so, who is the majority here

[npetreley]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
God's word gives you your answer as stated above.

"It is NOT the hearers of the law that are JUST before God but the DOERS of the Law Will Be Justified" Romans 2:13.

As I pointed out in the other thread, Romans later says, "Romans 3:20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin." So obviously it is impossible for Romans 2:13 to mean that those who do the law will be justified, or Paul is contradicting himself.

So why did Paul say it? If you read the whole book of Romans and not just the sound bites that support your view, you'll see 2:13 is part of a long argument. This part establishes what the law is all about, and its strict requirements, so we'll get a full understanding of what it was we were up against if faith had not rescued us.

Originally posted by BobRyan:
ANd that is Romans 2:16 "According to my Gospel" as Paul states when SHOWING the successful case of Romans 2:13-16 (an extreme case where a gentile has no scripture at all to go on - and YET shows the New Covenant promise of the "law written on the heart".)

So you ignore Romans 3:20 in order to insert into the Gospel the ability to obey the law? All you have to do is toss in circumcision, and Paul talked about your views in Galatians!

The book of Romans is about the whole Gospel, a part of which is where one finds out the righteous requirements of the law. Paul then explains how important it is that one becomes aware of one's inability to fulfill them. That's why Paul goes on to explain that through the law we become conscious of sin.

In other words, Romans 2:13, which establishes the necessity of following the law in order to be justified is certainly part of the Gospel, but not in the sense you are implying -- that part of the Gospel includes our obeying the law. It is a prelude to finding out that we cannot possibly follow the law. Another part of the Gospel is finding out the consequences of disobedience. Another part is finding out how indebted we are to God. And another part of the Gospel is finding out that we don't have to worry, because Christ paid it all. And so on. As I said, Romans is a great book, but you must read the whole thing.

Originally posted by BobRyan:
As Christ said "Not EVERYONE who SAYS Lord Lord will ENTER the kindgdom of heaven but he who DOES the will of My Father" Matt 7.

Right. There's fake faith, and then there's real faith. If you have truly be regenerated, then obedience follows. Jesus tells you He knows the difference. He who does the will of My Father is he who is truly regenerated, because obedience followed. Their works are evidence of their salvation, not the condition for it. The rest can chant "Lord, Lord" all they want, but Jesus knows their hearts are still corrupt and their faith is fake.

[ December 24, 2002, 12:39 PM: Message edited by: npetreley ]

 

[npetreley]

Bob,

So I ask again, do we in any way merit salvation? You won't come out and say it, but it sure seems as if your answer is "yes", in which case you are in direct contradiction with scripture.

 

[BobRyan]

"It is NOT the hearers of the law that are JUST before God but the DOERS of the Law Will Be Justified" Romans 2:13.

npetreley
As I pointed out in the other thread, Romans later says, "Romans 3:20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin."

And as I already pointed out - Romans 3 is dealing with works apart from faith. And Romans 2 is dealing with Works IN THE CONTEXT of repentance, grace and the Gospel (According to My Gospel God will judge the secrets of men Rom 2:16).

Romans 3 eventually comes around to the SAME point as was given in Romans 2 - "By Faith we Establish the Law" Roms 3:31.

npeterely
So obviously it is impossible for Romans 2:13 to mean that those who do the law will be justified, or Paul is contradicting himself.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

As shown above - the Romans 2 statement is IN context of the Gospel and shows both the Saved and the Lost final states as well as the basis on which they end up as they do.

You practice of taking exactly what the text says and adding "it can not possibly mean that because of the way I interpret Romans 3:20" is not valid.

Romans 3 is dealing wiht the failure of works "apart from faith" - instead of being a flat contradition of the Gospel themes presented in Romans 2.

npeterely
So why did Paul say it? If you read the whole book of Romans and not just the sound bites that support your view, you'll see 2:13 is part of a long argument.

Would you care to read - or tolerate a detailed review of the gospel themes IN Romans 2 posted here? If so, I would be pleased to post one.

