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

[Dr. Walter]

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.

You missed my point in the previous post! One must already be "in Christ" BEFORE they can produce Good works according to Ephesians 2:10. Hence, good works do not place one in Christ and outside of Christ there is no salvation, justification or redemption. Hence, "good works" do not obtain such but are the product, or consequence of such!

You have not answered the problems I have placed before you, you have only reworded the same position and repeated it!

 

[Dr. Walter]

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

So you think your own intepretation of this passage is better than Paul's interpretation of this passage in Romans 10:4-8???? His interpretation condemns your take on it. He interprets these words to be in contrast to the law of faith rather than a syncretism as your interpretation demands. Note verse 10 in Deuternonmy identifies precisely what Law and commandments Moses is talking about!

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.

Your intepretation of Romans 2:12-15 destroys the very argument Paul is making! YOur interpretation destroys and denies any just standard for judging the works of Gentiles since they are not under the law of Moses! You force your "new heart" interpretation into Romans 2:14 and thereby destroy the law written on conscience as the just basis for God judging Gentiles by!

 

[Andre]

You missed my point in the previous post! One must already be "in Christ" BEFORE they can produce Good works according to Ephesians 2:10. Hence, good works do not place one in Christ and outside of Christ there is no salvation, justification or redemption. Hence, "good works" do not obtain such but are the product, or consequence of such!

Begs the question - you are merely re-formulating an assertion of the belief that good works are not necsessary for salvation.

In this respect, it must be stated that I can fully agree with Ephesians 2:10 without having to believe, in consequent, that works are not essential for salvation.

 

[Andre]

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!

You continue to apply the same invalid general principle - that "previous and following contexts" necessitate the content of material sandwiched in the middle. There is nothing wrong with arguing as follows, which is what I think Paul is doing:

1. In the first part of Romans 2, leveling a critique at the hypocrite;

2. Then connecting that critique to a coming judgement at which some will get life based on deeds and others, presumably including this hypocrite, will be lost;

3. Focusing back on the hypoctite come more (later in Romans 2)

4. In chapter 3, asserting that the Law of Moses cannot save by itself.

You seem to think that just because some material appears between two treatments of the same thing - in this case the treatment of the hypocrite - that material must of necessity be solely focused on the hypocrite still. This is simply not true. I could do the following:

1. Lecture my child on his misbehaviour;

2. Point out the true fact that some children will indeed be rewarded for their good behaviour;

3. Then return to lecturing my child about his bad behaviour.

This is entirely legitimate - the fact that Paul has two chunks of criticism of the hypocrite in Romans 2 does not mean that, in between, he cannot greatly widen his scope of consideration.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Begs the question - you are merely re-formulating an assertion of the belief that good works are not necsessary for salvation.

In this respect, it must be stated that I can fully agree with Ephesians 2:10 without having to believe, in consequent, that works are not essential for salvation.

It most certainly does not beg the question! The grammar in Ephesians 2:10 demands that a person must be "in Christ" previous to "good works" being produced. The argument which I responded to was that good works created one in Christ. That is false! Your position is equally false as your position demands that ultimately it is "good works" that obtains a justifying "in Christ" salvation. This texts denies that "good works" obtains "in Christ" salvation and that invalidates your whole position.

 

[Andre]

It most certainly does not beg the question! The grammar in Ephesians 2:10 demands that a person must be "in Christ" previous to "good works" being produced.

Even if this is true, this does not rule out the possibility that good works are necessary for final salvation. Both can, and I believe are, true.

It The argument which I responded to was that good works created one in Christ. That is false!

I agree and I never said anything like this at all.

This texts denies that "good works" obtains "in Christ" salvation and that invalidates your whole position.

It clearly does no such thing - the Ephesians text is entirely silent on the matter of the relation of good works to final salvation.

 

[Dr. Walter]

You continue to apply the same invalid general principle - that "previous and following contexts" necessitate the content of material sandwiched in the middle. There is nothing wrong with arguing as follows, which is what I think Paul is doing

You misunderstand my argument! I am arguing that there is NO BIBLICAL CONTEXT anywhere in Romans that associates justification for anyone in connection with the Law and Romans 2:6-10 is in direct connection with "the law" (vv. 11-14). You cannot deny that Romans 2:12-13 is the standard being provided for judging the "works" of Romans 2:6-10.


In addition your interpretation fails to define what is the just standard to judge the works of Gentiles since it would be unjust to judge them by "the law" of Moses (Rom. 2:12-14)! Your interpretation of Romans 2:15 denies any definition or identification of any just standard to judge the works of Gentiles.

Your interpretation completely ignores how Paul would deal with a TYPE of person who believes that according to their own merits they will escape the judgement of God (v. 3)!

Your intepretation is not based upon demonstrating that Paul's declaration that the judgement of God is righteous (v. 5).

My intepretation fits better.

