Jesus & Salvation By Faith ALONE

[Jedi Knight]

I think that we need to take the entire corpus of scripture when we interpret Jesus's statement. Paul says this:

Therefore, brothers, we have an obligation—but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it. 13For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,

This is a clear statement of the possibility of the believer not achieving "life". So when Jesus promises eternal life, I suggest that He is, by implication, referring to someone who "perseveres" in the faith.

What do you think Paul means in this text from Romans 8?

Ok so Eternal Life is not Everlasting in your view. I think if you go back to the garden of Eden...why were they prevented from going back in? Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." How long would Adam have lived in a fallen"in sin" state if he ate? Forever! Now in Christ death on the tree "cross" gives eternal "forever" Life having obtained eternal redemption.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Find me any basis for those described in Romans 2:1-5 or those described in Romans 2:17-24 for coming to God through anything other than their own works?

Those who precede and follows (Rom. 2:6-10) are those who DO NOT COME TO GOD BY FAITH IN CHRIST but come to God BY WORKS WITHOUT CHRIST. When you come to God BY WORKS WITHOUT CHRIST you will be judgemend by God's Standard for YOUR WORKS, which is a JUST standard. A Just standard will approve all works that are deemed "good" by the appropriate consequence. A JUST standard will disapprove all works that are deemed "evil" by the appropriate consequence. That is ALL Paul is saying in Romans 2:6-10 to people who come WITHOUT CHRIST by their OWN WORKS.

The consquence of coming to God WITHOUT CHRIST by their OWN WORKS is stated in Romans 3:9-21.

 

[Andre]

Paul means exactly what he says. Justification UNDER LAW is according to works. The works are judged to be "good" according to the Law's standard of "Good" will obtain the JUST consequence - and works that are judged to be evil will obtain the JUST consequence.

Are you referring to these verses?:

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; 13for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.

I think I know where you are coming from. You (correctly in my view) discern that Paul believes that no one can be justified by doing the Law of Moses. And so you understandably think that Paul cannot be talking about a real judgement here, since he says that people are being justified by what appears to be the Law of Moses.

The problem with this is that you are implicitly saying that Paul sets forth a purely hypothetical judgmenet scenario here in Romans 2, even though he nevers tells us that this is what he is doing.

I just cannot accept that a competent skilled person like Paul would do such a thing. No competent person would describe a coming judgement, and the awarding of eternal life at that judgement, and expect the reader to see this simply a declaration of a standard that zero persons will attain.

That simply makes no sense at all - for Paul to paint a picture of people being given eternal life based on what they do, while all the while Paul believes that this is an unattainable standard.

The Romans 3 argument does not work here to make Romans 2:6-13 "hypothetical". Why not? Precisely because the fact that all are born hopeless sinners does not mean they are stuck in that state.

But I do understand your objection that the verses (above), if taken as describing a real judgement that will actually take place, seem to clash with other Pauline statements about how one cannot be justified by the Law of Moses.

To address this will take some time. I hope to return to this.

 

[DHK]

That simply makes no sense at all - for Paul to paint a picture of people being given eternal life based on what they do, while all the while Paul believes that this is an unattainable standard.

A standard of salvation of works is unattainable. It cannot be done. That is why Christ came into the world. No man can keep the law. No one is perfect. Christ lived a perfect life. The perfect one could die for the imperfect one.

The Romans 3 argument does not work here to make Romans 2:6-13 "hypothetical". Why not? Precisely because the fact that all are born hopeless sinners does not mean they are stuck in that state.

Again, that is precisely why we need a Savior. We are sinners; we are in need of a Savior. That is the only solution that man has. Man is stuck in that state--like a drowning man, he needs someone stronger than himself to pull himself out of the water in order to be saved or he will drown. He cannot save himself. His good works are no good now. Whatever he does now will not help. His riches, his righteousness, his stature, all that he has and is is all for nought unless someone else comes and pulls him out of that water. He will drown! So will man drown in his sin and be separated from God for all eternity unless someone pulls him out of that morass of sin. He needs a Savior, Christ, who paid the penalty for his sin. He is totally helpless without Christ. There is no amount of work he can do. He needs a Savior.

