Is Calvinism of the Bible?

[mondar]

I have not left, but I dont have time or interets to work on much regarding this channel right now, maybe later. I do want to drop in an mention one thing.

John Calvin was an attorney before he was a reformist. His theology followed a humanistic interpretation. “humanistic methods of exegesis†(Wikipedia under John Calvin is in bold)

This seems manipulative to me. It seems as if GraceBwithU is trying to poison the well by mentioning humanism. I went to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Calvin) and red the article on John Calvin. The sentence referred to reads:
"Part of that training involved the newer humanistic methods of exegesis, which dealt with a text directly via historical and grammatical analysis, as opposed to indirectly via layers of commentators."
I certainly agree with historical and grammatical analysis and disagree with layers of commentators. To call Calvin a humanist with all the religious implications is to be ignorant of what Calvin taught. Calvin taught the exact opposite of what came to be humanism. Calvin was trained in the classical languages, and may have studied classical writings in their original languages, and as such he was called a humanist.

GraceBwithU, if you had read the wiki article on humanism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanistic ... l_humanism), you would have seen this:
"The Humanists therefore reject Calvinistic predestination,"

Actually, non-Calvinism is much closer to religious humanist then Calvinism.

Catch ya later, back to the family.

Mondar

 

[GraceBwithU]

:D

Mondar,
I've been reading over some of your post again and I am confused. I'm not sure what you believe. Would you be so kind to give a brief description of the what you believe the five points of the T.U.L.I.P. to mean. It would probably benefit every one to know. Some of your statements appear to not be in line with any of the outlines of the T.U.L.I.P. that I have read.
Thanks
:D

Mondar,
Forget the humanist comment...that will only take this thread off on another lost tangent.
Could you please answer the quote above so I can be sure what you believe? I may be assuming things about your belief. What do you think the 5 points of the T.U.L.I.P. mean. Are the discriptions below accurate?

T. -- Because of the fall, man is unable of himself to savingly believe the gospel. The sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God; his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt. His will is not free, it is in bondage to his evil nature, therefore, he will not - indeed he cannot - choose good over evil in the spiritual realm. Consequently, it takes much more than the Spirit's assistance to bring a sinner to Christ - it takes regeneration by which the Spirit makes the sinner alive and gives him a new nature. Faith is not something man contributes to salvation but is itself a part of God's gift of salvation - it is God's gift to the sinner, not the sinner's gift to God.

U. -- God's choice of certain individuals unto salvation before the foundation of the world rested solely in His own sovereign will. His choice of particular sinners was not based on any foreseen response of obedience on their part, such as faith, repentance, etc. On the contrary, God gives faith and repentance to each individual whom He selected. These acts are the result, not the cause of God's choice. Election therefore was not determined by or conditioned upon any virtuous quality or act foreseen in man. Those whom God sovereignly elected He brings through the power of the Spirit to a willing acceptance of Christ. Thus God's choice of the sinner, not the sinner's choice of Christ, is the ultimate cause of salvation.

L. -- Christ's redeeming work was intended to save the elect only and actually secured salvation for them. His death was substitutionary endurance of the penalty of sin in the place of certain specified sinners. In addition to putting away the sins of His people, Christ's redemption secured everything necessary for their salvation, including faith which unites them to Him. The gift of faith is infallibly applied by the Spirit to all for whom Christ died, therefore guaranteeing their salvation.

I. -- In addition to the outward general call to salvation which is made to everyone who hears the gospel, the Holy Spirit extends to the elect a special inward call that inevitably brings them to salvation. The internal call (which is made only to the elect) cannot be rejected; it always results in conversion. By means of this special call the Spirit irresistibly draws sinners to Christ. He is not limited in His work of applying salvation by man's will, nor is He dependent upon man's cooperation for success. The Spirit graciously causes the elect sinner to cooperate, to believe, to repent, to come freely and willingly to Christ. God's grace, therefore, is invincible; it never fails to result in the salvation of those to whom it is extended.

P. -- All who are chosen by God, redeemed by Christ, and given faith by the Spirit are eternally saved. They are kept in faith by the power of Almighty God and thus persevere to the end.

We can take on point at a time if you want. :D

 

[beloved57]

I have a relative who recently turned to Calvinism.