1. The TYPE - self-righteous persons that believe their own works will pass God's Judgement - vv. 1-3; 17-24

2. The DECLARATION - They and their works will not pass the judgement of God because His judgement is righteous - vv. 5-6

3. The CRITERIA and CONSEQUENCES of just judgement set forth - vv. 7-9

4. The DENIAL that God will respect persons in judgement but will judge by law not by personal profession or personal status - vv. 10-12

5. The DECLARATION that Gentiles will be judged justly according to the law that they are under rather than the law the Jews are under - vv. 13-15

6. The STANDARD for all personal behavior to judge sinners by - The personal righteousness of Christ revealed in the gospel (v. 16; 1:17; 3:21-22; 24-26).

7. All who boast in law have failed and will fail - vv. 17-24

8. Circumcision does not profit any sinner - those who violate but one point of God's Law and therefore righteousness is not obtained by law keeping - vv. 25-29

 

[Dr. Walter]

It clearly does no such thing - the Ephesians text is entirely silent on the matter of the relation of good works to final salvation.

Nice try! Ephesians denies "good works" are means to obtain "in Christ" salvation and you have no salvation of any kind OUTSIDE of Christ! Hint: You cannot work your way into Christ - it comes by creation BEFORE good works and thus WITHOUT good works!

 

[ituttut]

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!

Amen!

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!

But only if we if we understand that our entrance is through the work that Jesus did. We should never leave the impression that we boast that our entrance into Him depends on any work that we do (Romans 3:27)

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.

Now that makes sense.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

................. the relation of good works to final salvation.

GE:

Good works are essential _OF_ 'salvation'; in NO way _TO_ 'salvation' or _FOR_ 'salvation'.

By the way, there is no salvation than "final salvation" because there is no 'conditional salvation', only salvation conditioned on Christ.

 

[Dr. Walter]

We are getting away from the original subject - the meaning of "law" as given and used in Romans 3:27. That meaning is determined by three internal contextual principles:

1. The term "law" is equally applied to both "works" and "faith" and therefore whatever the meaning it must equally fit both.

2. The term "law" is the basis for contrast between "works" and "faith" and therefore although it must be equally applied to both, the application provides the basis for contrast.

3. The term "law" must be defined in keeping with the subject of the text - boasting!

The only definition of "law" that meets all three of these textual requirements is its basic general meaning: that which defines the nature of something; the rule/principle by which something is defined. For example, the law of gravity or the law of physics


Specifically, how does "works" defined by its own nature promotes boasting? How does "faith" defined by its nature exclude boasting?

This is what Paul means by "law" in this passage! This definition fits equally both "works" and "faith" but yet the "law" that defines "works" contrasts the "law" that defines faith in regard to boasting as the law that defines "works" promotes boasting but the "law" that defines "faith" excludes boasting!

The preceding context proves this is the meaning of "law" here in regard to "works" and "faith" concerning boasting. The "law" that defines "faith" in Romans 3:24-26 simply is the instrumental means (Gr. dia) through which the works of Jesus Christ are merely the object (Gr. en) embraced thus excluding all works but Christs for the provision for justification or propitiation (full satisfaction) - thus excluding all boasting by the believing one for anything that propiates/satsifies the righteous demands of God.

The law that defines "works" necessarily includes boasting. Works demand that "the reward" is a matter of "debt" owed to the worker and therefore excludes grace as the basis for receiving the "reward" (Gr. misthos - hire, wages):

Rom. 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God......4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.

Here, the Greek term "misthos" is in the context of "hire" for "wages" that works place the employer in "debt" to the worker. This definition of the "law" of works or how works is defined by its nature ("law") is in direct relationship to boasting (Rom. 4;2 "glory").

Works do give grounds for "to glory" (same Greek word translated "boast" in Rom. 3:27).

The idea of "the law of Moses" does not fit the term "law" in Romans 3:27 as "the law of Moses" cannot be equally applied to "works" as to "faith" in Romans 3:27. Therefore, "law" does not refer to the Law of Moses.

However, the "law of works" includes any and all laws that operate by the rule/principle of works. Hence, the Law of Moses as well as the law of conscience, as well as all traditions of men that operate by the principle of works for justification come under the meaning of "works" defined as a "law" in Romans 3:27. Hence, Jesus could say "BROAD" is the way and "WIDE" is the gate that leads to destruction because it fits ALL religions that fit under the singular "WAY" of "works" as defined as a principle for justification.

 

[Dr. Walter]

We are getting away from the original subject - the meaning of "law" as given and used in Romans 3:27. That meaning is determined by three internal contextual principles:

1. The term "law" is equally applied to both "works" and "faith" and therefore whatever the meaning it must equally fit both.

2. The term "law" is the basis for contrast between "works" and "faith" and therefore although it must be equally applied to both, the application provides the basis for contrast.

3. The term "law" must be defined in keeping with the subject of the text - boasting!

The only definition of "law" that meets all three of these textual requirements is its basic general meaning: that which defines the nature of something; the rule/principle by which something is defined. For example, the law of gravity or the law of physics


Specifically, how does "works" defined by its own nature promotes boasting? How does "faith" defined by its nature exclude boasting?

This is what Paul means by "law" in this passage! This definition fits equally both "works" and "faith" but yet the "law" that defines "works" contrasts the "law" that defines faith in regard to boasting as the law that defines "works" promotes boasting but the "law" that defines "faith" excludes boasting!