But I do understand your objection that the verses (above), if taken as describing a real judgement that will actually take place, seem to clash with other Pauline statements about how one cannot be justified by the Law of Moses.

One cannot be justified by the Law of Moses. It is impossible.
The Law was our schoolmaster to lead us to Christ. It doesn't save; it doesn't justify.

 

[Dr. Walter]

You are making some fundemental errors. The very verse you quoted demonstrates that "THE LAW" is the standard for judgement in verses 6-10. The phrase "the works of the law" or works that are demanded by the law to be regarded righteous is defined by verse 7 whereas works that are in volation of that law is found in verse 8. This is not about LAWS plural but the fundemental law OF GOD that defines righteousness in the sight of God anywhere at anytime.

This is "the law" that IN PRINCIPLE is written upon the conscience of all men. This is "the law" that IN WRITING is EXPANDED upon the two tablets of stone. This is "the law" that is further expanded in the Jewish civil and religious order. This is "the law" that can be found among all governments of all times that conforms to the righteous CHARACTER of God and thus is "the law OF GOD."

There is nothing HYPOTHETICAL here or anything that should be interpreted HYPOTHETICAL here. This judgement is contextually defined with regard to ALL who come before God by THEIR OWN MERITS. There is only one standard of judgement for ALL who come to God by THEIR OWN MERITS and that is the law of God. ALL who come this way will be judged this way.

Paul wishes to make it clear to THIS KIND OF PERSON who THINKS (v. 3) this way, that the Law of God will be JUST and FAIR to ALL who come on the basis of PERSONAL MERIT. He therefore simply sets forth the JUST demands and JUST consequences while denying any BIAS due to MISCONCEPTIONS on their part or on the part of God. Good works will get good consequences and bad works will get bad consequences - Period! God's justice will not be influenced by who you are or by what you have not been exposed to. The role Model of definitive righteousness will be according to Paul's Gospel (v. 16) - the life of Jesus Christ - as the GOLD standard of righteousness in practical terms.

Paul simply spells out the JUST GUIDELINES to all who come by personal merit before God and all who come in that day by PERSONAL MERIT will be judged within these guideliness.

There is nothing HYPOTHETEICAL in Romans 2:6-10 or in Romans 3:9-21. The reasons that NONE who come by their own works will be justified under the law in Romans 3:9-21 is because of the JUST standards spelled out in Romans 2:6-10 instead of the misconceptions found in Romans 2:1-5; 17-24 in the minds of ALL who think they can be justified this way because they think their BETTER THAN THOU works measure up to God's Standard of good.

In direct contrast, ALL those who come to God THROUGH THE MERITS OF CHRIST are justified already becuase the Law has ALREADY been satisfied by the merits of Christ imputed to them by faith and the penalty of the law ALREADY satisfied by Christ thus not imputing sin to them. ALL who come this way "shall not come into condemnation but is passed from death to life" ALREADY. In other words, the justified are actually justified rather than HYPOTHETICALLY justified as your position demands.

Are you referring to these verses?:

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; 13for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.

I think I know where you are coming from. You (correctly in my view) discern that Paul believes that no one can be justified by doing the Law of Moses. And so you understandably think that Paul cannot be talking about a real judgement here, since he says that people are being justified by what appears to be the Law of Moses.

The problem with this is that you are implicitly saying that Paul sets forth a purely hypothetical judgmenet scenario here in Romans 2, even though he nevers tells us that this is what he is doing.

I just cannot accept that a competent skilled person like Paul would do such a thing. No competent person would describe a coming judgement, and the awarding of eternal life at that judgement, and expect the reader to see this simply a declaration of a standard that zero persons will attain.

That simply makes no sense at all - for Paul to paint a picture of people being given eternal life based on what they do, while all the while Paul believes that this is an unattainable standard.

The Romans 3 argument does not work here to make Romans 2:6-13 "hypothetical". Why not? Precisely because the fact that all are born hopeless sinners does not mean they are stuck in that state.

But I do understand your objection that the verses (above), if taken as describing a real judgement that will actually take place, seem to clash with other Pauline statements about how one cannot be justified by the Law of Moses.

To address this will take some time. I hope to return to this.

