Good works & a few simple Questions.

[smaller]

Paul did not say he never committed any sin but did say he was dead unto sin, that sin did not dwell in Him Rom 6:7-14.

Really?

Romans 7:17
Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Romans 7:18
For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

Romans 7:20
Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Paul didn't deny doing evil, either. Quite the opposite:

Romans 7:19
For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

I would prefer to think this "evil" was restricted to Paul's internal battles. Jesus also shows us that evil does come from within, from evil thoughts, and it is this evil that defiles us.

Matt. 15:
19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:
20 These are the things which defile a man:

If your claim is that baptism or even repentance makes that disappear and never happen, I might suspect any such claims are not all that truthful, myself.

 

[Seabass]

What I'm asking for is where Paul says what James (supposedly) says, that our obedience is what MAKES us righteous before God.

Rom 6:16 Paul says "obedience unto righteousness" and NOT obedience because one is already righteous.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Rom 6:16 Paul says "obedience unto righteousness" and NOT obedience because one is already righteous.

Works gospel. Plain and simple.

You're failing to understand the difference between a legal declaration of righteousness, and the manifest deeds of righteousness in a person.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to make yourself righteous in God's sight by doing righteous things. To think you can is to subscribe to the works gospel Paul condemns.

 

[Drew]

It is IMPOSSIBLE to make yourself righteous in God's sight by doing righteous things. To think you can is to subscribe to the works gospel Paul condemns.

I will claim that Paul never condemns the notion of justification by good works, he condemns the notion of justification by doing the works of the Law of Moses, and in particular those that mark out the Jew as distinct from the Gentile. Here is one of the most famous texts used to argue that Paul does not believe that good deeds produce justification:

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. [Ephesians 2:8-9, NASB]

Is Paul really denying we need to do good works to be saved. Not without contradicting this:

6God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. [Romans 2:6-7, NASB]

Fortunately, there is no contradiction. What Paul goes on to say later on in Ephesian 2 shows that he is really denying in 2:9 is that one is justified by being Jewish - by following the dictates of the Law of Moses which only Jew can do. Note the details of the explain following the keyword "therefore":

Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called "Uncircumcision" by the so-called "Circumcision," which is performed in the flesh by human hands- 12remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall, 15by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace, 16and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by it having put to death the enmity. 17And He came and preached peace to you who were far away, and peace to those who werenear; 18for through Him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father. 19So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household..

[Ephesians 2:11-19, NASB]

Paul's argument is clear: God does not limit membership in his family to Jews - the only ones who can do the "works" of the Law of Moses.

Paul is certainly not denying what he says here:

6God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. [Romans 2:6-7, NASB]

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I will claim that Paul never condemns the notion of justification by good works

Correct. He plainly says this:

"13 ...it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous (justified)." (Romans 2:13 NASB parenthesis mine)

Which seems to directly contradict what he said here:

"16 know that a man is not justified by observing the law" (Galatians 2:16 NASB)

So we have to figure out how both can be true, but not be contradictory to each other. The apparent contradiction is quickly resolved when one realizes that 'justified' has two meanings and usages in the Bible. In the first verse above, Paul is saying obedience to the law is how one is justified, as in SHOWN to be righteous. While in the second verse above he is saying that no man can be justified, as in MADE righteous by the law.

From http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1344&t=KJV :

Outline of Biblical Usage

1. to render righteous or such he ought to be
2. to show, exhibit, evince, one to be righteous, such as he is and wishes himself to be considered
3. to declare, pronounce, one to be just, righteous, or such as he ought to be

So what Paul is saying is no one can be MADE righteous in God's sight by observing the law (doing righteous things). But obedience to the law is how one is SHOWN to be righteous in God's sight. Of course, obedience to the law does not mean old covenant to-the-letter-of-the-law law keeping, but rather law 'keeping' the way that is done in this New Covenant through the new way of faith in Christ.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

But I still think Paul is clear that the basis of justification - the thing that gets examined as the deciding criterion - is how we have lived.

I agree with this if you change the word 'justification' to 'salvation'.

Works are what God will examine and use as evidence for or against us as to whether we received Christ as Lord and Savior and made eligible to enter the kingdom of God.

"...among God's churches we boast about your perseverance and faith in all the persecutions and trials you are enduring. 5 All this is evidence that God's judgment is right, and as a result you will be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are suffering." (2 Thessalonians 1:4-5 NIV)

But so many people think dead faith will usher us into the kingdom too. Not even remotely true. Only the faith that endures to the end will save a person--a faith evidenced by it's perseverance in seeking to do right.

 

[jonahmano]

I think being a disciple of Christ, your most prominent work will be to serve God and if you are led by the Holy Spirit then you don't have to worry about what you have done or what you haven't. The Spirit of God will guide you to the way of heaven.

