Can the Bible be understood apart from interpretation?

[Drew]

Good post. I would add that it is God's grace that enables us to persist in doing good.

His burden is light, but it is still a burden that we must carry.

Thanks. We need to politely, but firmly, call those who deny Romans 2 to the carpet. There is simply no sound reason for believing that Paul does not mean what he says there. If Paul had been describing a path to justification that is not attainable, why would Paul not qualify his statements accordingly.

Here is one of several fatal errors in the position of those who reject the Romans 2 teaching - it is one things to assert that Paul is speaking hypothetically in Romans 2 - that he does not believe that any can be saved by persistence in doing good - it is quite another to actually show that this is indeed what Paul is doing.

This cannot be emphasized enough - it is very odd to make a statement that you know to be false. So if this is what Paul is doing in Romans 2, where is the evidence?

I suggest that there is clearly none.

 

[chestertonrules]

Good post. I would add that it is God's grace that enables us to persist in doing good.

His burden is light, but it is still a burden that we must carry.

Thanks. We need to politely, but firmly, call those who deny Romans 2 to the carpet. There is simply no sound reason for believing that Paul does not mean what he says there. If Paul had been describing a path to justification that is not attainable, why would Paul not qualify his statements accordingly.

Here is one of several fatal errors in the position of those who reject the Romans 2 teaching - it is one things to assert that Paul is speaking hypothetically in Romans 2 - that he does not believe that any can be saved by persistence in doing good - it is quite another to actually show that this is indeed what Paul is doing.

This cannot be emphasized enough - it is very odd to make a statement that you know to be false. So if this is what Paul is doing in Romans 2, where is the evidence?

I suggest that there is clearly none.

Romans 2 is not alone, either.

Gal 6
7Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.

 

[Drew]

Romans 2 is not alone, either.

Gal 6
7Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.

I agree. I have absolutely no idea how someone reads this text and still denies that ultimate salvation is a based on the content of our lives. And we also have Romans 8:

For 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 text, too, is ignored by many.

 

[archangel_300]

The material that follows 2:8-10 makes no sense if "good works" are in view in 2:8-10. More specifically, if the justification value of "good works" is being denied, why does Paul use a "therefore" transitional in verse 11 to conclude that the Gentile now has access to the covenant promises (including, of course, final justification) specifically because a dividing line between Jew and Gentile has been dissolved? After all, the dividing line is, of course, not the “good works†line, it is the “works of Torah†line.

Please define "good works" if you say we are indeed saved by "good works".
What is meant by that?

 

[Drew]

The material that follows 2:8-10 makes no sense if "good works" are in view in 2:8-10. More specifically, if the justification value of "good works" is being denied, why does Paul use a "therefore" transitional in verse 11 to conclude that the Gentile now has access to the covenant promises (including, of course, final justification) specifically because a dividing line between Jew and Gentile has been dissolved? After all, the dividing line is, of course, not the “good works†line, it is the “works of Torah†line.

Please define "good works" if you say we are indeed saved by "good works".
What is meant by that?

Thanks for your question. When I say "good works", this is simply my way of saying, in accordance with what Paul says at various places (not least Romans 2:6-7) that eternal life is granted based on some assessment of how we have striven to do good things - to participate in implementing the kingdom of God values that Jesus has espoused.

I will agree that while the Scriptures do indeed affirm ultimate future salvation by "good works", no specific "criteria" are given - no "list" of what you must do.

But that is entirely irrelevant anyway. Even though some here entirely ignore me on this, I accept the other stuff Paul tells us - that the Spirit is responsible for generating the good works. If our faith is true, we have the assurance that, whatever the standard turns out to be, we will indeed meet it.

 

[Mysteryman]

LOL...no, Paul never says good works save us.

Here are words straight from Paul's mouth:

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

This is a clear assertion: What will God give?

Answer: Eternal life. Not rewards over and above eternal life, but eternal life.