 

[BobRyan]

Jesus obviously taught salvation by faith, but did He teach salvation by faith ALONE?

how about we have that discussion in the light of Christ's Word in Matt 7 or Matt 10 or John 15?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Are you referring to these verses?:

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; 13for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.

I think I know where you are coming from. You (correctly in my view) discern that Paul believes that no one can be justified by doing the Law of Moses. And so you understandably think that Paul cannot be talking about a real judgement here, since he says that people are being justified by what appears to be the Law of Moses.

The problem with this is that you are implicitly saying that Paul sets forth a purely hypothetical judgmenet scenario here in Romans 2, even though he nevers tells us that this is what he is doing.

I just cannot accept that a competent skilled person like Paul would do such a thing. No competent person would describe a coming judgement, and the awarding of eternal life at that judgement, and expect the reader to see this simply a declaration of a standard that zero persons will attain.

Indeed the problem with those who want to deny the Rom 2:6 doctrine on perseverance of the saints is that when they read Rom 2:6-29 they have to declare all texts where the wicked are failing and doomed as "real" and then turn around and eisegete all the texts in Romans 2 where the saints are persevering and are going to heaven as "fake".

A more transparently flawed solution for Romans 2 could hardly be imagined.

In Romans 1 Paul presents the saved vs 1-17, and the wicked vs 18-32 among "The Jew first and also the Greek".

Then in Romans 2 Paul carries that same model into even more detail - showing repeatedly the succeeding cases of the saints and also the failing cases of the wicked. At no point in either Romans 1 or Romans 2 is Paul arguing that both the saints and the wicked are doomed.

in Christ,

Bob
That simply makes no sense at all - for Paul to paint a picture of people being given eternal life based on what they do, while all the while Paul believes that this is an unattainable standard.

The Romans 3 argument does not work here to make Romans 2:6-13 "hypothetical". Why not? Precisely because the fact that all are born hopeless sinners does not mean they are stuck in that state.

But I do understand your objection that the verses (above), if taken as describing a real judgement that will actually take place, seem to clash with other Pauline statements about how one cannot be justified by the Law of Moses.

To address this will take some time. I hope to return to this.[/QUOTE]

 

[BobRyan]

According to Jesus, confessing Him before men is essential to final salvation.

Matthew 10
[32] Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.
[33] But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

This proves that salvation is not by faith ALONE.

True - but how does the saint get to the point where He is confessing Christ before men? Is it not by first turning from being lost - to being saved (laying again the foundation of the Gospel)? And in that case is it not also by the Holy Spirit that the Saint continues to walk in faith - "by the Spirit putting to death the deeds of the flesh"?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Chowmah]

The thief on the cross was saved without works.

Hello Jedi Knight. Could you answer me a question?

Luke 23:40-43
But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? [41] And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. [42] And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. [43] And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

In Luke Jesus tells the thief, today thou shalt be with me in paradise. Is there a misplaced comma? Should the comma be placed after today? A whole new meaning to the scipture.

John 20:13-17
And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them, Because they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him. [14] And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus. [15] Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away. [16] Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master. [17] Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Ya see, Jesus has not yet ascended to the father and this was 3 days and 3 nights after he said those words "today, shalt thou be with me in paradise

 

[Andre]

A standard of salvation of works is unattainable. It cannot be done. That is why Christ came into the world. No man can keep the law. No one is perfect. Christ lived a perfect life. The perfect one could die for the imperfect one.

This assertion fundamentally begs the question precisely because it does not explain why Paul would give a lengthy treatment of a coming judgement, where eternal life is granted based on "persistence in doing good" and not intend his readers to take it seriously.

Romans 2 is notoriously complex, but one path I think we cannot take is to suggest that Paul is describing what it is only a hypothetical possibility when he writes of people getting eternal life based on their deeds. He never gives even an inkling of a hint that he is speaking hypothetically.

One cannot be justified by the Law of Moses. It is impossible.

I have never suggested otherwise - I have been quite clear about this: one cannot be justified by the Law of Moses.

Now, and as I have posted to Dr. Walter, I can fully understand why you might think that I am "forced" into that position because I indeed believe that the following is not hypothetical:

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;
13for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.