This can nail the topic.......:p

 

[JLB]

Works gospel. Plain and simple.

You're failing to understand the difference between a legal declaration of righteousness, and the manifest deeds of righteousness in a person.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to make yourself righteous in God's sight by doing righteous things. To think you can is to subscribe to the works gospel Paul condemns.

It's impossible to be righteous except by obedience.

Whether obedience to repent or obedience to believe or to obey what God tells you to do.

Believe = Obey

Unbelief = Disobedience

Abraham believed God because he got out of his fathers house to a country...

Abraham believed he would become a great nation [have many children] so he obeyed.

You can not disconnect obeying from believing, nor can you disconnect obeying from faith.

If you believe the Gospel, then you repent, for the Gospel command is Repent for the kingdom of God is at hand.

If you don't believe the Gospel, then you don't repent, turn to God.

Likewise Abraham as our example of the Gospel faith, believed God because he turned to God by turning away from his fathers house to live a life of the obedience faith before God, by obeying His Voice.


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

It's impossible to be righteous except by obedience.

Be made righteous, or be shown to be righteous? That is what is in debate here.

You can not disconnect obeying from believing, nor can you disconnect obeying from faith.

I couldn't agree more. Surely you can see that I defend this whole-heatedly. What I disagree with is the obedience itself is what MAKES a person righteous (justified) in God's sight. Paul said believing is what does that, all by itself:

"it is with your heart that you believe and are justified" (Romans 10:10 NASB)

Then, on the Day of Wrath particularly, our works--what we have done and said--are what will be used as evidence for or against our being saved from the wrath of God, showing us to have, or not have, the justification that is secured through believing in the heart:

"and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. " (Romans 10:10 NASB)

You would be terribly mistaken to think I believe that a person can do nothing and will still be saved on the Day of Wrath. That's not the point. The point is, the believing all by itself is what makes a person righteous--the person who then does righteous things because he has been made righteous. No righteous behavior means no righteous nature secured by faith all by itself to drive that righteous behavior.

 

[JLB]

I couldn't agree more. Surely you can see that I defend this whole-heatedly. What I disagree with is the obedience itself is what MAKES a person righteous (justified) in God's sight. Paul said believing is what does that, all by itself:

"it is with your heart that you believe and are justified" (Romans 10:10 NASB)

Then, on the Day of Wrath particularly, our works--what we have done and said--are what will be used as evidence for or against our being saved from the wrath of God, showing us to have, or not have, the justification that is secured through believing in the heart:

"and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. " (Romans 10:10 NASB)

James explains that it is obedience together with believing faith, that makes faith complete...

Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." And he was called the friend of God. James 2:22-23

Likewise Paul teaches the exact same principle here in Romans 10:9-10

that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Romans 10:9-10

It is both the believing and the expression of obedience that completes a faith that can save.

as James clearly and plainly says - Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. James 2:17


What you have intended to teach is believing all by itself results in righteousness, which clearly disconnects believing from the work of obedience.

Paul does not teach this nor suggest this in any way.

It's is the two working together, as Paul is teaching the two-fold components of salvation by faith...

Believing in your heart and confessing with your mouth...

Faith all by itself is dead...


As the thief on the cross said - Then he said to Jesus, "Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom."



JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Once again, JLB, I think you are simply unable to hear the argument you are resisting.

You'll have to get it out of your head that I'm saying faith can be alone and a person be saved. I simply saying it is the faith part, in the heart, all by itself that makes a person legally righteous (justified) in God's sight (Romans 10:10 NASB). The 'all by itself' I'm defending is the actual agent through which we are made legally righteous before God. That in no way means, or implies, that faith will, and can, remain alone, for it to be able to save a person. It's just that the faith itself is responsible for the justifying--the making one righteous part of a legitimate salvation experience composed of both faith and works.

You see, Paul contrasts trusting with everything else a person can do that can justify a person (Romans 4:5 NASB). He does not make an argument for other, specific works that can justify. His argument for justification is that it is done solely through trusting God. James on the other hand is arguing that this trusting must be validated as being real by what it does in order for it to be considered a faith that can then save a person. Of course, you will have to understand the two different uses and definitions of the word 'justified' to see that James is not saying a person is made righteous by what he does, but rather shown to righteous by what he does.

 

[Drew]

I agree with this if you change the word 'justification' to 'salvation'.

Indeed. I should never have used the term "justification" in that statement.

Works are what God will examine and use as evidence for or against us as to whether we received Christ as Lord and Savior and made eligible to enter the kingdom of God.

I agree (I want to perhaps quibble over the phrase "Kingdom of God", but I won't).

But so many people think dead faith will usher us into the kingdom too. Not even remotely true. Only the faith that endures to the end will save a person--a faith evidenced by it's perseverance in seeking to do right.

