Free will or no free will?

[Imagican]

Mutz,

I recognize the error in the words offered. YES, it was DEATH that was defeated. But the death was the RESULT of sin.

MEC

 

[Drew]

It is perfectly clear in the scriptures that works do not bring justification.

I disagree. What is clear from the scriptures is that the works of Torah do not bring about justification. For some reason, many (most?) in the reformed tradition read Paul's references to "works", and his denial of justification by works, and read it is as denial of the justifying power of the more general category of "good works". Ephesians 2 is a classic case. If one actually opens one's mind to the possibility, the context (especially verses 11 and following) make it clear that Torah is what Paul is talking about, not the more general category of "good works".

Romans 4:4 tells us that works brings debt, not grace. If you believe in your own righteousness as contributing to your justification, you do not need Christs. As has been previously mentioned by others, grace and works are in apposition. Romans 11:4 tells us that grace is no more of works.

I think Romans 4:4 has also been generally misinterpreted. I agree with the arguments of NT Wright who writes as follows. The "this reading" of the first sentence is a reference to a lenthty argument that Wright has just finished making (and which I will not reproduce here):

This reading of Romans 4 suggests that the discussion of “works,†“reward,â€Â
“debt,†and so forth in w. 3-4 functions as a metaphor within the wider categories of
“works of Torah†(i.e., badges of Jewish ethnic covenant membership). Rom 4:3-8 is
sometimes cited as evidence that Paul did after all occasionally write as though he agreed
with Martin Luther, as though (that is) the real issue he faced was the possibility of
people trying to “earn†justification by “good works,â€Â

And the implication, of course, is that this is not what Paul was writing about at all.

 

[Drew]

True confessions:
To those who think they must cooperate with God and obey His commands, thus securing a place in the hereafter, let us reason together. What has anyone done of a spiritual nature that is not tainted with sin? I will go first,.....

Hello Bubba (and others):

I think that a passage like Deuteronomy 30:11 and following is instructive. It is a covenant renewal passage - a promise about what will happen when God renews the covenant. Was not the covenant renewed in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ?

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.

The believer in Christ can indeed claim this promise - and Paul quotes this very text in Romans 10.

So I think this shows that indeed, through the indwelling of the Spirit, we can obey the "law".

Besides, I think the view that you seem to espouse is at variance with the fact that in renewing the covenant, the Holy Spirit indwelling the believer essentially entails the presence of God in that very person. In the Old Testament, the presence of God was understood to be found in the temple - not just symbollically, but really there. Since Jesus, the human person has become the temple and God's Spirit literally dwells in each believer.

So I find it very hard to sustain the position you seem to hold - that all we do is hopelessly tainted with sin. Paul in Romans 10 is telling us that the Deuteronomy 30 promise has come true - the "law" has been written on the heart of the believer so that we may do it". The Holy Spirit is the means by which this has been accomplised. How can one therefore assert that all the believer does is tainted by sin?

Sometimes people use Romans 3 (the first 20 verses) to assert this hopeless situation of mankind. But these verses (or most of them) are part of a history that has now passed away. Romans 3 is a part of Paul's re-telling of the covenant history. And in verse 21, we realize that we have left behind the hopeless state described earlier in that chapter:

But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify

 

[mondar]

MarkT,
Just let me clarify what you are saying. You believe that regeneration results in the irradiation of the sin nature? So the unregenerate have original sin, but the regenerate do not have a sin nature?

 

[mondar]

It is perfectly clear in the scriptures that works do not bring justification.

I disagree. What is clear from the scriptures is that the works of Torah do not bring about justification. For some reason, many (most?) in the reformed tradition read Paul's references to "works", and his denial of justification by works, and read it is as denial of the justifying power of the more general category of "good works". Ephesians 2 is a classic case. If one actually opens one's mind to the possibility, the context (especially verses 11 and following) make it clear that Torah is what Paul is talking about, not the more general category of "good works".

If this is a "classic case," it is a clear "classic case" of isogesis. You are playing the word association game here.

In verse 11 you associate the concept of circumcision with the law. Now of course Moses gave the law not Abraham. The sign of circumcision never meant one was under the law, but rather that one is a "son of Abraham" and under the Abrahamic Covenant. The law was given at Sinai, not with Abraham.