I do not have the time to explain my take on these verses. But I will say this: I believe that the "Law" in verse 13 is not the Law of Moses. If it were, I would indeed be in trouble in imagining that we are to take all or Romans 2 as a literal description of something that will actually happen. And I do believe it is literal.

I will provide the relevant argument as soon as I can (probably not in the next few days).

 

[Andre]

There are a lot of questions still on the table. But of one thing we can be quite sure. It would take the most confused and incompetent of writers to lecture the self-righteous sinner at the beginning of chapter 2 (verses 1 through 4) and then warn that sinner of the consequences of that self-righteousness (verses 5-6) in terms of a coming judgement where one gets condemnation for doing evil and eternal life for doing good, and yet not mean the self-righteous sinner to take it as a real event that will be actually take place and be true in all stated details, including the part about eternal life being awarded to those who persist in doing good.

Of course, if Paul really wanted to describe an unattainable works-baseds standard for getting eternal life, he could have chosen to do that - he could have said something like: the "good works" standard for getting eternal life is such and such, but no one can attain it.

But Paul does not say this - people read that in, falsely thinking that the Romans 1 and Romans 3 "lost sinner incapable of doing good" cannot be rescued from that state. Yet Romans 8 shows that he can indeed be rescued. What Paul actually does say forces us to take him as describing a real event which will unfold exactly as specified, with some getting condemnation for doing evil, and others getting life for doing good.

The irony of this debate is this: Some seem to argue that since 2:1-5 (and chapter 1 as well) are describing a lost sinner, Paul cannot possibly mean what he says in 2:7 about people getting eternal life based on good deeds, since such a sinner will surely not get eternal life based on his deeds. However, the fact that Paul is indeed scolding the self-righteous sinner is precisely an argument in favour of believing that Paul means exactly what he says.

Why is this? Well, it is clear that Paul is warning the self-righteous sinner of the consequences of his actions in terms of a coming judgement. Is this judgement not really going to happen? Of course it is going to happen, it makes no sense to threaten the self-righteousness sinner with a "standard" that will not actually be applied.

And more to the point, since Paul must mean what he says about the evil getting condemnation, there is absolutely no reason to not take him seriously about the flip side - that there will be those who get life. I cannot emphasize this enough - no competent writer would warn a self-righteous sinner of a coming judgement, and only mean "half" of what he says will happen at that judgement - namely that the evil will condemnation.

 

[adisciplinedlearner]

A casual reading of the New Testament does not lead one to believe in salvation by faith ALONE. This false doctrine must be imposed upon the New Testament before one can subscribe to it. Jesus certainly did not teach salvation by faith ALONE.

 

[steaver]

A casual reading of the New Testament does not lead one to believe in salvation by faith ALONE. This false doctrine must be imposed upon the New Testament before one can subscribe to it. Jesus certainly did not teach salvation by faith ALONE.

A disciplined learner you are not in the case of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Any other gospel than the one Paul preached, faith alone, is a perversion of the gospel. Paul had strong words for those who add the law of Moses to the grace of God..."let them be accursed".

 

[Jedi Knight]

Hello Jedi Knight. Could you answer me a question?


Ya see, Jesus has not yet ascended to the father and this was 3 days and 3 nights after he said those words "today, shalt thou be with me in paradise

Hello Chowmah! Jesus did indeed say to the thief, "Today you will be with me in Paradise". Remember Jesus last words on the cross? Luke 23:46 "Jesus called out with a loud voice, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." When he had said this, he breathed his last." My spirit. Not my mind or my body. But my spirit! Jesus was in control of His death too if you recall John 10:18 "No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father." I believe Jesus spirit was in paradise the same day with the thief. His bodily resurrection was later. Steven echoed this when he was being killed, Acts 7:59 "While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." not his body. Now back to "Today", Jesus had not yet ascended "in the glorified body" yet, but "His spirit" was in paradise that same day. Hope this helps. :wavey:

 

[DHK]

This assertion fundamentally begs the question precisely because it does not explain why Paul would give a lengthy treatment of a coming judgement, where eternal life is granted based on "persistence in doing good" and not intend his readers to take it seriously.