Agree again - we'll have to find something else to fight over . Come to think of it, I think we disagree about what Paul means by "justification by works":

1. I think it is a coded way of saying "Not only Jews can be justified, that is not only those who do the "works" of the Law of Moses".

2. You appear to believe that he means "You cannot be MADE righteous by doing good deeds."

Back to the belief without good works, no salvation, I suspect you will agree that we are in the minority, at least among North American "evangelicals" (not sure I belong in that category, but we'll let that pass). Are you as mystified as me by the abject refusal of many here to deal with this text?:

God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. [Romans 2:6-7, NIV]

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Agree again - we'll have to find something else to fight over .

Or we could gang up on JLB .

Come to think of it, I think we disagree about what Paul means by "justification by works":

1. I think it is a coded way of saying "Not only Jews can be justified, that is not only those who do the "works" of the Law of Moses".

I will have to digest this a little more before I comment.

2. You appear to believe that he means "You cannot be MADE righteous by doing good deeds."

By the nature of what it means to be justified by faith in God's forgiveness, as opposed to working, I'm confident that Paul is talking about being MADE righteous by doing good deeds, not being shown to be righteous.

Besides, Paul is already in agreement with James that it is through the works of the law that one is shown to be righteous:

"it is...the doers of the Law will be justified" (Romans 2:13 NASB)


So we know that when he says the exact opposite, contradictory thing to that here...

"a man is not justified by the works of the Law" (Galatians 2:16 NASB)

...he is referring to being MADE righteous by the works of the law. See what I'm saying?

Back to the belief without good works, no salvation, I suspect you will agree that we are in the minority, at least among North American "evangelicals" (not sure I belong in that category, but we'll let that pass). Are you as mystified as me by the abject refusal of many here to deal with this text?:

God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. [Romans 2:6-7, NIV]

Yes, we're definitely in a minority.
And I'm as mystified as you as to why the church can't 'see' the plain words of scripture. But I know that is how indoctrinations work. They are amazingly powerful at making it so our eyes gloss right over plain words of scripture right under our fat noses. It's scary.

 

[WIP]

Or we could gang up on JLB .

Conspiracy!

 

[Drew]

Really?

Romans 7:17
Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Romans 7:18
For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

Romans 7:20
Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Paul didn't deny doing evil, either. Quite the opposite:

Romans 7:19
For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

The Paul in Romans 7 is certainly not Paul, the believer. No, Paul is looking back at his life as a Jew under the Law of Moses. You will understandably object that Paul uses the present tense. Well, indeed he does. But before I tackle that challenge, I will argue that, whatever else is the case, it is clear that the person in Romans 7 cannot be a believer (in Jesus):

1. The person described in Romans 7 is experiencing a "law" of sin that leads to death:but 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? [Romans 7:23-24, NASB]

2. The Christian in Romans 8 is described as having been set free from from this law of sin and death.
2because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death [Romans 8:2, NASB]

3. If the position that the person in Romans 7 is a Christian is correct, - then we have the following statements:

a. The Christian is subject to the law of sin that produces death (clear statement from Romans 7)

b. The Christian is set free from the law of sin that produces death (clear statement from Romans 8)

These statements are inconsistent. Therefore, assuming we agree that the statement from Romans 8 is about the Christian, the Romans 7 cannot be descriptive of the experience of the Christian - one cannot be both subject to the effects of a law and yet also released from its effect.

Now, in the next post, I will offer an explanation of the whole business of use of the present tense, since it certainly does appear that, notwithstanding the above, Paul is talking about himself as a believer.

 

[Drew]

Really?

Romans 7:17
Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Romans 7:18
For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

Romans 7:20
Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Paul didn't deny doing evil, either. Quite the opposite:

Romans 7:19
For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

Is Paul writing about himself as a believer? It sure looks that way. But, as per the preceding post, it is clear the person in Romans 7, regardless of verb tenses, cannot be a believer.

Contradiction? No.

Paul begins his treatment of the struggling person of Romans 7 in the past tense:

Certainly not! Indeed I would not have known what sin was except through the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, "Do not covet." 8But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of covetous desire. For apart from law, sin is dead. 9Once I was alive apart from law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died. 10I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. [Romans 7:7-10,NASB]

Paul is speaking about the status of the Jew under Torah in the past. Long before Paul was born - that is to say in Paul's past - the Torah was given to Jews.

Later Paul switches to the present:

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 [Romans 7:7-10,NASB]

The reason that Paul switches to the present is that he wants to make the point that even in the present, even after their Messiah has come - the Jew remains (in the present) in slavery to the Torah.

