Ignoring Romans 2: An Error of Exegisis

[glorydaz]

The verse is telling us what to look forward too. The word "seek" is the key word here !

No. The verse is saying what everyone who understands how to parse an English sentence will know that it says - God will "render" or "give" eternal life to those who persist in doing good.

Yes, the word "seek" is there, but the sentence says what it says!!!

"Eternal life" is there in the sentence. It is there for a reason. And the linguistic form does not allow you to say that there is only "seeking" of eternal life going on here

Are you telling us that the following text does not have "eternal life" functioning in the role of something that will be rendered? A simply yes or no answer will suffice.

Who will render to every man according to his deeds: 7To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life

When someone says this:
"Who will render to every child according to his deeds: To those children who by patient continuance in well doing seek for ice cream, ice cream."

...are they not promising ice cream cones to children do good (and also seek for ice cream)?

I suspect that you know full well that this is exactly what such a statement implies.

There is a thin line between legitimate discussion and distortion. I suggest that both you and gd are traversing that line.

"Traversing the line between legitimate discussion and distortion"? Those are some pretty harsh words coming from someone who has to resort to these kinds of statements to prove a point. There's a point being proven, alright, but not what you seem to be "seeking". ;)

Drew...God will render His righteous judgment according to their deeds.
That means all deeds (and every hidden thought as Paul just explained, in depth) or it wouldn't be righteous JUDGMENT, would it?

Let me try your game for a moment. You say, "Kids...here's the deal. To those of you who run around the house looking for chores to do in order to earn some ice cream, just remember, I'm not going to forget how you poured paint all over your mother's living room carpet. I already talked to you about that. There's no way you can get that stain out of the carpet...that stain should be quite noticeable as you scurry around hoping I'll be so impressed with a clean house and watered plants, I'll forget that stain." :biglaugh

 

[Drew]

I am sorry, Drew, but once again you've misquoted the KJV.

7To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:

OK, but the same argument applies to the version below:

What will be rendered? Righteous judgment according to one's deeds. Good and bad deeds, Drew.

You are simply not treating the english structure of this statement properly.

What function does the phrase "eternal life" serve in the version you have provided? Presumably Paul does not insert the words "eternal life" into a sentence like many people insert the word "um". Woud you expect Paul to write things like:

"I am going to the movies, eternal life"

"Looks like rain today, eternal life"

"Please pass the potato salad, eternal life"

So: Please tell us: what is Paul saying about eternal life here?

 

[Drew]

Traversing the line between legitimate discussion and distortion"? Those are some pretty harsh words coming from someone who has to resort to these kinds of statements to prove a point.

I basically stand by my statement. Both you and MM are simply going beyond the realm of reasonable argument. You are basically saying the equivalent of claiming that the following statement is not a promise to give Charlie a dog:

"I will give Charlie a dog"

Now perhaps the moderators are letting you and MM get away with re-working the words of scripture since it may not be strictly against the rules to do what you are doing.

But I think that this needs to stop. Its one thing to say "the translators made an error when they rendered such and such a greek word as "eternal life". Fine, then provide the argument.

But frankly, I do not think you should be allowed to say that the clear meaning of an english statement is not what it obviously is.

But, I do not make the rules.

 

[Drew]

Drew,

I'd like to get clarified, these meanings too -

What is justification according to you?

First, I have not forgotten about your earlier questions. Let me say something in brief about justification. Justification, as Paul uses the term, is primarily a covenantal term - it is the declaration that a person is a member of God's true family. And it is not a statement about how you got into that family, but rather a declaration that you are in.

I believe that most in the reformation tradition see justification as a purely forensic or legal term. True - there are times where Paul uses justification language in a lawcourt setting. But I believe that this usage is primarily metaphorical and that the covenantal idea is primary.

But the lawcourt metaphor is indeed apt since, the purpose of the covenant was always to deal with the problem of sin. So it is entirely appropriate to use a lawcourt metaphor when judgement of sin is at issue.

But, I am prepared to argue that, for Paul at least, justification is primarily a covenantal concept, involving issues of membership in God's "true" family - the "true" descendents of Abraham.

Justification and salvation are not the same concepts. True, those who are justified do indeed get "saved". But these are distinct concepts.

 

[glorydaz]

Traversing the line between legitimate discussion and distortion"? Those are some pretty harsh words coming from someone who has to resort to these kinds of statements to prove a point.

I basically stand by my statement. Both you and MM are simply going beyond the realm of reasonable argument. You are basically saying the equivalent of claiming that the following statement is not a promise to give Charlie a dog:

"I will give Charlie a dog"

Now perhaps the moderators are letting you and MM get away with re-working the words of scripture since it may not be strictly against the rules to do what you are doing.