Where does Paul say that eternal life is granted on the basis of persisting in good works? He doesn't. In order to come to that conclusion you must take Scripture and wrench it out of its context--do some Scripture twisting. Paul never says any such thing.

Romans 2 is notoriously complex, but one path I think we cannot take is to suggest that Paul is describing what it is only a hypothetical possibility when he writes of people getting eternal life based on their deeds. He never gives even an inkling of a hint that he is speaking hypothetically.

But he doesn't write about anyone getting eternal life based on deeds. You have yet to prove that.

I have never suggested otherwise - I have been quite clear about this: one cannot be justified by the Law of Moses.

You just suggested it in your above quotes. Paul was referring to the Law of Moses very clearly. The entire context of Romans chapter two is Paul addressing the Jews, particularly those who are trying to be saved by following Moses' Law. They couldn't do it. It is very evident in this chapter that Paul is addressing Israel. If so, then it becomes obvious that he is speaking of the Law of Moses, especially the Ten Commandments.

Now, and as I have posted to Dr. Walter, I can fully understand why you might think that I am "forced" into that position because I indeed believe that the following is not hypothetical:

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;
13for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.

Of course this is a hypothetical. Can you point to me one person that through the law has been justified. Can you name me just one. I would like to know one person who has been justified through the Law so that you can demonstrate to me that this is not a hypothetical. That would prove to me that this is not a hypothetical. Otherwise, I will give you Scripture to show you that it is.

Romans 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Romans 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

Galatians 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
--Understand this last verse very carefully.
Here Paul teaches that if one were to be justified by the law he would have to "continue in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them." How many laws are there in the "book"? I think someone said there are 613 OT laws. Is that correct? The teaching is that to be justified by the law one would have to keep, from birth to death every law, not even breaking one law in his life--not once. He would not be able to sin even one time. If he did he would be cursed under the law.
"Cursed is every one that continues not in ALL things which are written in the book of the law to do them."
The truth is: We haven't broken the law just one time--but many times every day. We all are cursed. We cannot keep the law. We cannot keep the law of Moses. We cannot keep God's moral law--The Ten Commandments, mentioned in Romans 2:14,15, a law written on the hearts of every man. No man can. All men, therefore, fall under the curse of God, and are condemned.

I do not have the time to explain my take on these verses. But I will say this: I believe that the "Law" in verse 13 is not the Law of Moses. If it were, I would indeed be in trouble in imagining that we are to take all or Romans 2 as a literal description of something that will actually happen. And I do believe it is literal.

It doesn't really matter. You can't keep it anyway, can you?
And since you can't you are cursed and there is no way that you can gain eternal life through works.

 

[Dr. Walter]

In the book of Romans "the Law" refers exclusively to the standard of righteousness that manifests the character of God. - The righteousness of God

1. The law written on conscience manifests this standard - Rom. 2:14-15

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


2. This is the character/standard made manifest in the "law and the prophets" a. The Mosaic moral, ceremonial, civil laws
b. The prophets interpretations and applications
c. Romans 3:21

Rom. 3:21 But now the righteousness of God....being witnessed by the law and the prophets;


3. This is the character/standard made manifest in the Person and life of Christ. - Rom. 1:17; 3:21-22; 10:4

Rom. 1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.


Rom. 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ

Rom. 10:3 For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.
4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.


4. This is the characer/standard that is pursued and obtained ONLY one of two ways: - Rom. 3:27

a. "the law of works" - by personal performance
b. "the law of faith" by substitutionary performance through imputation

Rom. 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.


5. This is the character/standard that is violated "the law of sin" -Rom. 7:25

Rom. 7;22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:....25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.


6. This is the character/standard written upon the new heart - Rom. 8:4

Rom. 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

2 Cor. 3:3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.


7. This is what the Gentile obtained through faith but what the Jew failed to obtain through works. - Romans 9:30-33

Rom. 9:30 ¶ What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;


8. This is the Law that serves as the standard of righteousness in judgement for all who come NOT BY FAITH but by their own works: - Rom. 2:6-10


9. No flesh shall be justified under this law - Rom. 3:20-21.

There are a lot of questions still on the table. But of one thing we can be quite sure. It would take the most confused and incompetent of writers to lecture the self-righteous sinner at the beginning of chapter 2 (verses 1 through 4) and then warn that sinner of the consequences of that self-righteousness (verses 5-6) in terms of a coming judgement where one gets condemnation for doing evil and eternal life for doing good, and yet not mean the self-righteous sinner to take it as a real event that will be actually take place and be true in all stated details, including the part about eternal life being awarded to those who persist in doing good.