When the law is finally mentioned in verse 15, it is not speaking of the works of the law as a method of justification, but it is talking about how the law was a dividing wall, or a barrier between Jew and Gentile.

Drew, it must be nice not to have to actually do any exegesis on the passage as you fail to do but simply to declare "see, the word 'law' occurs somewhere in the same book.... That is not proof of anything. You dont demonstrate any relationship between the word "Law" and the word "works." You simply mention that the word occurs 8 verses later and make massive assumptions that your point is proven. That is an astonishing absurdity. It is not even close to exegesis.

To make the concept crystal clear in Ephesians 2:8-9 Paul uses words that cannot be confused with works.
* Grace is the opposite of works
* "not of yourselves" is the opposite of works
* "gift" is the opposite of works
* "not of works" is the opposite of works

It seems to me that only the most closed mind would associate works with Ephesians 2:8-9. Pauls language could not be any stronger.

Verse 5 reinforces that Grace is totally dependant upon God. We were dead, God made us alive together with Christ by his grace, not by any human works. The entire context speaks of God as the source of salvation, never human ability or works.

Romans 4:4 tells us that works brings debt, not grace. If you believe in your own righteousness as contributing to your justification, you do not need Christs. As has been previously mentioned by others, grace and works are in apposition. Romans 11:4 tells us that grace is no more of works.

I think Romans 4:4 has also been generally misinterpreted. I agree with the arguments of NT Wright who writes as follows. The "this reading" of the first sentence is a reference to a lenthty argument that Wright has just finished making (and which I will not reproduce here):

This reading of Romans 4 suggests that the discussion of “works,†“reward,â€Â
“debt,†and so forth in w. 3-4 functions as a metaphor within the wider categories of
“works of Torah†(i.e., badges of Jewish ethnic covenant membership). Rom 4:3-8 is
sometimes cited as evidence that Paul did after all occasionally write as though he agreed
with Martin Luther, as though (that is) the real issue he faced was the possibility of
people trying to “earn†justification by “good works,â€Â

And the implication, of course, is that this is not what Paul was writing about at all.

When NT Wright sees a passage that does not fit his theology it is a metaphor. I sometimes wonder if NT Wright ever heard of something called hermeneutics. If NT Wright does not like what a passage says, "well its a metaphor." The context has absolutely no indication that metaphorical language is to be understood.

Spiritualizing is a common hermeneutic of heterodoxy.

 

[MarkT]

It is perfectly clear in the scriptures that works do not bring justification.

I disagree. What is clear from the scriptures is that the works of Torah do not bring about justification. For some reason, many (most?) in the reformed tradition read Paul's references to "works", and his denial of justification by works, and read it is as denial of the justifying power of the more general category of "good works". Ephesians 2 is a classic case. If one actually opens one's mind to the possibility, the context (especially verses 11 and following) make it clear that Torah is what Paul is talking about, not the more general category of "good works".

Your statement doesn't make sense Drew. The works of Torah? Torah refers to the five books of Moses. When Jesus spoke of the law he was refering to the law of Moses; the commandments and the ordinances.

It's true we are not justified by the law of Moses, which means that no one can gain entrance into the kingdom by following the law. The law condemns. Like Jesus said, 'Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father, it is Moses who accuses you, on whom you set your hope.' The Jews set their hope on Moses and the law thinking that the works of the law would make them clean and righteous in God's sight.

We are not justified by the works of the law because Christ put the law to death in his flesh. Notice what Paul says in his letter to the Ephesians about Christ creating in himself one new man in the place of two. Eph. 2:15,16 Keep that in mind. One new man in the place of two. Man is both flesh and spirit; body and soul. Christ created one new man in himself in the place of two. And he not only did it in himself, he created the new man in us as well. In everyone who believes in him: we were born in the image of Christ, the true image of God. Christ was crucified, and we were crucified with him. So the old self, the body of flesh, and sin with it, are dead. We are no longer living in the flesh but we are in the new man that Christ created.

As far as works go, there are the works of the law, which don't justify, and there are the works of God; belief, love, faith, hope, peace, and every good thing that comes from God is God's work. We are God's workmanship. So when we believe in the Son we are doing the works of God. When we keep the commandments we are doing the works of God. When we practice our faith; give to the poor, for example, or when we imitate Christ, we are doing the works of God.