What do any of you know of it? I've studied my KJV bible, and can not
make Calvinism agree with the teachings of Jesus.

Basically, my relative says there is no hope of being saved if you weren't
pre-elected.
He puts all the responsibility for those going to heaven, and those going to
eternal damnation, on God's shoulders.

I am not going to say all calvinism is of the bible, but the truthes of tulip are mot definitly foundational gospel truth and the responsibilty of who is saved and lost eternally is determined by God...soley based on His perogatives and not the actions of men...

 

[unred typo]

quote by beloved57:

I am not going to say all calvinism is of the bible, but the truthes of tulip are mot definitly foundational gospel truth and the responsibilty of who is saved and lost eternally is determined by God...soley based on His perogatives and not the actions of men…

If we are judged by our works, as the Bible says we will be, then it is the actions of men by which God will solely base his decision upon. When each of the petals of the tulip are pulled off and examined under the light of scripture, you will see them wither and die and blow away like the chaff it is. The responsibility of who is saved and lost rests with the man himself, as God has already done all that is needed to save all who come to him and he has also made provisions so that everyone is able to do what is required of them. No one will be tested above that they are able to withstand. In the end, God will judge every man according to their works of faith and love, using the same measure by which they judged others. How fair is that? My God is an awesome God! Sorry about yours....

 

[beloved57]

unred says

If we are judged by our works, as the Bible says we will be, then it is the actions of men by which God will solely base his decision upon

God will judge the non elect based on their works to determine degree of punishment , salvation is not the issue..

When each of the petals of the tulip are pulled off and examined under the light of scripture, you will see them wither and die and blow away like the chaff it is.

Thats not true all those truthes are taught in the scripture, I can see right now you are a unbeliever..

The responsibility of who is saved and lost rests with the man himself, as God has already done all that is needed to save all who come to him and he has also made provisions so that everyone is able to do what is required of them. No one will be tested above that they are able to withstand. In the end, God will judge every man according to their works of faith and love, using the same measure by which they judged others. How fair is that? My God is an awesome God! Sorry about yours....
[quote:a2ccb]quote by beloved57:

I am not going to say all calvinism is of the bible, but the truthes of tulip are mot definitly foundational gospel truth and the responsibilty of who is saved and lost eternally is determined by God...soley based on His perogatives and not the actions of men…

If we are judged by our works, as the Bible says we will be, then it is the actions of men by which God will solely base his decision upon. When each of the petals of the tulip are pulled off and examined under the light of scripture, you will see them wither and die and blow away like the chaff it is. The responsibility of who is saved and lost rests with the man himself, as God has already done all that is needed to save all who come to him and he has also made provisions so that everyone is able to do what is required of them. No one will be tested above that they are able to withstand. In the end, God will judge every man according to their works of faith and love, using the same measure by which they judged others. How fair is that? My God is an awesome God! Sorry about yours...[/quote:a2ccb]

You serve and worship an idol sir... Not the God of scripture...

 

[francisdesales]

God will judge the non elect based on their works to determine degree of punishment , salvation is not the issue..

Where is that in the Bible? I am curious, as I find lots of Scriptures that tell us that EVERYONE is subject to being judged by God. He is not a respecter of persons. Are you saying that someone elected into the Church will automatically go to heaven?

Regards

 

[beloved57]

God will judge the non elect based on their works to determine degree of punishment , salvation is not the issue..

Where is that in the Bible? I am curious, as I find lots of Scriptures that tell us that EVERYONE is subject to being judged by God. He is not a respecter of persons. Are you saying that someone elected into the Church will automatically go to heaven?

Regards

I never said everyone will not be judged , but christ was judged for the sins of his people , he was our substitute , and bore Gods just wrath on our behalf, however the non elect were not included in that , so they will be judged for their own sins...

So you have two groups of people that have been judged, Christ people who were chosen by God, God has judged them in him and the devils people who will be judged for their own sins..

 

[Drew]

God will judge the non elect based on their works to determine degree of punishment , salvation is not the issue..

Paul seems to think otherwise as he states in Romans 2:

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

I have yet to read a credible argument that undermines the plain sense of the above text - eternal life will be granted on the content of the entire life lived. Beloved57, how do you reconcile this text from Romans 2 with your position?