But I think that this needs to stop. Its one thing to say "the translators made an error when they rendered such and such a greek word as "eternal life". Fine, then provide the argument.

But frankly, I do not think you should be allowed to say that the clear meaning of an english statement is not what it obviously is.

But, I do not make the rules.

One of the basic rules of Scripture is to NOT take verses out of context, and to compare everything with the WHOLE WORD OF GOD. This is what you're failing to do here. I'm just trying to help you out and you have donkeyed down on this one verse at the expense of the Truth.

 

[glorydaz]

Drew,

I'd like to get clarified, these meanings too -

What is justification according to you?

First, I have not forgotten about your earlier questions. Let me say something in brief about justification. Justification, as Paul uses the term, is primarily a covenantal term - it is the declaration that a person is a member of God's true family. And it is not a statement about how you got into that family, but rather a declaration that you are in.

I believe that most in the reformation tradition see justification as a purely forensic or legal term. True - there are times where Paul uses justification language in a lawcourt setting. But I believe that this usage is primarily metaphorical and that the covenantal idea is primary.

But the lawcourt metaphor is indeed apt since, the purpose of the covenant was always to deal with the problem of sin. So it is entirely appropriate to use a lawcourt metaphor when judgement of sin is at issue.

But, I am prepared to argue that, for Paul at least, justification is primarily a covenantal concept, involving issues of membership in God's "true" family - the "true" descendents of Abraham.

Justification and salvation are not the same concepts. True, those who are justified do indeed get "saved". But these are distinct concepts.

By God's grace...We are Reconciled by His death, Justified by His faith, Saved by His Life, Filled with His Spirit, and Sanctified for His use. It's not complicated in the least.

 

[glorydaz]

Traversing the line between legitimate discussion and distortion"? Those are some pretty harsh words coming from someone who has to resort to these kinds of statements to prove a point.

I basically stand by my statement. Both you and MM are simply going beyond the realm of reasonable argument. You are basically saying the equivalent of claiming that the following statement is not a promise to give Charlie a dog:

"I will give Charlie a dog"

Now perhaps the moderators are letting you and MM get away with re-working the words of scripture since it may not be strictly against the rules to do what you are doing.

But I think that this needs to stop. Its one thing to say "the translators made an error when they rendered such and such a greek word as "eternal life". Fine, then provide the argument.

But frankly, I do not think you should be allowed to say that the clear meaning of an english statement is not what it obviously is.

But, I do not make the rules.

You sound like a little boy who thinks he can make the rules and everyone must abide by what he says because it's his ball. Sorry, Drew, but we are all adults and are entitled to state our views...just the way you do.

LOL..."They should make it stop?" You're calling out the police to take away our right to speak? Interesting concept. :help

 

[Drew]

LOL..."They should make it stop?" You're calling out the police to take away our right to speak? Interesting concept. :help

Strangely, I am in a sense acting in your interests. You are repeatedly making claims that deny the obvious meaning of a clear english statement. I am not sure this helps your case.

Don't believe me? I challenge any of you readers out there to state that you agree with gd that Romans 2:6-7, as a chunk of isolated text, is not making a statement about a future awarding of eternal life

No one will come forward (except MM who is doing the same thing you are doing) - I guarantee it.

It is clear - the phrase "eternal life" is the object of what it is to be rendered, or given. And your position cannot survive this.

Please answer this question: what is the function of the phrase "eternal life" in Romans 2:6-7? What is Paul saying about eternal life here?

Are you seriously going to tell the readers that he is simply talking about people who seek it and that he is not making a further point about God awarding it to some people?

 

[glorydaz]

LOL..."They should make it stop?" You're calling out the police to take away our right to speak? Interesting concept. :help

Strangely, I am in a sense acting in your interests. You are repeatedly making claims that deny the obvious meaning of a clear english statement. I am not sure this helps your case.

Don't believe me? I challenge any of you readers out there to state that you agree with gd that Romans 2:6-7, as a chunk of isolated text, is not making a statement about a future awarding of eternal life

No one will come forward (except MM who is doing the same thing you are doing) - I guarantee it.

It is clear - the phrase "eternal life" is the object of what it is to be rendered, or given. And your position cannot survive this.

Please answer this question: what is the function of the phrase "eternal life" in Romans 2:6-7? What is Paul saying about eternal life here?

Are you seriously going to tell the readers that he is simply talking about people who seek it and that he is not making a further point about God awarding it to some people?

