Not since Paul introduced a "Righteousness apart from the law." See, this is the problem Calvinists continue to make. Calvinists use passages talking about the law of righteousness (i.e. no one can be righteous by the law) and apply it to Righteousness by faith (i.e. no one can have faith because that would make them righteousness according to the law). It doesn't follow. Proving that men are born unable to become righteous by law is NOT proof that men are born unable to become righteous by faith.
Everything else you say in your post is based on this faulty premise. Can you show me one verse which equates the 'law of righteousness' with 'righteousness by faith?'
Before you answer, read again Romans 3:20-21:
20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.
21 But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify.
You seem to want to equate the inability to be declared righteous by observing the law that Paul speaks of in verse 20 with the view of righteousness by faith which is apart from the law in verse 21ff. How can that be? Where does Paul equate the two?
What you are arguing against here is the inability of man in both keeping the Law and his inability to believe, Biblical doctrines espoused by Calvinists, and are arguing for man’s ability against this. This is nothing new, as most non-cals argue for this state of man, and argue for his glory and abilities.
Some other comments. First, Paul didn't introduce this "righteousness apart from the Law." It was introduced by God Himself long before Romans had been written. Righteousness has always been apart from the Law and has always been by grace. Note Genesis 12-15. Re-reading Romans 3:20-12 does not prove your point, as to do this would be to proof-text. We must look beyond your chosen text to the rest of the counsel of God.
1) Man cannot keep the Law unto righteousness, this is truth. So far I think you are OK here. I could be incorrect. (Some non-cals don’t believe this, but believe they are able, thus non-cal theology lends itself logically to these errors).
2) The Law is given as proof that man is incapable. This is stated within Scripture. Non-cals argue God never gives us commands we cannot keep. This is fallacious and erroneous, for, the Law was given as to make conscious of inability. Yet, non-cals have and hold an unbiblical and inflated view of man, thus they do argue this. As for you? I think you are staying OK here as well, believing man cannot keep the Law, but then you begin to drift.
3) These things (our inability) teach us that we are utterly dependent upon God. Or at least they should. You begin to drift here even further, and this is where you get off base and away from scripture, from man being incapable and totally dependent upon God (specifically at this point incapable of keeping the Law) to man being capable in his own "freewill" to make a choice out of his situation to eternal life. One can easily see the problem this brings in representing God and man, and how such a teaching elevates mankind to an unbiblical state.
Now, must we only reference Paul here? I get this from your
"Where does Paul equate the two?" statement. Let's not make rules and impose them on others and stack the deck in our favor. This is not following good debate, but is actually a bit deceitful to be honest. This would be like asking another to show where
"In the beginning God created the heavens and earth" is word for word from Psalm 23, and since they can't, making pretense to have "won."
4) Abram teaches us this, that is, that in him all nations would be blessed, and this would be by pattern and by example, that is,
that God chose Abram, so also has He chosen each of those who are his seed by faith. Read Genesis 12-15. We must remember that it was not Abram that had chosen God, but quite the contrary. This must take place, and it does today for his seed, 1 Thess. 1:4; 2 Thess. 2:13-14; 2 Peter 2:10 &c.
5) Abraham did not have this faith within himself inherently, faith
came by his communication with God, that is, he received this faith by hearing, and hearing by the word of God, just as his seed does today. By time we get from Genesis 12, to Genesis 15 we see that Abram now is enabled to believe and trust in God. Keep in mind also, that he was chosen by God, by God's very Word, and only in this was he enabled to trust and follow; God made the first move, Abrams faith came from Gods Word alone. Romans 10:17 supports this.
6) So we ask this, by way of application; What do you have that you did not receive? It is Gods purpose and election that stands, not mans choice. Paul understood this, Romans 9; 2 Timothy 2:8-10.
The basic argument of yours is this, that we are capable, in our own freewill to "redeem ourselves" by choosing, or able within himself to become righteous by faith. But man is not able to do this, this comes from God, not from man.
You're also arguing this; Yes, man is incapable of keeping the Law, (to this I think you agree, although other non-cals who take your theology further rightly conclude, though in error, that they can) but then, as is due in your theology, you turn around and say that by freewill choice, man can believe himself into righteousness.
Let's take this absurdity of belief and freewill a bit further, OK? Since man is fully capable of believing himself into righteousness by freewill choice, then man should also be capable of free willing himself into keeping the Law to righteousness. This is rightly turning the table back on your theology, such is where the error is in the first place.
But none of this can happen, man is incapable in both arenas, both in keeping the Law, and in believing by faith, as we keep in mind the fact that faith does not save in the first place, it is grace. Romans 10:17 "Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God." Thus, faith comes from a Source, and that Source is God Himself via His Word. It's then not inherent in man, it comes from God. Abram shows us this same thing, as a type of all genuine believers, that is, that God grants to them this faith.
But this theology of yours fails to recognize that even faith itself comes from God, due to the fact you are claiming man is able. This is not true, it must be God that enables, as is the point of Scripture. In all of your arguments in this thread at hand this is the case, that it is man that is “able” even though you've alluded to believing somewhere along the line that faith does come from God (I believe, I could be wrong). This is you attempting to play both sides of the fence here; i.e. “man is able/ man isn’t able unless God.” Abram shows us this same thing, as a type of all genuine believers, that is, that God grants to them this faith.
So to conclude, if Calvinists do indeed equate man’s inability in both, again, inability to keep the Law, and incapability of belief unto righteousness, they are correct to do so. Scripture supports this. This fact is "equated" throughout Scripture. It doesn't have to come word for word from Paul in a strict passage that you use alone.
Furthermore the physical healing examples of Christ, healing the blind, the lame, raising the dead all show and are to show forth that man is totally incapable having a Spiritual application, and that, unless He speaks the Word to them, which enables, they could not be healed. Now, some would argue that they had faith inherent in them, but this is not true Scripturally, faith comes
from hearing. To address your fondness of and for man and his ability, freewill, power, capabilities, freedom &c Jesus speaks to this, that we are not free, but are in bondage, and that the Son only sets us free. See John 8.
The bottom line is God is Sovereign, man is unable to keep the Law and or believe unto righteousness apart from God. Man in said state is his Scriptural position, so, for Calvinist's to use this both concerning the Law and of faith, that we are unable in both is to use solid doctrine. In conclusion man is born incapable of being able to be made righteous by faith unless God does that work in them through His Word, therefore, you are incorrect in believing otherwise.
- Peace