What is the stated basis - the criterion - for the awarding of eternal life? What you believe? What you have faith in?

Where, and please be precise, is the issue of faith or belief anywhere in view here in this text?

No. The basis of the granting of eternal life is what Paul says it is - the persistence in doing good.

Why do you reject what Paul is saying? And please do not tell us "because somewhere else he tells us we are saved by grace through faith". A 7th grader can see the problem with such an answer: It does not explain why Paul would write something he knowingly believes to be false in Romans 2?

Hi

The translators left out the small word "in" , which makes a huge difference in understanding what is written here. Romans 2:7 should have been written this way -- "To them who by patent continuance in well doing seek for glory and hounour and immortality in eternal life"

 

[Drew]

Hi

The translators left out the small word "in" , which makes a huge difference in understanding what is written here. Romans 2:7 should have been written this way -- "To them who by patent continuance in well doing seek for glory and hounour and immortality in eternal life"

I have access to the original Greek. I see no evidence of the word "in". Can you please identify the Greek word that you deem to be the word "in".

In any event, do you deny that Paul is saying that eternal life is given to those who persist in doing good?

 

[Mysteryman]

Good post. I would add that it is God's grace that enables us to persist in doing good.

His burden is light, but it is still a burden that we must carry.

Thanks. We need to politely, but firmly, call those who deny Romans 2 to the carpet. There is simply no sound reason for believing that Paul does not mean what he says there. If Paul had been describing a path to justification that is not attainable, why would Paul not qualify his statements accordingly.

Here is one of several fatal errors in the position of those who reject the Romans 2 teaching - it is one things to assert that Paul is speaking hypothetically in Romans 2 - that he does not believe that any can be saved by persistence in doing good - it is quite another to actually show that this is indeed what Paul is doing.

This cannot be emphasized enough - it is very odd to make a statement that you know to be false. So if this is what Paul is doing in Romans 2, where is the evidence?

I suggest that there is clearly none.

Romans 2 is not alone, either.

Gal 6
7Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.

Hi

Again , the word "in" was omitted

 

[Drew]

Again , the word "in" was omitted

Where? My greek version does not appear to have the word "in" anywhere in the verse. What is the specific greek word that you believe has been omitted?

 

[Free]

Again , the word "in" was omitted

How do you know that it was omitted?

 

[archangel_300]

Thanks for your question. When I say "good works", this is simply my way of saying, in accordance with what Paul says at various places (not least Romans 2:6-7) that eternal life is granted based on some assessment of how we have striven to do good things - to participate in implementing the kingdom of God values that Jesus has espoused.

I will agree that while the Scriptures do indeed affirm ultimate future salvation by "good works", no specific "criteria" are given - no "list" of what you must do.

But that is entirely irrelevant anyway. Even though some here entirely ignore me on this, I accept the other stuff Paul tells us - that the Spirit is responsible for generating the good works. If our faith is true, we have the assurance that, whatever the standard turns out to be, we will indeed meet it.

This is the part that perplexes me about your post.
I agree with you that if we claim to have faith we will have works. So in a sense yes works do justify our faith. But they do not justify our salvation, but you seem to suggest that it does?

We are all unworthy servants and no amount of good works will ever make us worthy of salvation.
But if we do have good works this means that the seed of faith has *already* been planted.
If we have attained salvation we will then produce good works which God has called us to do. It is the *evidence* of our salvation but it is not what causes us to become saved.

 

[Drew]

I agree with you that if we claim to have faith we will have works.

Agree. If our faith is real, God promises that the Holy Spirit will generate the works.

But they do not justify our salvation, but you seem to suggest that it does?

In my defence, I am only following Paul - in Romans 2, Paul tells us who will get eternal. It will be those who persisted in doing good.

We are all unworthy servants and no amount of good works will ever make us worthy of salvation.

Where in the Bible is there any such statement? And remember, I entirely agree that the unregenerate man cannot do good. But Paul says many times that the person who has been born again is freed from slavery to sin.