 

[francisdesales]

I never said everyone will not be judged , but christ was judged for the sins of his people , he was our substitute , and bore Gods just wrath on our behalf, however the non elect were not included in that , so they will be judged for their own sins...

Jesus was an expiation for sin. That doesn't mean OUR ACTIONS will not be judged... Drew clearly points out one example of this. Heaven has been opened for us because of Jesus' action, but it doesn't follow that He is "judged" in our place. It means that heaven is AVAILABLE to mankind, not that a select few will automatically receive it.

Regards

 

[beloved57]

franc says

Jesus was an expiation for sin. That doesn't mean OUR ACTIONS will not be judged...

If this be the case , it has not nothing to do with the elects salvation, I personally dont believe the elect will face any judgment for condemnation in that day.. Christ only expiated the sins of the elect...not offer expiation but expiated..

 

[stovebolts]

franc says

Jesus was an expiation for sin. That doesn't mean OUR ACTIONS will not be judged...

If this be the case , it has not nothing to do with the elects salvation, I personally dont believe the elect will face any judgment for condemnation in that day.. Christ only expiated the sins of the elect...not offer expiation but expiated..

Ok :wink:

1 Corinthians 3:12-17 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

 

[Drew]

franc says

Jesus was an expiation for sin. That doesn't mean OUR ACTIONS will not be judged...

If this be the case , it has not nothing to do with the elects salvation, I personally dont believe the elect will face any judgment for condemnation in that day.. Christ only expiated the sins of the elect...not offer expiation but expiated..

I will re-ask my question. Here is something from Romans 2:

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

I have yet to read a credible argument that undermines the plain sense of the above text - eternal life will be granted on the content of the entire life lived. Beloved57, how do you reconcile this text from Romans 2 with your position?

 

[francisdesales]

franc says

Jesus was an expiation for sin. That doesn't mean OUR ACTIONS will not be judged...

If this be the case , it has not nothing to do with the elects salvation, I personally dont believe the elect will face any judgment for condemnation in that day.. Christ only expiated the sins of the elect...not offer expiation but expiated..

Jesus died for the sins of the WORLD, not just the elect. God now offers His forgiveness to ANYONE who asks, as the price has been paid by Christ. It doesn't follow that we do not have to ask for forgiveness because Christ is an expiation for sin. Otherwise, ALL men are saved - since over and over, the Bible tells us that Christ died for the sin of the world, not just the few elect. While it is true that the elect will take advantage of this offering, it certainly doesn't mean we won't be judged, since men can return to the vomit of their former lives, refusing to ask for forgiveness again.

Where does the Bible say that Christ only died for the elect?

And secondly, the Bible doesn't make the distinction between the elect and the non-elect when it discusses judgment, as in Matthew 25:31-46. The ONLY distinction is the actions of those who are obviously elect - as seen by their actions. The elect do not receive a pass from judgment. Those who are elect and persevere will not be condemned.

Regards

 

[mondar]

franc says

Jesus was an expiation for sin. That doesn't mean OUR ACTIONS will not be judged...

If this be the case , it has not nothing to do with the elects salvation, I personally dont believe the elect will face any judgment for condemnation in that day.. Christ only expiated the sins of the elect...not offer expiation but expiated..

I will re-ask my question. Here is something from Romans 2:

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

I have yet to read a credible argument that undermines the plain sense of the above text - eternal life will be granted on the content of the entire life lived. Beloved57, how do you reconcile this text from Romans 2 with your position?

Actually Beloved57 does has a completely creditable view. Calvinists commonly recognize that Romans 2:10 is referring to the fruits of an obedient Christian, and not a means of salvation. To make works a means of salvation makes salvation a complete tautology. If the HS makes us righteous enough to save ourselves, then why do we need the blood of JC for? This view of salvation completely misses the point of the forensic reckoning of righteousness in Romans 4.
"4) Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."

Romans 2 is about principles of Gods judgment upon the Jew. Gods judgment came upon the Jew for their works, and they did not have the right works because of their heart condition. The immediate context of verse 10 begins in verses 1 and 5. In verse 1 the Jew did not practice the law, but used it to judge Gentiles. God will use this same law to judge the Jew, how cannot keep the law because of the hardness of his heart. The people of verse 10 are those whom God has changed their heart. When God changes someone heart (the elect) they "worketh good."