Drew, you can take as many surveys as you like, but I understand quite clearly what Paul is saying in Romans. I'm not in the least concerned whether you or some one else sees it or not. I know many people who view this portion of scripture exactly like I do. I even gave you two examples, but you refuse to admit it.


I don't need to prove that Paul isn't saying good deeds will earn anyone eternal life, because that idea is not supported anywhere in Scripture. You can continue to sweat over this verse for the next 10 yrs., but I'm confident it agrees with the whole Word of God concerning what it takes to obtain eternal life.

You keep this verse in isolation because it gives you a shred of hope that man's efforts contribute to his salvation. Yes, people seek after eternal life...no matter what path they take, there is only one way set forth by God...by grace through faith. It's really just that simple. If sin is not taken care of first, all man's efforts are in vain.

 

[francisdesales]

Romans 2 - The two possibilities are eternal life and wrath.

Romans 2 is speaking of judgment based on deeds...that isn't the Bema Seat.

You'll have to look elsewhere for the reward that will be given to believers.

All judgment is based on what we do!!!

If one passes judgment, they receive the reward of eternal life. If one fails, they receive eternal damnation. There is no "lesser" rewards. It is either perfect happiness or utter failure. There is no "middle" ground in judgment.

"1 Corinthians 9:25-27" And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.

Nothing about "lesser rewards. We strive for heaven in the next life...

2 timothy, James 1, and the rest speak of the reward of eternal life, there is no mention of "lesser rewards". It merely backs up what I've been saying. Reward to eternal life, or hell. This is based upon the judgment of whether one has faith working in love. Citing all the biblical mentioning of "crowns" means nothing. Those judged worthy will receive a crown, THE ONLY reward, nothing lesser. Heaven is the ultimate reward and a person will be completely fulfilled in heaven.

EVERYONE will appear before the judgment seat, and they will receive heaven or hell. That's it.

Regards

 

[Mysteryman]

Romans 2 - The two possibilities are eternal life and wrath.

Romans 2 is speaking of judgment based on deeds...that isn't the Bema Seat.

You'll have to look elsewhere for the reward that will be given to believers.

All judgment is based on what we do!!!

If one passes judgment, they receive the reward of eternal life. If one fails, they receive eternal damnation. There is no "lesser" rewards. It is either perfect happiness or utter failure. There is no "middle" ground in judgment.

"1 Corinthians 9:25-27" And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.

Nothing about "lesser rewards. We strive for heaven in the next life...

2 timothy, James 1, and the rest speak of the reward of eternal life, there is no mention of "lesser rewards". It merely backs up what I've been saying. Reward to eternal life, or hell. This is based upon the judgment of whether one has faith working in love. Citing all the biblical mentioning of "crowns" means nothing. Those judged worthy will receive a crown, THE ONLY reward, nothing lesser. Heaven is the ultimate reward and a person will be completely fulfilled in heaven.

EVERYONE will appear before the judgment seat, and they will receive heaven or hell. That's it.

Regards

Your views are one who seems to be saying that you are going before the white throne judgement and not the judgement seat of Christ.

The "bema" is the judgement seat of Christ. Only rewards and crowns are dealt with, at the judgement seat of Christ.

On the other hand, the white throne judgement (thronos) pertains to all those who are not Christians.

 

[francisdesales]

You've got your Catholic glasses well in place.

Those written in the Lamb's book of Life were written in the Book when they were born of the Spirit.
They were justified by faith...the only thing that covers sin is the blood of the Lamb.
I realize you don't accept that, but it's clearly stated in the Word of God. Good deeds done by man...even those done in the strength of the Lord do not take away sin. Only the cross does that.

You again misrepresent purposely because you are confounded... I have never suggested something else covers our sin besides the blood of Christ. Good deeds are done by man, but invariably, moved by the Spirit. What trips you up is your unbelief in the Scriptures plainly stating that GOD TRANSFORMS man. He is born of the Spirit, you say, but you don't REALLY believe that.

What exactly is the purpose of this rebirth, if the same creature, the old man who can do NOTHING good, remains? God says He will place a new heart within this new person. But you say He cannot do this.

Where is that vaunted faith you speak about? You have stooped to this level of misrepresentation because you cannot argue against my actual point, but must re-invent one.

You don't have an argument with me...you have an argument with Protestants...period.

You are a Protestant, and my argument is with Protestant theology. You are currently that representative of that heresy. Period.

There doesn't really seem to be anything gained by discussing certain issues with you. I end up seeing anger and frustration, and that's certainly not something I want to contribute to.
Revelation 21:27"]And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Don't forget Jesus said that people can be removed from that book.

He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels. Rev 3:5

OR are you going to claim that God didn't really say that, it's a false translation, or that He cannot do that, either?