The preceding context proves this is the meaning of "law" here in regard to "works" and "faith" concerning boasting. The "law" that defines "faith" in Romans 3:24-26 simply is the instrumental means (Gr. dia) through which the works of Jesus Christ are merely the object (Gr. en) embraced thus excluding all works but Christs for the provision for justification or propitiation (full satisfaction) - thus excluding all boasting by the believing one for anything that propiates/satsifies the righteous demands of God.

The law that defines "works" necessarily includes boasting. Works demand that "the reward" is a matter of "debt" owed to the worker and therefore excludes grace as the basis for receiving the "reward" (Gr. misthos - hire, wages):

Rom. 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God......4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.

Here, the Greek term "misthos" is in the context of "hire" for "wages" that works place the employer in "debt" to the worker. This definition of the "law" of works or how works is defined by its nature ("law") is in direct relationship to boasting (Rom. 4;2 "glory").

Works do give grounds for "to glory" (same Greek word translated "boast" in Rom. 3:27).

The idea of "the law of Moses" does not fit the term "law" in Romans 3:27 as "the law of Moses" cannot be equally applied to "works" as to "faith" in Romans 3:27. Therefore, "law" does not refer to the Law of Moses.

However, the "law of works" includes any and all laws that operate by the rule/principle of works. Hence, the Law of Moses as well as the law of conscience, as well as all traditions of men that operate by the principle of works for justification come under the meaning of "works" defined as a "law" in Romans 3:27. Hence, Jesus could say "BROAD" is the way and "WIDE" is the gate that leads to destruction because it fits ALL religions that fit under the singular "WAY" of "works" as defined as a principle for justification.

Romans 3:27 contrasts "works" and "faith" in regard to boasting by the definition of their very nature ("law").

Works by its very nature ("Law") is what YOU DO whereas "faith" by its very nature is inseparable from what it embraces as its "hope" and hope that is seen is not hope. Our Hope is what CHRIST DID for us and that is the foundation of faith and faith is the substance of things NOT SEEN but works are SELF-EVIDENT.

In regard to justification before God faith embraces what God has provided IN THE PERSON AND WORK OF CHRIST to satisfy His righteous demands (Rom. 3:24-26) whereas works are what YOU DO and nothing YOU DO can satisfy His righteous DEMANDS because if what YOU DO could satisfy his righteous demands there would be no need for God to provide Christ TO DO anything for you!

It is not what YOU DO for God that justifies you in his sight but what God DOES FOR YOU that justifies you in his sight! What YOU DO as a justfied person in his Sight justifies you in the sight of men (James 2) and obtains temporal blessings and eternal blessings in heaven.

 

[BobRyan]

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.

That kind of name-calling ad hominem is indicative of an utterly failed argument.

Paul says in Rom 2: 13 "it is NOT the hearers of the Law that are just before God but the DOERS of the Law WILL be justified"

James agrees "You seen then that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone" James 2

Christ agrees in Matt 7 "not everyone who SAYS Lord lord will enter the kingdom of heaven but he who DOES the will of my Father"

All of these examples speak to the action of the saved saint who walks in obedience to God's commandments after having become saved.

Because the born-again saved saint has the new covenant reality of the "Law of God written on the heart".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Dr. Walter]

That kind of name-calling ad hominem is indicative of an utterly failed argument.

Please point out the "name" I called you? Describing the position of a person and calling them a "name" is not one and the same!

Paul says in Rom 2: 13 "it is NOT the hearers of the Law that are just before God but the DOERS of the Law WILL be justified"

Why don't you quote james 2:10 where James really defines what it means to be a doer of the Law??????????? Why totally ignore that defintion and drop down to where James is speaking about justification before men "I will shew YOU.....shew ME"?????? I will tell you why! Because you pick and choose what you like irregardless of what God's word teaches in context.

Christ agrees in Matt 7 "not everyone who SAYS Lord lord will enter the kingdom of heaven but he who DOES the will of my Father"

Ah, but these people made the same identical claim you do! They rejected justification by faith alone without works! The claimed entrance into heaven by "Lord, Lord....have we not done many wonderful works" and "in thy name."

Jesus never denied they did such works in his name! He denied he EVER knew them in God's plan of salvation! God has no one in His purpose of salvation that enters heaven with "faith" PLUS "works" as the basis for entrance!

 

[Dr. Walter]

Let the reader note again, that Bob is incapable of dealing with the evidence that is presented in the first two posts of this thread! He totally ignores the evidence and attempts to divert the subject to something other! He cannot deal with the scriptures presented like a capable exegete.

That kind of name-calling ad hominem is indicative of an utterly failed argument.

Paul says in Rom 2: 13 "it is NOT the hearers of the Law that are just before God but the DOERS of the Law WILL be justified"

James agrees "You seen then that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone" James 2

Christ agrees in Matt 7 "not everyone who SAYS Lord lord will enter the kingdom of heaven but he who DOES the will of my Father"

All of these examples speak to the action of the saved saint who walks in obedience to God's commandments after having become saved.

Because the born-again saved saint has the new covenant reality of the "Law of God written on the heart".

in Christ,

Bob