Of course we are justified by faith because we believed, not by seeing but by hearing. Blessed are those who believe without seeing. John 20:29 Faith to us is reckoned as righteousness. Which means we are made right by faith. And God gives us gifts.

 

[mutzrein]

Mutz,

I recognize the error in the words offered. YES, it was DEATH that was defeated. But the death was the RESULT of sin.

MEC

And this leads us precisely to the topic in hand, which is what I contend with you and others of like mind.

You can choose not to 'sin' but you CANNOT choose life. Unless you can receive this, I believe you can only understand God's grace in part.

Bless you MEC

 

[MarkT]

MarkT,
Just let me clarify what you are saying. You believe that regeneration results in the irradiation of the sin nature? So the unregenerate have original sin, but the regenerate do not have a sin nature?

MarkT,
Just let me clarify what you are saying. You believe that regeneration results in the irradiation of the sin nature? So the unregenerate have original sin, but the regenerate do not have a sin nature?

Renewed regenerated in mind and spirit. We know that that which is born of the spirit is spirit. In Christ there is no sin.

The body of flesh has the sin nature. That's why it is called the sinful body. And the desires of the flesh are opposed to the Spirit. Gal. 5:17 'For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you would.'

And we don't get credit for using theological terms like 'original sin'. Are we trying to imitate Christ or the scholars here? The works of the scholars are stumbling blocks.

As long as we are in the earthly tent we are tempted/tested. The spirit is willing, the flesh is weak. Look at it like Paul said, Romans 7:15-7:25 'I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree that the law is good. So that it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I can not do it.' and he goes on to say, 'Who will deliver me from this body of death', refering to his physical body.

'So then, I of myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.'

Then he goes on to say, 'But you are not in the flesh, you are in the Spirit, if the Spirit of God really dwells in you.'

So we have put on God's nature. In our spirit and in our mind we are regenerated and renewed while sin and death dominate our physical body. So basically what Paul is saying is we don't choose to sin even though we often end up doing what we don't want to do.

 

[Bubba]

True confessions:
To those who think they must cooperate with God and obey His commands, thus securing a place in the hereafter, let us reason together. What has anyone done of a spiritual nature that is not tainted with sin? I will go first,.....

Hello Bubba (and others):

I think that a passage like Deuteronomy 30:11 and following is instructive. It is a covenant renewal passage - a promise about what will happen when God renews the covenant. Was not the covenant renewed in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ?

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.

The believer in Christ can indeed claim this promise - and Paul quotes this very text in Romans 10.

So I think this shows that indeed, through the indwelling of the Spirit, we can obey the "law".

Besides, I think the view that you seem to espouse is at variance with the fact that in renewing the covenant, the Holy Spirit indwelling the believer essentially entails the presence of God in that very person. In the Old Testament, the presence of God was understood to be found in the temple - not just symbollically, but really there. Since Jesus, the human person has become the temple and God's Spirit literally dwells in each believer.

So I find it very hard to sustain the position you seem to hold - that all we do is hopelessly tainted with sin. Paul in Romans 10 is telling us that the Deuteronomy 30 promise has come true - the "law" has been written on the heart of the believer so that we may do it". The Holy Spirit is the means by which this has been accomplised. How can one therefore assert that all the believer does is tainted by sin?

Sometimes people use Romans 3 (the first 20 verses) to assert this hopeless situation of mankind. But these verses (or most of them) are part of a history that has now passed away. Romans 3 is a part of Paul's re-telling of the covenant history. And in verse 21, we realize that we have left behind the hopeless state described earlier in that chapter:

But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify

Drew,
Romans 7:14,"We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature.[c] For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to doâ€â€this I keep on doing. 20Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

21So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22For in my inner being I delight in God's law; 23but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. 24What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25Thanks be to Godâ€â€through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin."
Paul was very honest with himself and at the end of my day, I usually after a review of my sins like selfishness, anger, lust, pride and etc., acknowledge my short comings to my Lord and thank Him that there is no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus. I been a Christian for over 32 years and I have yet to come upon any believer who does not sin regularly. They may sin less then they once did, but they still sin. Thus, it will always be about grace.
Grace and rest, Bubba

 

[Bubba]

Thanks for your response to me Bubba - I understand where you are coming from - and I understand where those who are on the 'other' side are coming from.