 

[Drew]

Calvinists commonly recognize that Romans 2:10 is referring to the fruits of an obedient Christian, and not a means of salvation.

My question was not about Romans 2:10, it was about the following text in Romans, which makes it clear that eternal life, and not other things are handed out on the basis of an entire life lived:

To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life

To make works a means of salvation makes salvation a complete tautology.If the HS makes us righteous enough to save ourselves, then why do we need the blood of JC for? This view of salvation completely misses the point of the forensic reckoning of righteousness in Romans 4.
"4) Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."

First, I did not write Romans 2:7, Paul did. And it clearly states that eternal life is granted on the basis of the entire life lived. The only possible way to avoid the implications of Romans 2:7 (not to mention other texts which have a similar theme) is to argue that Paul is writing about a fictional category of persons - that no person will actually ever be given eternal life in accordance with 2:7. I believe you make such an argument, but I do not think that it works.

And there is absolutely nothing incoherent with taking Romans 2:7 at face value and also asserting that the atoning sacrifice of Jesus is both necessary and fully sufficient to ensure that a favourable "jusfification by works" verdict will be rendered at the day of judgement. As I think Romans 8 teaches, the atonement is required in order to allow the giving of the Spirit which will ensure that the believer, through the action of the Spirit, not through moral self-effort will indeed "persist in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality" and hence be granted eternal life as per Romans 2:7. Perhaps I see things slightly differently from unred in this regard, but I will not address that here.

And there is no conflict with Romans 4 at all. Following NT Wright, I will argue that we can coherently say that we are indeed justified by faith in that we indeed can now know with certainty that those who have faith in Jesus in the present will be justified by their works in the future. This is a little more complex than the the more simple: justification is a one-time event that occurs when we accept Christ. I wish things were that simple. But texts like Romans 2:7 do not allow us to draw that conclusion, unless we do the demonstrably untenable: Claim that Romans 2:7 describes how we would be justified if we could be justified by works, but that we actually can't.

It is simply way too much of a stretch to claim that Paul is talking about a set with zero persons in it when he talks about a set of persons who are given eternal life based on "persisting in doing good..." I will try to expand on why this is an untenable position in a later post. For now I will point out that Paul nowhere states that he is talking about a route to justification that no one will satisfy. I suggest that some read that back into the text.

 

[beloved57]

Calvinists commonly recognize that Romans 2:10 is referring to the fruits of an obedient Christian, and not a means of salvation.

My question was not about Romans 2:10, it was about the following text in Romans, which makes it clear that eternal life, and not other things are handed out on the basis of an entire life lived:

To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life

To make works a means of salvation makes salvation a complete tautology.If the HS makes us righteous enough to save ourselves, then why do we need the blood of JC for? This view of salvation completely misses the point of the forensic reckoning of righteousness in Romans 4.
"4) Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."

First, I did not write Romans 2:7, Paul did. And it clearly states that eternal life is granted on the basis of the entire life lived. The only possible way to avoid the implications of Romans 2:7 (not to mention other texts which have a similar theme) is to argue that Paul is writing about a fictional category of persons - that no person will actually ever be given eternal life in accordance with 2:7. I believe you make such an argument, but I do not think that it works.

And there is absolutely nothing incoherent with taking Romans 2:7 at face value and also asserting that the atoning sacrifice of Jesus is both necessary and fully sufficient to ensure that a favourable "jusfification by works" verdict will be rendered at the day of judgement. As I think Romans 8 teaches, the atonement is required in order to allow the giving of the Spirit which will ensure that the believer, through the action of the Spirit, not through moral self-effort will indeed "persist in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality" and hence be granted eternal life as per Romans 2:7. Perhaps I see things slightly differently from unred in this regard, but I will not address that here.

And there is no conflict with Romans 4 at all. Following NT Wright, I will argue that we can coherently say that we are indeed justified by faith in that we indeed can now know with certainty that those who have faith in Jesus in the present will be justified by their works in the future. This is a little more complex than the the more simple: justification is a one-time event that occurs when we accept Christ. I wish things were that simple. But texts like Romans 2:7 do not allow us to draw that conclusion, unless we do the demonstrably untenable: Claim that Romans 2:7 describes how we would be justified if we could be justified by works, but that we actually can't.