 

[Mysteryman]

You've got your Catholic glasses well in place.

Those written in the Lamb's book of Life were written in the Book when they were born of the Spirit.
They were justified by faith...the only thing that covers sin is the blood of the Lamb.
I realize you don't accept that, but it's clearly stated in the Word of God. Good deeds done by man...even those done in the strength of the Lord do not take away sin. Only the cross does that.

You again misrepresent purposely because you are confounded... I have never suggested something else covers our sin besides the blood of Christ. Good deeds are done by man, but invariably, moved by the Spirit. What trips you up is your unbelief in the Scriptures plainly stating that GOD TRANSFORMS man. He is born of the Spirit, you say, but you don't REALLY believe that.

What exactly is the purpose of this rebirth, if the same creature, the old man who can do NOTHING good, remains? God says He will place a new heart within this new person. But you say He cannot do this.

Where is that vaunted faith you speak about? You have stooped to this level of misrepresentation because you cannot argue against my actual point, but must re-invent one.

You don't have an argument with me...you have an argument with Protestants...period.

You are a Protestant, and my argument is with Protestant theology. You are currently that representative of that heresy. Period.

There doesn't really seem to be anything gained by discussing certain issues with you. I end up seeing anger and frustration, and that's certainly not something I want to contribute to.
Revelation 21:27"]And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Don't forget Jesus said that people can be removed from that book.

He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels. Rev 3:5

OR are you going to claim that God didn't really say that, it's a false translation, or that He cannot do that, either?

There are two books of life !

 

[francisdesales]

Your views are one who seems to be saying that you are going before the white throne judgement and not the judgement seat of Christ.

There is not two judgment seats. There is only one. "Bema" is not found in Scriptures, I don't know where you got that from??? Another tradition of men, I suppose. There is only ONE judgment seat, and God judges us ALL by the same standards - what we did in life...

When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth [his] sheep from the goats: Mat 25:31-32

Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did [it] not to one of the least of these, ye did [it] not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. Mat 25:45-46

Clearly, we will ALL appear before the throne and judged. Paul writes the same thing...

But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ Romans 14:10

For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things [done] in [his] body, according to that he hath done, whether [it be] good or bad. 2 Cor 5:10

Earlier, Paul told the Corinthians that NO ONE will enter the Kingdom IF they commit particular sins, presumably without asking for forgiveness...

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Cor 6:9-10

Seems like Christians are equally judged - if they perform works of evil, they aren't getting into heaven, just as Jesus said in Mat 25.

No, if the righteous turn away from righteousness, they will receive NO reward, much less a "lesser one". You are yet again confused. There is only one judgment, and christians are not above being judged. You are again preaching falsehood.

The "bema" is the judgement seat of Christ. Only rewards and crowns are dealt with, at the judgement seat of Christ.

On the other hand, the white throne judgement (thronos) pertains to all those who are not Christians.

There is no separate judgment seat. This is a figment of your imagination.

 

[francisdesales]

There are two books of life !

Prove it from Scriptures.

 

[Mysteryman]

There are two books of life !

Prove it from Scriptures.

Rev. 13:8 - book of life of the Lamb -- Lamb's book of life - Rev. 21:27

Rev. 20:13 - book of life

 

[francisdesales]

Rev. 13:8 - book of life of the Lamb -- Lamb's book of life - Rev. 21:27

Rev. 20:13 - book of life

Same book. the second mentioning is the same book with the shorter title. Rev 20 is also the book of the Lamb.

 

[Mysteryman]

Quote francis: "But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ Romans 14:10

For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things [done] in [his] body, according to that he hath done, whether [it be] good or bad. 2 Cor 5:10"


Both these verses, the word "judgement"is the greek word --- "bema"

 

[Mysteryman]

Rev. 13:8 - book of life of the Lamb -- Lamb's book of life - Rev. 21:27

Rev. 20:13 - book of life

Same book. the second mentioning is the same book with the shorter title. Rev 20 is also the book of the Lamb.

I would suggest you read Rev. 13:8 more carefully and combine what it says here, with Ephesians 1:4

Just like there is willfull sinning and unwillful sinning. There is also unwillful ignorance and willfull ignorance.

 

[francisdesales]

I would suggest you read Rev. 13:8 more carefully and combine what it says here, with Ephesians 1:4

Thanks for the reference, but honestly, I don't see different judgment seats mentioned. In one, it mentions judgment in the negative sense, in the other, the positive sense. Those who pass and those who fail - known by God through all eternity...

Just like there is willfull sinning and unwillful sinning. There is also unwillful ignorance and willfull ignorance.

Are you apologing for your willful ignorance???