The problem, as I see it is, both of you have started with the premise that all men (mankind) will live eternally. This is the reason I believe that so many have a problem reconciling the thought that a just and righteous God could condemn those who have never heard the gospel or perhaps don't have the faculties or mental capacity to grasp it - and therefore there has to be another answer.

Mutzrein,
I think we have three choices to believe about the afterlife as Christians:
1. Annihilation- Soul Sleep then heavenly bliss for some, extermination for the rest
2. Eternal life and eternal punishment
3. Reconciliation of the whole human race

I believe the latter has as much validity, if not more then the first two.
Grace, Bubba

I believe there is an option that has a tremendous amount of scriptural support and validity. But for some reason Christendom wants to accept something else. Why can't we accept that man is born spiritually void? He is born without eternal life yet we condemn the 'unregenerate' to live eternally in a place of punishment. This is not what it means to 'perish'.

Mutzrein,
I know that groups like the Seventh Day Adventist, believe in Annihilation and that man is not eternal until God by His Spirit makes them eternal. I did a couple of years ago believe in Annihilation, and that death was the eternal punishment (punishment of death being eternal not the punishing), but as you probably are aware, I now believe God will reconcile all people to Himself through Jesus. What greater triumph over death, evil and Satan then complete reconciliation. You may need to PM me if you want to discuss more.
Blessings, Bubba

 

[Drew]

It is perfectly clear in the scriptures that works do not bring justification.

I disagree. What is clear from the scriptures is that the works of Torah do not bring about justification. For some reason, many (most?) in the reformed tradition read Paul's references to "works", and his denial of justification by works, and read it is as denial of the justifying power of the more general category of "good works". Ephesians 2 is a classic case. If one actually opens one's mind to the possibility, the context (especially verses 11 and following) make it clear that Torah is what Paul is talking about, not the more general category of "good works".

Your statement doesn't make sense Drew. The works of Torah? Torah refers to the five books of Moses. When Jesus spoke of the law he was refering to the law of Moses; the commandments and the ordinances.

An analysis of Ephesians 2 shows rather clearly that it is indeed the works of Torah whose justificatory power Paul is denying - he is not denying the notion of justification by "good works", since he would then be contradicting the rather clear message of Romans 2:6-13.

What is my case in respect to Ephesians 2? Well, if the reader is of the mind that the writing of the Reformers have the same status as inspired Scripture, then my arguments will not succeed. And if the reader's basic orientation is "I will continue to believe that Paul is denying justification by good works in Ephesians 2 as long as no one disproves such a reading beyond any doubt at all", then please do not waste your time by reading further.

What I am about to argue will only be worth reading if you are willing to step back from a commitment to the "standard view" and consider both it and my proposal without a priori commitment to either.

I do not think that the "works" in Ephesians 2:8-9 refer to the general category of "good works". Instead, Paul is referring to works of Torah, and specifically those that demarcate the Jew from his pagan neighbour. Consider what he goes on to write in verses 10 and following - Paul is clearly concerned with the issue of the Jew-Gentile division (which, of course, is manifested through the ethnic specificity of Torah). He is not dealing with the issue of people try to earn their salvation through "good works":

Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (that done in the body by the hands of men) 12remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.
14For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18For through him we both have access ot the Father by one Spirit.

Paul wants to drive home the point the true family of God contains both Jews and Gentiles - that membership in the family is not limited to those who practice Torah - the Jews. He is simply not even addressing, and therefore not denouncing, the idea that people can play some kind of a role in their own justification.

This text is all about the Jew-Gentile division - of that there can be no doubt. Which makes more sense:

1. Paul, in Eph 2:8-9 is denying the justificatory power of good works, something which is not particulalry a "Jew vs Gentile" issue and then suddenly changes topics to the question of Jew-Gentile unity.

2. Paul, in Eph 2:8-9 is denying the justificatory of Torah, something which the Jews have and the Gentiles do not, and then goes on in verses 10 and following to explain how the Torah, which was seen as marking the Jew out from the Gentile, is in fact not the basis for justification after all.

I think explanation 2 is a lot more coherent.

 

[MarkT]

True confessions:
To those who think they must cooperate with God and obey His commands, thus securing a place in the hereafter, let us reason together. What has anyone done of a spiritual nature that is not tainted with sin? I will go first,.....