It is simply way too much of a stretch to claim that Paul is talking about a set with zero persons in it when he talks about a set of persons who are given eternal life based on "persisting in doing good..." I will try to expand on why this is an untenable position in a later post. For now I will point out that Paul nowhere states that he is talking about a route to justification that no one will satisfy. I suggest that some read that back into the text.

I am through striving with you , we will see whose right soon, at the judgment , christ is returning soon...But I tell you the truth , you do believe falsehoods..and not the truth..

 

[beloved57]

franc says

Jesus was an expiation for sin. That doesn't mean OUR ACTIONS will not be judged...

If this be the case , it has not nothing to do with the elects salvation, I personally dont believe the elect will face any judgment for condemnation in that day.. Christ only expiated the sins of the elect...not offer expiation but expiated..

Ok :wink:

1 Corinthians 3:12-17 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

its easy to post a passage of scripture but what is the sense of it ?

 

[unred typo]

quote by beloved57 on Tue Nov 27, 2007:

If this be the case , it has not nothing to do with the elects salvation, I personally dont believe the elect will face any judgment for condemnation in that day.. Christ only expiated the sins of the elect...not offer expiation but expiated..

Perhaps you are thinking of this verse?
Romans 8
1There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
2For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

There is no condemnation to those who what? Walk not after the flesh. It doesn’t say that there is no condemnation to those who are chosen to be elect, now does it? Walking ‘not after the flesh’ is not doing what? Not giving in to fleshly lusts and ‘the sin that so easily besets us,’ as Paul would say. Walking ‘after the Spirit’ is doing what? Walking in love and good works, faith and repentance. As 1 John 2 tells us:

16For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
17And the world passes away, and the lust thereof: but he that does the will of God abides for ever.

and 1 John 3 says:

14We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loves not his brother abides in death.
15Whosoever hates his brother is a murderer: and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.

To my mind, loving your brother involves works of kindness, and hating your brother involves sins of all kinds, ( i.e. stealing, cheating, coveting, adultery, bearing false witness, murder, being greedy and selfish, etc. ) but you can ‘personally believe’ whatever you like.

quote by beloved57:
I am through striving with you , we will see whose right soon, at the judgment , christ is returning soon...But I tell you the truth , you do believe falsehoods..and not the truth..

Well, again, you can ‘personally believe’ whatever you like. If I were you, I would do a little more research into what the Bible actually says because we do agree on this: Christ is returning soon.

 

[mondar]

Calvinists commonly recognize that Romans 2:10 is referring to the fruits of an obedient Christian, and not a means of salvation.

My question was not about Romans 2:10, it was about the following text in Romans, which makes it clear that eternal life, and not other things are handed out on the basis of an entire life lived:

To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life

Verse 7 is not referring to a means of justification. The conclusion of this unit of material is found in 3:19-20. Verses like verse 7 leave all the world guilty before God since there is no one who meets the standard of "patient continuance in well doing." Of course those words are in the context of Judiasm. Verse 1 tells us that the reason for such statements is that the Jew is
inexcusable" in judging others because they do not practice the law themselves.

The reason the Jew (or anyone in the world for that matter) always fails in "patient continuance) is found in verse 5. There is the hardness of the impenitent heart. This is not something man can change. If Deuteronomy 29:4 is consulted, you will see why the Jew could not repent, it was because God did not give them the heart. The circumcised heart is an act of God (Deut 30:6). Thats why chapter 2 concludes by talking about the inward Jew (Rom 2:29). So then, those justified by faith alone are they that continue in well doing. This begins with the heart circumcision of God. Those like you Drew that function like the Jew and try to achieve the standard of verse 7 will fail and see only guilt before God.

Verse 7 speaks of "seeking." Romans 3:11 makes it clear that no one seeks after God. When the just seek God, it is only by the ministry of God after salvation.

To make works a means of salvation makes salvation a complete tautology.If the HS makes us righteous enough to save ourselves, then why do we need the blood of JC for? This view of salvation completely misses the point of the forensic reckoning of righteousness in Romans 4.
"4) Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."

First, I did not write Romans 2:7, Paul did.

This is your first violation of your own theology. It was a very arrogant statement. You are not seeking patient continuance in well doing here. Now you have failed. You are guilty before God. To demonstrate your lack of repentance, just do a self check. You will do things like this again. Why? Because you are guilty.