But if we do have good works this means that the seed of faith has *already* been planted.

Agree

If we have attained salvation we will then produce good works which God has called us to do. It is the *evidence* of our salvation but it is not what causes us to become saved.

I agree that if we have faith, we will be saved. But Paul means what he says. At the great Romans 2 judgement, it is our good works that will be the basis for receipt of eternal life. If you want to call that "evidence", then I am all in favour of that. But if the works are not there, well........

 

[Mysteryman]

Hi

The translators left out the small word "in" , which makes a huge difference in understanding what is written here. Romans 2:7 should have been written this way -- "To them who by patent continuance in well doing seek for glory and hounour and immortality in eternal life"

I have access to the original Greek. I see no evidence of the word "in". Can you please identify the Greek word that you deem to be the word "in".

In any event, do you deny that Paul is saying that eternal life is given to those who persist in doing good?

Hi

I find your question very interesting. The reason being, is that you asked if I "deny" what Paul is saying.


I believe what the Word says, not what my translation has altered. Your question to me implies . Which means that you should have been more careful with how you worded your question.

Read Romans 2:6 first --- here it is ---> "Who will render to every man acording to his deeds" ? < Render what ?

If you eliminate verses from your bibles, since they were added by man/translators. You should read verse 6 and 7 together, as they are only one statement, not two !

This is talking about those who, by patient continuance in well doing, seek for glory and immorality (which btw is only given to them who are chosen from before the foundation of the earth to be holy and without blame in love)(saved by grace , not by works) in eternal life. < This is talking about rewards ! Render what ? = Rewards !

The same context is given in Galatians 6:7 and 8 < Reap what ? = Rewards !
Galatians 6:9 - "And let us not be weary in well doing : for in due season we shall reap if we faint not"

 

[Drew]

I believe what the Word says, not what my translation has altered.

Again, you have been thrice asked to defend your claim that the greek contains the word "in". Please do so.

This is talking about those who, by patient continuance in well doing, seek for glory and immorality (which btw is only given to them who are chosen from before the foundation of the earth to be holy and without blame in love)(saved by grace , not by works) in eternal life. < This is talking about rewards ! Render what ? = Rewards !

No. All the translations are consistent - it is eternal life that is rendered, not rewards other than eternal life. You are asking to believe that all the following translations are wrong and that you are right. Yet you will not defend your claim about this mysterious missing "in". Here are several translations. They are all clear - it is eternal life that is given based on persistence in doing good:

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

who WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS:
7to those who by (L)perseverance in doing good seek for (M)glory and honor and (N)immortality, eternal life;

6 who “will render to each one according to his deedsâ€:[a] 7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality;

For he will repay according to each one's deeds: 7 to those who by patiently doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life

 

[Mysteryman]

I believe what the Word says, not what my translation has altered.

Again, you have been thrice asked to defend your claim that the greek contains the word "in". Please do so.

This is talking about those who, by patient continuance in well doing, seek for glory and immorality (which btw is only given to them who are chosen from before the foundation of the earth to be holy and without blame in love)(saved by grace , not by works) in eternal life. < This is talking about rewards ! Render what ? = Rewards !

No. All the translations are consistent - it is eternal life that is rendered, not rewards other than eternal life. You are asking to believe that all the following translations are wrong and that you are right. Yet you will not defend your claim about this mysterious missing "in". Here are several translations. They are all clear - it is eternal life that is given based on persistence in doing good:

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

who WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS:
7to those who by (L)perseverance in doing good seek for (M)glory and honor and (N)immortality, eternal life;

6 who “will render to each one according to his deedsâ€:[a] 7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality;

For he will repay according to each one's deeds: 7 to those who by patiently doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life

Hi

Read these two verses --- Galatians 5:21 and now read Ephesians 5:5 <-- What difference do you see in these two verses ?