Hello Bubba (and others):

I think that a passage like Deuteronomy 30:11 and following is instructive. It is a covenant renewal passage - a promise about what will happen when God renews the covenant. Was not the covenant renewed in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ?

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.

The believer in Christ can indeed claim this promise - and Paul quotes this very text in Romans 10.

So I think this shows that indeed, through the indwelling of the Spirit, we can obey the "law".

Besides, I think the view that you seem to espouse is at variance with the fact that in renewing the covenant, the Holy Spirit indwelling the believer essentially entails the presence of God in that very person. In the Old Testament, the presence of God was understood to be found in the temple - not just symbollically, but really there. Since Jesus, the human person has become the temple and God's Spirit literally dwells in each believer.

So I find it very hard to sustain the position you seem to hold - that all we do is hopelessly tainted with sin. Paul in Romans 10 is telling us that the Deuteronomy 30 promise has come true - the "law" has been written on the heart of the believer so that we may do it". The Holy Spirit is the means by which this has been accomplised. How can one therefore assert that all the believer does is tainted by sin?

Sometimes people use Romans 3 (the first 20 verses) to assert this hopeless situation of mankind. But these verses (or most of them) are part of a history that has now passed away. Romans 3 is a part of Paul's re-telling of the covenant history. And in verse 21, we realize that we have left behind the hopeless state described earlier in that chapter:

But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify

Drew,
Romans 7:14,"We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature.[c] For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to doâ€â€this I keep on doing. 20Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

21So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22For in my inner being I delight in God's law; 23but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. 24What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25Thanks be to Godâ€â€through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin."
Paul was very honest with himself and at the end of my day, I usually after a review of my sins like selfishness, anger, lust, pride and etc., acknowledge my short comings to my Lord and thank Him that there is no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus. I been a Christian for over 32 years and I have yet to come upon any believer who does not sin regularly. They may sin less then they once did, but they still sin. Thus, it will always be about grace.
Grace and rest, Bubba

That's true Bubba

But it is in God's nature to discipline us when we do wrong, to forgive us and to give us good gifts.

 

[Bubba]

That's true Bubba

But it is in God's nature to discipline us when we do wrong, to forgive us and to give us good gifts.

MarkT,
I agree, for God's children all discipline and consequences are for our good (Romans 8:28).
Bubba

 

[Drew]

Romans 7:14,"We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature.[c] For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to doâ€â€this I keep on doing. 20Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

Hello Bubba (and others):

I think that this entire chunk of Romans 7 is specifically addressing the state of the Jew under Torah, analysed from a Christian perspective. It has nothing to do with the experience of the renewed believer. I do not have the time to defend this assertion, but I simply put it forward as a possible alternative.

If this view is correct, then the Romans 7 material works harmoniously with the overall position for which I am advocating.

I hope to return to this and fill out the argument as to what I believe Paul is really saying in this text from Romans 7.

 

[Drew]

Notice what Paul says in his letter to the Ephesians about Christ creating in himself one new man in the place of two. Eph. 2:15,16 Keep that in mind. One new man in the place of two. Man is both flesh and spirit; body and soul. Christ created one new man in himself in the place of two.

But the context of Ephesians 2 shows that you are drawing the wrong distinction here in terms of what the "two" are. The "two" distinction he is drawing is not one of "sprit and flesh" or "body and soul". Instead, the two are Jew and Gentile:

11Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (that done in the body by the hands of men) 12remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.
14For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit

There really is no doubt - Paul is talking about Jews and Gentiles here and how they have been brought together in Christ. It is is the Jew and the Gentile who are the "two made one". To suggest otherwise to say that Paul goes off on wild and unannounced tangents - a position that is not easy to sustain.

 

[MarkT]

An analysis of Ephesians 2 shows rather clearly that it is indeed the works of Torah whose justificatory power Paul is denying - he is not denying the notion of justification by "good works", since he would then be contradicting the rather clear message of Romans 2:6-13.

What are you talking about analysis for? The law of Moses is the law. How many times does Jesus have to refer to Moses and the law? If anything Torah equals the OT equals the Scriptures. Paul, for example, tells us to attend to the reading of the Scriptures; the OT; Torah. Please quote the words you are refering to.