And it clearly states that eternal life is granted on the basis of the entire life lived. The only possible way to avoid the implications of Romans 2:7 (not to mention other texts which have a similar theme) is to argue that Paul is writing about a fictional category of persons - that no person will actually ever be given eternal life in accordance with 2:7. I believe you make such an argument, but I do not think that it works.

And there is absolutely nothing incoherent with taking Romans 2:7 at face value and also asserting that the atoning sacrifice of Jesus is both necessary and fully sufficient to ensure that a favourable "jusfification by works" verdict will be rendered at the day of judgement.

Verse 7 offers no atonement. In fact in all of Chapter 2 there is no atonement. There is no reckoning of righteousness from Christ. So then you are completely inconsistent in assuming that there is an atonement in chapter 2. You are on your own in Chapter 2, you are without Christ. By works, christ has become of no effect to you. You have fallen from Grace by your own works. Chaper 2 is not about the atonement, it is about the works of the law. So if you seek justification by the law, you will be judged by the law.

As I think Romans 8 teaches, the atonement is required in order to allow the giving of the Spirit which will ensure that the believer,

A sad testimony of your understanding of the atonement. The atonement does nothing more for you then the giving of the Spirit. For you there is no substutionary atonement since you go about to establish your own righteousness. Show me the atonement in Chapter 2.

through the action of the Spirit, not through moral self-effort will indeed "persist in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality" and hence be granted eternal life as per Romans 2:7. Perhaps I see things slightly differently from unred in this regard, but I will not address that here.

No, you and unred are on the same page.

And there is no conflict with Romans 4 at all. Following NT Wright, I will argue that we can coherently say that we are indeed justified by faith in that we indeed can now know with certainty that those who have faith in Jesus in the present will be justified by their works in the future.

Such a statement is a complete refusal to even read Romans 4:4-5. To the one who works, debt comes. That was made clear in chapter 2. This debt is the debt of one not under the atonement. You, unred, and others are some who work for your salvation. You have only debt.

Verse 5 is clear, those who recognize that they are helpless sinners, and that only faith can save, our faith is reckoned for righteousness. That is imputed righteousness. IT is Christ that is righteous, and the value of this righteousness is transfered to our side of the ledger. God judges us righteous on that basis. It is Christs righteousness that propitiates Gods wrath, not our own righteousness (Rom 3:25).

This is a little more complex than the the more simple: justification is a one-time event that occurs when we accept Christ. I wish things were that simple.

That is the simple Gospel. You reject that Gospel for another gospel (Galatians 1:8-9)

But texts like Romans 2:7 do not allow us to draw that conclusion, unless we do the demonstrably untenable: Claim that Romans 2:7 describes how we would be justified if we could be justified by works, but that we actually can't.

It is simply way too much of a stretch to claim that Paul is talking about a set with zero persons in it when he talks about a set of persons who are given eternal life based on "persisting in doing good..." I will try to expand on why this is an untenable position in a later post. For now I will point out that Paul nowhere states that he is talking about a route to justification that no one will satisfy. I suggest that some read that back into the text.

The error here is Paul is not talking about a route to justification. This is the whole point of my statement that your theology makes justification a tautology. Maybe I used a word you did not understand. Your concept of justification is a tautology because it is meaningless for God to pronounce you innocent if you are already innocent.

You who thing you have found something in yor own repentance according to your own flesh (Romans 4:1) and will try to boast before God in what you have done (Romans 4:2) will not be justified at all. You do it not by faith. So because you will fail in "patient continuance in well doing," you will be "judged by the law (Rm 2:12)." You will only stand guilty before God (Rm 3:19). You ask me to meet a standard you yourself will not keep. You are exactly like the Jew of Romans 2.

 

[Drew]

I am through striving with you , we will see whose right soon, at the judgment , christ is returning soon...But I tell you the truth , you do believe falsehoods..and not the truth..

In all fairness, this is not really a contribution to the debate, it is a point of rhetoric. Do you not have an answer to my question about Romans 2:7? Or do you agree with what mondar is saying about this text?

Romans 2:7 is part of inspired Scripture. It must mean something. What do you think it means? I am not trying to be difficult here - I am genuinely interested in how you see this text.