Of course, if Paul really wanted to describe an unattainable works-baseds standard for getting eternal life, he could have chosen to do that - he could have said something like: the "good works" standard for getting eternal life is such and such, but no one can attain it.

But Paul does not say this - people read that in, falsely thinking that the Romans 1 and Romans 3 "lost sinner incapable of doing good" cannot be rescued from that state. Yet Romans 8 shows that he can indeed be rescued. What Paul actually does say forces us to take him as describing a real event which will unfold exactly as specified, with some getting condemnation for doing evil, and others getting life for doing good.

The irony of this debate is this: Some seem to argue that since 2:1-5 (and chapter 1 as well) are describing a lost sinner, Paul cannot possibly mean what he says in 2:7 about people getting eternal life based on good deeds, since such a sinner will surely not get eternal life based on his deeds. However, the fact that Paul is indeed scolding the self-righteous sinner is precisely an argument in favour of believing that Paul means exactly what he says.

Why is this? Well, it is clear that Paul is warning the self-righteous sinner of the consequences of his actions in terms of a coming judgement. Is this judgement not really going to happen? Of course it is going to happen, it makes no sense to threaten the self-righteousness sinner with a "standard" that will not actually be applied.

And more to the point, since Paul must mean what he says about the evil getting condemnation, there is absolutely no reason to not take him seriously about the flip side - that there will be those who get life. I cannot emphasize this enough - no competent writer would warn a self-righteous sinner of a coming judgement, and only mean "half" of what he says will happen at that judgement - namely that the evil will condemnation.

 

[Andre]

A disciplined learner you are not in the case of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Any other gospel than the one Paul preached, faith alone, is a perversion of the gospel. Paul had strong words for those who add the law of Moses to the grace of God..."let them be accursed".

Argumentative and question-begginng.

The arguments against the standard reformed teaching on the nature of justification need to be actually engaged, not dismissed with the usual flourish of content-less rhetoric.

 

[Andre]

Where does Paul say that eternal life is granted on the basis of persisting in good works? He doesn't.

6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life

 

[Andre]

In the book of Romans "the Law" refers exclusively to the standard of righteousness that manifests the character of God. - The righteousness of God

1. The law written on conscience manifests this standard - Rom. 2:14-15

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

If by this you mean that Romans 2:14-15 is describing a "law" which all men - believers and unbelievers - can understand, I suggest a different interpretation.

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

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

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

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

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

…but instead this:

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

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

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

We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles[/COLOR]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Andre]

In the book of Romans "the Law" refers exclusively to the standard of righteousness that manifests the character of God. - The righteousness of God

1. The law written on conscience manifests this standard - Rom. 2:14-15

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

No. Most of Paul's uses of the term "law" in Romans, and elsewhere for that matter, denote the Law of Moses, as specifically applicable only to Jews.

Here is Romans 3:27-28 in the NASB:

27Where then is boasting? It is excluded By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. 28For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.

What is this "Law" at the end of v. 28?

Paul is clearly talking about the Law of Moses here. And so the “boast” here (verse 27) is not the boast of the person who thinks he can climb to heaven by a ladder of good works, it is instead the boast of the Jew, who thinks that following the Law of Moses, which only Jews are under, will justify him.

That this is the case is borne out by verse 29, a verse which makes no sense if obedience to a general law" is in view in verse 28, but makes perfect sense if the Law of Moses is what Paul is referring to at the end of verse 28:

29Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too,

Paul is amplifying the implications of verse 27 and 28 and is clearly focusing on how the Jew and Gentile are both members of God’s family. At the end of verse 28, he has written that "Law" does not justify. In verse 29, it becomes clear that this is the Law of Moses since, obviously, it is by doing the works of the Law of Moses that the Jew could boast "God is God of the Jews only". What marks out the nation Israel from the Gentile? Possession and doing of the Law of Moses, of course.