Originally posted by BobRyan:
ANd that is Romans 2:16 "According to my Gospel" as Paul states when SHOWING the successful case of Romans 2:13-16 (an extreme case where a gentile has no scripture at all to go on - and YET shows the New Covenant promise of the "law written on the heart".)

npetreley

So you ignore Romans 3:20 in order to insert into the Gospel the ability to obey the law?

Nope. Paul decided to place Romans 2 ahead of chapter 3 and decided to include the Gospel themes of repentance, the grace of God (vs 4) and the future judgment through Christ (vs 16) in the chapter that shows the fate of both the saved and the lost and what the difference is between them.

And that is in perfect harmony with his focus in chapter 3 on "Works" that are apart from faith as the perfect contrast to "doers of the law" (obedience) within the context of repentance and the law "written on the heart" as the New Covenant promises in Romans 2.

-----------------------------------

npeterely

The book of Romans is about the whole Gospel, a part of which is where one finds out the righteous requirements of the law. Paul then explains how important it is that one becomes aware of one's inability to fulfill them. That's why Paul goes on to explain that through the law we become conscious of sin.

This is back to that part where we agree. However that is Romans 3 not 2. Romans 2 is showing the law 'Written on the heart" as the New Covenant promises, starting with repentance and grace in vs 4 - showing perserverance of the saints in 5-14 and showing obedience instead of rebellion in vs 13-16 and its Gospel result in the future judgment of Christ vs 16.

-------------------------------

npeterely
In other words, Romans 2:13, which establishes the necessity of following the law in order to be justified is certainly part of the Gospel, but not in the sense you are implying -- that part of the Gospel includes our obeying the law. It is a prelude to finding out that we cannot possibly follow the law. Another part of the Gospel is finding out the consequences of disobedience. Another part is finding out how indebted we are to God. And another part of the Gospel is finding out that we don't have to worry, because Christ paid it all. And so on.

All that is found in Romans 3 as you say - but in Romans 2 it is dealing with the contrast of the changed life of repentance and perserverance and "the law written on the heart" vs the unchanged life of one who remains in sin.

Originally posted by BobRyan:
As Christ said "Not EVERYONE who SAYS Lord Lord will ENTER the kindgdom of heaven but he who DOES the will of My Father" Matt 7.

npetreley
Right. There's fake faith, and then there's real faith. If you have truly be regenerated, then obedience follows. Jesus tells you He knows the difference. He who does the will of My Father is he who is truly regenerated, because obedience followed. Their works are evidence of their salvation, not the condition for it. The rest can chant "Lord, Lord" all they want, but Jesus knows their hearts are still corrupt and their faith is fake.

Read the details of Romans 2 and Matt 7 carefully - you will see they are making that exact same point. Paul identifies BOTH the ones with "fake faith" and the ones with "real faith" in Romans 2. The entire chapter is a CONTRAST between the two groups JUST as you find in Matt 7.

The chapter uses "contrast language" from start to finish.

It is impossible to miss.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Yelsew]

It is beyond my comprehension why any one of you would want to bear any label other than CHRISTIAN!

There is but one head of the church, Jesus the Christ! He can be plainly viewed and he is just as powerful viewed from any of the pews.

So why not knock off this childish name calling and labeling, it does not become the church whose head is the Christ.

As for Calvin, Armenius, Wesley, Luther, Apollos, Paul, Matthew, Mark, John, Luke, Peter, etc., they were all mere mortals just like you and I. Though Paul was recruited in a rather dramatic fashion, he was and remained a mere mortal, facing the one death that all men must experience.

Drop the labels, read and learn from the scriptures for yourself without the "slant" of these others. Their interpretation is no better than your own if you have the Holy Spirit to guide you. If you don't, it is nearly impossible to get the correct interpretation anyway.

Merry Christmas to you all.

[ December 25, 2002, 12:21 PM: Message edited by: Yelsew ]

 

[just-want-peace]

So why not knock off this childish name calling and labeling, it does not become the church whose head is the Christ.

Hallelujah! A word of sanity in a maelstrom of pettyness!!!

 

[npetreley]

Well, Bob, you wore me out. I give up. Tell you what. You trust in Christ, free will, and the law, and I'll trust in Christ, and we'll leave it at that.