The notion of 'good works'. Romans 6. Paul is saying God will reward or punish every man according to his works, or deeds in this case. He says, 'To those who by patience in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality (that's the believer; the one who follows Christ) he will give eternal life.' Recall the works, the acts, the deeds of the apostles, for example. That's why the book is called the Acts of the Apostles. 'Works' may be synonomous with actions, acts, words and deeds. By faith, by obedience in seeking him when reading the book, for example, we increase in faith. Because 'to him who has will more be given.' We increase in wisdom and knowledge. There's the work of preaching the gospel, for example, or teaching. There's prayer. There's the work that builds up the church. There's the gathering of the saints. All these things serve God's purpose; create the kingdom. These things are rewarded. We are following Christ in other words. We are not following the law and hoping that in following the law we will get into the kingdom.

What is my case in respect to Ephesians 2? Well, if the reader is of the mind that the writing of the Reformers have the same status as inspired Scripture, then my arguments will not succeed. And if the reader's basic orientation is "I will continue to believe that Paul is denying justification by good works in Ephesians 2 as long as no one disproves such a reading beyond any doubt at all", then please do not waste your time by reading further.

That's right. Let's stay away from theology and theological terms and stick with the book. When you say Paul is denying justification by good works in Ephesians, I don't know what you are talking about. Please quote Paul or something.

What I am about to argue will only be worth reading if you are willing to step back from a commitment to the "standard view" and consider both it and my proposal without a priori commitment to either.

I do not think that the "works" in Ephesians 2:8-9 refer to the general category of "good works". Instead, Paul is referring to works of Torah, and specifically those that demarcate the Jew from his pagan neighbour. Consider what he goes on to write in verses 10 and following - Paul is clearly concerned with the issue of the Jew-Gentile division (which, of course, is manifested through the ethnic specificity of Torah). He is not dealing with the issue of people try to earn their salvation through "good works":

Oh man! What are you talking about? Torah is the OT, the Scriptures. At least that's what I get from an internet search. In Ephesians 2: 8-9 Paul is saying we were not saved by anything we did. So he is speaking after the fact. Verse 10 Paul says we are God's work, created in Christ, for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. The good works may include forgiving those who trespass against us, for example. Do you know that when we forgive men the debts they owe us, they tend to remember it and they feel good and that's what God wants.

color=#0000FF]Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (that done in the body by the hands of men) 12remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.
14For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18For through him we both have access ot the Father by one Spirit.[/color]

Paul wants to drive home the point the true family of God contains both Jews and Gentiles - that membership in the family is not limited to those who practice Torah - the Jews. He is simply not even addressing, and therefore not denouncing, the idea that people can play some kind of a role in their own justification.

Well basically he's say the Gentiles who are saved have been brought into the household of God. Again, I don't know what you mean by practicing Torah. Practicing the OT? Reading the Scriptures?

This text is all about the Jew-Gentile division - of that there can be no doubt. Which makes more sense:

1. Paul, in Eph 2:8-9 is denying the justificatory power of good works, something which is not particulalry a "Jew vs Gentile" issue and then suddenly changes topics to the question of Jew-Gentile unity.

2. Paul, in Eph 2:8-9 is denying the justificatory of Torah, something which the Jews have and the Gentiles do not, and then goes on in verses 10 and following to explain how the Torah, which was seen as marking the Jew out from the Gentile, is in fact not the basis for justification after all.

I think explanation 2 is a lot more coherent.

Well neither. Like I said, Paul is saying we were saved by grace, not because of anything we did. And then he said, in Christ, the Gentile believer is now a fellow citizen with the saints and the commonwealth of Isreal. He says the same thing when he says the Gentile was grafted into the natural tree. The only time Paul mentions the law is when he says it was abolished when Jesus died in the flesh.

 

[Drew]

[ In Ephesians 2: 8-9 Paul is saying we were not saved by anything we did.

You are not reading these verses in context. For Paul, the term "works" usually is a reference to the works of Torah - following the dictates of the Law of Moses - and is not a reference to the more general category of good works. In the case of Ephesians 2:8-9, we can determine that what Paul is denying is not "justification by good works" but rather justification by "works of Torah".

Torah is not simply the "Old Testament" as you write - it is not the "Scriptures". Torah is essentially the Law of Moses. And Paul is denying that having the Law of Moses and following it is salvific - he is simply not even addressing the issue of "salvation by good works", at least not in Ephesians 2.