It is therefore clear that the proposal that Paul is talking about the status of the Jew under the Torah works perfectly well with the "past to present" transition that we get in Romans 7: the Jew was given the Torah in the past and it gave him problems in the past. The Jew who rejects Jesus in the present persists in the problematic state of being under Torah and a slave to sin.

The argument that Paul is talking about the Jew under Torah in Romans 7 makes perfect sense of the "past to present" transition of tenses.

 

[Drew]

Correct. He plainly says this:

"13 ...it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous (justified)." (Romans 2:13 NASB parenthesis mine)

Which seems to directly contradict what he said here:

"16 know that a man is not justified by observing the law" (Galatians 2:16 NASB)

So we have to figure out how both can be true, but not be contradictory to each other. The apparent contradiction is quickly resolved when one realizes that 'justified' has two meanings and usages in the Bible. In the first verse above, Paul is saying obedience to the law is how one is justified, as in SHOWN to be righteous. While in the second verse above he is saying that no man can be justified, as in MADE righteous by the law.

There is, I suggest, another way to resolve the seeming contradiction. That is, in keeping with Old Testament prophecy, to assert that Paul really has two laws in his bag of concepts. This way, we are not forced to claim two senses of justification, although in saying this, I am most certainly not saying your analysis is incorrect - I am simply offering an alternative. Note this from Deuteronomy:

"So it shall be when all of these things have come upon you, the blessing and the curse which I have set before you, and you call them to mind in all nations where the Lord your God has banished you, 2and you return to the Lordyour God and obey Him with all your heart and soul according to all that I command you today, you and your sons, 3then the Lord your God will restore you from captivity, and have compassion on you, and will gather you again from all the peoples where the Lord your God has scattered you. 4If your outcasts are at the ends of the earth, from there the Lord your God will gather you, and from there He will bring you back. 5The Lord your God will bring you into the land which your fathers possessed, and you shall possess it; and He will prosper you and multiply you more than your fathers.6"Moreover the Lord your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live. 7The Lord your God will inflict all these curses on your enemies and on those who hate you, who persecuted you. 8And you shall again obey the Lord, and observe all His commandments which I command you today. [Deuteronomy 30:1-8, NASB]

This is rather clearly a prophecy of what will happen when God restores Israel. Many Christians, me included, think this prophecy was fulfilled at the Cross and in the Resurrection. If that's so, we can at least get a sense that something may have changed with respect to the "Law". And this expectation is borne out by these words that should strike as perplexing:

For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, [Romans 2:14-15, NASB]

A Gentile doing the Law of Moses?! This is indeed strange since the Old Testament is clear: the Law of Moses is for Jews only and what's more, the Law "goes out of its way" to mark out the Jew as distinct from the Gentile. So it is indeed odd for Paul to write as if there is a sense that Gentiles "have a law unto themselves".

This is just the tip of the iceberg, but I trust it shows that it is at least plausible that Paul thinks in terms of two Laws - the Law of Moses which was for Jews only and was so burdensome to them (see Romans 7) and a strange new Law, "written on the heart" and which the Gentile, too, can observe.

 

[Drew]

And I'm as mystified as you as to why the church can't 'see' the plain words of scripture. But I know that is how indoctrinations work. They are amazingly powerful at making it so our eyes gloss right over plain words of scripture right under our fat noses. It's scary.

What's so odd about this is that people seem to think its "OK" to ignore Romans 2:6-7 - to say that Paul "didn't really mean it" since he later, so the argument goes, shows that good deeds have nothing to with final salvation. This really does seem to be an "emperor with no clothes" scenario - all these evangelicals agree to allow the exceedingly odd, and I mean exceedingly odd, move of asserting that, in Romans 2:6-7, Paul is speaking about a purely hypothetical scenario where eternal life is granted in accordance with good deeds. Yet Paul never gives even the remotest hint that he is speaking hypothetically in Romans 2. On the contrary, the whole rhetorical thrust of the passage only makes sense if there will indeed be a judgment where some get eternal life based on good works. Who makes statements about what is only hypothetically true. It is hypothetically true? - it could be case in some universe - that I, Drew, became the quarterback of the Dallas Cowboys. Would I claim "I am the quarterback of the Dallas Cowboys" and not be considered a liar or a nut? Of course not! And yet all these people here clearly think Paul says something in Romans 2 that he (Paul) knows to be false - that people get eternal life according to works - and they are happy to say all scripture is inspired and inerrant. Odd stuff, man.

I started a thread on Romans 2:6-7 and it has been notoriously inactive. Since you and I both know that many here feel passionately that works have no connection to final salvation, the only plausible explanation for the roaring silence is that, at the risk of seeming immodest, I have so clearly articulated the hopeless corner Romans 2:6-7 forces these "good works don't matter" people into, they know they cannot defend their position. So rather than admit this, they take their ball and go home.