 

[ivdavid]

Drew,

This seems to be a really long-drawn out argument and I think this is more on a mix-up of terminology rather than a mix-up of doctrine. Please bear with me while I try to understand this issue.

According to you, when is a man able to do righteous works - before he is justified and saved by God's grace through a saving faith of God or after he is justified?
(Justified means being reconciled with God - called by God from being enemies of God to being given the right to call Him Abba, Father, by the regenerative work of the Holy Spirit.)

I think this question should resolve a lot of issues. Consider the following possibilities -

i) If a man can do righteous works before he's justified, then that goes against Romans 1-3 where Paul says none apart from God can do righteous works.

ii) If a man does righteous works after he's already justified through faith by grace, then he cannot lose his salvation based on his works - it can only be lost based on his lack of faith or unbelief (because faith was the criteria for justification in the first place).
And yes, his works will definitely be an indicator or evidence of his faith. If a person claims faith but continues to willfully walk in sin, then he's lying about knowing God. Such a person can be evaluated based on his fruits (works). Such people cannot inherit the Kingdom of God just based on their non-works based faith. But those who do righteous works are only evidencing the faith they have in Christ and evidencing the new creatures that they've become by the regenerative work of the Holy Spirit. Can this evidencing factor(works) become greater that the primary factor(grace through faith)?

 

[francisdesales]

Not always. Faith is not a conveyor belt that yields predictable and automatic results. Otherwise, why does Paul tell us one could have ALL THE FAITH TO MOVE MOUNTAINS (a freakin lot...) but yet, WITHOUT LOVE, is NOTHING??? (1 Cor 13:2) This one verse destroys your imaginative thinking here.

IF faith was a word that always has an effect, that shows our salvation, why do people of faith CONTINUE to sin? This does NOT show the desired effect, does it...

No, all is nothing, except for faith working in love, Paul tells the Galatians, after telling them one is saved by faith without works OF THE LAW...

BOTH must be present to be saved. And everyone knows that love is indeed a work... Ask someone married or someone with children, if you don't think so.

Regards

There are hypocrites that claim to have faith...even the devil believes.

Which is exactly my point. Some with faith are hypocrites and there is no "conveyor belt" effect in every case. James makes that very clear when talking to Christians who are NOT showing their love, despite claiming they have faith. Thus, James calls people FOOLISH who think they are saved by faith alone.

Reader of Scriptures, heed the Bible...

We are speaking of saving faith here.

There is no such term in Scriptures. That's an invented and contrived remark, an effort to do away with acts of Love. Faith PLUS LOVE saves. Faith, even enough to move mountains, without Love, does not save. Thus, "saving faith", what's that?

Is it MORE faith required to move mountains, by itself??? Does this need Love? If so, you have admitted that faith ALONE does not save - which is exactly the point of Paul and James. Faith, without works of love, are nothing.

Our attempts at love IN CHRIST are certainly not "filthy rags". That is just plain silly.

Haven't you read Romans 8? Works of Love IN THE SPIRIT are salvific.

Regards

 

[Mysteryman]

Again , the word "in" was omitted

How do you know that it was omitted?

Hi Free

Read these two verses --- Galatians 5:21 and now read Ephesians 5:5 <-- What difference do you see in these two verses ?

 

[francisdesales]

The translators left out the small word "in" , which makes a huge difference in understanding what is written here. Romans 2:7 should have been written this way -- "To them who by patent continuance in well doing seek for glory and hounour and immortality in eternal life"

God be praised that you are here to correct the intent of the Bible and God so readily available to anyone with the internet and access to a Greek translation...

This is exactly why Christ formed a Church, rather than a piece of writing that would be diseminated throughout the world. People like you would no doubt "correct" everything, making it more to THEIR liking and making Christianity cater to their own whims.

 

[Free]

This is exactly why Christ formed a Church, rather than a piece of writing that would be diseminated throughout the world.

As I pointed out to someone else already, such a statement undermines the inspiration of Scripture.