How do we know this? We know this because of what Paul then goes on to say in verses 10 and following. What he writes in those verses makes it clear that Paul has been denying something which would separate the Jew from the Gentile. And that is Torah, not "doing good works". Remember - both Jew and Gentile can do "good works" so it is not a "barrier" that has been erased. The barrier that has been erased is the ethnic specificity of Torah. Here are the verses again:

Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (that done in the body by the hands of men) 12remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.
14For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, 16and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.

 

[Drew]

Let's be clear here. When Paul says "you are not justified by works" as in this statement:

"8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faithâ€â€and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God 9not by works, so that no one can boast"

....one cannot simply assume that he is talking about the general category of "good works". He could be referring to the "works of Torah" - following the Law of Moses, doing those works.

To be fair, I am likewise not entitled to simply assert that Paul's reference to "works" is a reference to the Law of Moses. But, if you look at what Paul goes on to say in 11 and following, the evidence is really overwhelming that he has been talking about "works of Torah" in verses 8 and 9.

Here are verses 11 and following with comments inserted by me to show how this works:

Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called "uncircumcised" by those who call themselves "the circumcision" (that done in the body by the hands of men) {***Clearly Paul is introducing the Jew-Gentile distinction here, so already we need to ask ourselves: what is this distinction based on? The ability to do good works? No. Both Jew and Gentile are in Adam. The distinction lies in the fact that the Jew does Torah and the Gentile does not}
 12remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise {***Why was the Gentile separated? Because he was not a Jew! And what marks out a Jew from a Gentile? Doing "good works"? No, It is Torah that marks the Jew out from the Gentile} , without hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ. {***How has this happened? It is happened because the possession of Torah is not the basis for being in the family of God. It is Jesus' work on the cross}

14For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations {***Who are the "two"? Obviously Jew and Gentile. And what is it that would divide Jew from Gentile and needs to be renounced as the grounds of justification? Doing "good works"? Again, no - both Jew and Gentile are equal in this respect. The real barrier is Torah - the ethnic charter of the Jews that they would see as marking them out as God's covenant people to the exclusion of the Gentile}

Paul could not have been more clear - he is focusing on how Christ's actions have rendered meaningless the works of Torah - the practices that are the very basis for the "barrier" that exists between Jew and Gentile.

 

[Vic C.]

Oh man! What are you talking about? Torah is the OT, the Scriptures. At least that's what I get from an internet search. In Ephesians 2: 8-9 Paul is saying we were not saved by anything we did. So he is speaking after the fact. Verse 10 Paul says we are God's work, created in Christ, for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. The good works may include forgiving those who trespass against us, for example. Do you know that when we forgive men the debts they owe us, they tend to remember it and they feel good and that's what God wants.

Hi Mark... I understand your frustrations, really! ;-)

Torah can indeed refer to the Law:

From the "Jewish Virtual Library": http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ... n_Law.html

3. The term "Torah" can mean the entire corpus of Jewish law. This includes the Written and the Oral Law, which includes the Mishna, the Midrash, the Talmud and even later day legal commentaries. This definition of Torah is probably the most common among Orthodox Jews. Usually you can figure out which definition is being used by the context.

Here's the catch... and I've posted about this a few times; the Law contains 613 points. Many of those points revolve around conduct and "good works". This is where many people here get confused; when we exclude Torah from justification, we also include the "good works" contained in the Law. Heh! 8-)

Mark, your understanding of Ephesians 2, in light of the above, is the more correct understanding.

 

[Drew]

Mark, your understanding of Ephesians 2, in light of the above, is the more correct understanding.

Well if that is so, we have a deeply confused Paul who does things like insert a statement about "flesh and spirit" being the "two things" that are made one into a treatment that is clearly about the Jew-Gentile divide.

And we also have Paul denying justification by doing "good works" in verses 8 to 9 and then suddenly entering into a long treatment of the Jew-Gentile divide, a divide which, of course, has everything to do with Torah, since that is what separates the Jew from the Gentile, and nothing to do with a capacity to do "good works" - since both Jew and Gentile are in Adam, the Jew-Gentile divide has no connection to a capacity to do "good works".

The position that many take on this only has any traction at all because any position can be sustained if you are willing to say that the writer has changed topics randomly and without notice.