness, as well as external obedience; and the apostle is speaking of justification before God, who sees the heart, and not before men, who judge according to outward appearance: nor are such designed who are imperfect doers of the law; for the law requires a perfect obedience, and what is not perfect is not properly righteousness; nor does it, nor can it consider an imperfect righteousness as a perfect one; for it accuses of, pronounces guilty, curses, and condemns for every transgression of it. But such only can be intended, who are doers of it spiritually, internally, as well as externally, and that perfectly. Adam, in his state of innocence, was a perfect doer of the law; he sinning, and all his posterity in him, none of them are righteous, but all pass under a sentence of condemnation. The best of men, even believers in Christ, are not without sin in themselves; and when any of the saints are said to be perfect, it must be understood in a comparative sense, or as they are considered in Christ. There never was but one since Adam, and that is Christ, who has fulfilled, or could perfectly fulfil the law; the thing is impossible and impracticable for fallen man: hence these words must be understood either hypothetically, thus, not the hearers of the law, but if there were any perfect doers of it, they would be justified before God; or else of such persons who are considered in Christ, by whom the whole perfect righteousness of the law is fulfilled in them, and who may be reckoned as perfect doers of it in him, their substitute, surety, and representative.

From: Romans 2 Bible Commentary - John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible

 

That's easy. The whole argument from Romans 1:18 through to 3:20 is taken up with establishing 'that ... the whole world [is] guilty before God' (V.19). In Romans 2:13, Paul is establishing that having the law preached to them, as the Jews did, was of no benefit because they did not keep it, and even Gentiles sometimes keep at least some of the 10 Commandments, and their consciences accuse them when they sin egregiously showing that the moral law was originally written on the hearts of all men, though now smudged and defaced by the Fall. But Gentiles did not keep the law consistently which is why Paul writes, 'we have previously charged both Jews and Gentiles that they are all under sin' (Romans 3:9).
So the doers of the law shall be justified, but unfortunately there are none.'There is none righteous, no, not one.' 'For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble at one point, he is guilty of all' (James 2:10).

Therefore, 'by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.' We need a righteousness outside of ourselves, that exceeds the [legal] righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees.

 

I was hoping to get YOUR assessment rather than this this C&P dump of another's opinion. But that seems to be all you Calvinist/Reformed types are able to do, parrot other's opinions (all the while parroting Sola Scriptura). Like @Martin Marprelate (and other Calvinist members on this board) you're unable to think on your own outside of your Calvinist dogma, and parroting other's opinions is all you have to give.

However, Gill is spot on with this assessment. The judgement, 'the rendering to every man according to his works' in Romans 2, is internal (which is manifested externally).

 

Please tell me why you think I'm talking about "keeping the law perfectly". FYI, that's the farthest thing from my intent, and neither is it Paul's intent in Romans 2.

 

No, there's much more to be gleaned from this scripture than this gross over-simplification of yours's (or whoever it is you're parroting). Romans 2 is delving into the judgement of the TWO HEARTS.

BTW, writing in bolded italicized print doesn't make your arguments any stronger.

 

Proverbs 11:14 applies. Do you realise that just about every heresy in history has been inflicted upon the Church by people thinking thinking that they ae wiser and more clever than those who have gone before. You are walking in the footsteps of Socinius and Charles Taze Russell. Or you would be if you were not parroting Roman Catholic doctrine. There is actually nothing new under the sun.

 

You are right that it is an over-simplification; it was all I had time to write; but I note that you have made no attempt to refute it. Why don't you lay out your doctrine of the 'two hearts' and amaze us with your wisdom? But that's not your style which is simply to pour your rather pathetic scorn on others.

I embolden Scripture when I quote it to distinguish it from what else I write. I did not italicize anything in my earlier post, and only tend to do so when I am quoting another author for the same reason.