Romans 4:4-5 - A Challenge to Traditional View

[Drew]

Yes, you have complicated something that is not complex.

You have made a statement. Fine. I have made an argument that, admittedly, entails a relatively complex scheme of justification. Perhaps you would like to find and identify the errors in this argument rather than simply state it is too complex.

The works that you so quickly want to attribute to justification, belong with sanctification.

Once again, you cannot expect me or any other reader to simply accept your say-so on this - you need to provide an actual case. That's what I did - in annoying detail perhaps.

 

[RadicalReformer]

Yes, you have complicated something that is not complex.

You have made a statement. Fine. I have made an argument that, admittedly, entails a relatively complex scheme of justification. Perhaps you would like to find and identify the errors in this argument rather than simply state it is too complex.

The works that you so quickly want to attribute to justification, belong with sanctification.

Once again, you cannot expect me or any other reader to simply accept your say-so on this - you need to provide an actual case. That's what I did - in annoying detail perhaps.

Drew, Scripture is not complex. Just on the basis that you admit that your "scheme of justification" (never heard of Biblical doctrines being called 'schemes' before *shrug*) is "relatively complex" - your scheme losses footing.

Genesis 15:6 is the reference point for Romans 4:4-5. On this basis your scheme falls flat.

Let the reader read Scripture, not some convoluted "scheme" that is "relatively complex".

Drew - Justification is a done deal for the believer. Christ is either our propitation for our sins or He is not. Look up the meaning and understand the whole compass of propitiation.

Sanctitfication is the process of God, transforming the believer into the likeness of Christ after the believer has already been Justified in the eyes of God.

 

[unred typo]

quote by RadicalReformer:
Genesis 15:6 is the reference point for Romans 4:4-5. On this basis your scheme falls flat.

Forgive me for answering your post to Drew. He will probably answer more completely. I just want to point out that Genesis 15:6 is not the only verse that you need to consider. The readers that Paul wrote to understood the basis that God counted this belief of Abram on. Notice verse 7 of Genesis 15:

5And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if you be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall your seed be.
6And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

7And he said unto him, I am the LORD that brought you out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give you this land to inherit it.

Abram’s belief was not the simple, one time event that some would lead us believe. In the Bible we can see the true nature of this faith in Genesis 12:

1Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get you out of your country, and from your kindred, and from your father's house, unto a land that I will show you:
2And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great; and you shall be a blessing:
3And I will bless them that bless you, and curse him that curses you: and in you shall all families of the earth be blessed.
4So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.

Abram’s faith was a working faith; a faith of works where a 75 year old man took his family and traveled to an unknown land, because he trusted God and believed in what God promised him. He didn’t stay on his porch in Ur, sit back in his rocking chair and say, “God said it, I believe it and that settles it.†He got packing and obeyed God. It is this kind of obedience that constitutes the faith that God counts as righteousness. This is what James is talking about.

So you tell me, what came first, the obedience or the counting it for righteousness? We all agree it wasn’t the circumcision that made Abram righteous before God because that came after, and the rest of Torah, still later. But obedience to God’s command to leave his homeland came before he was declared to be righteous by God. This obedience to God was always the basis of justification because it is faith of trusting that what God says, he is going to accomplish. This was the faith of RIGHTEOUS Noah, who preached righteousness and was saved with his family in the ark that he built by faith in what God said.

What do we have to have faith in? That by following what Jesus said, we will be made righteous through his blood. What did Jesus say? Repent, change your evil ways and follow his commands to love and forgive one another. Is that so complicated? No, but getting it explained with all your terms and angles is like untangling fishing line on a mesquite bush. Peter warned that the unlearned and unstable would have to wrestle with what Paul wrote if they were going to understand it in the way Paul meant it. I think Drew has presented it very well. :smt023

 

[Drew]

Drew, Scripture is not complex. Just on the basis that you admit that your "scheme of justification" (never heard of Biblical doctrines being called 'schemes' before *shrug*) is "relatively complex" - your scheme losses footing.

Again, you simply claim that Scripture is not complex as if God "owes" us something simple. You are not engaging in fair and proper debate here - you cannot merely deny the truth of something just because it is not as simple as you would like it to be.

God is a very sophisticated and subtle - it is not at all surprising to me that justification is not as simple as "accept Jesus today and you are in"

Genesis 15:6 is the reference point for Romans 4:4-5. On this basis your scheme falls flat.

Let the reader read Scripture, not some convoluted "scheme" that is "relatively complex".

Drew - Justification is a done deal for the believer. Christ is either our propitation for our sins or He is not. Look up the meaning and understand the whole compass of propitiation.

Sanctitfication is the process of God, transforming the believer into the likeness of Christ after the believer has already been Justified in the eyes of God.

If your response to my position is to simply state that I am wrong without explaining yourself or showing specific errors in my position, I think the careful reader will have no reason to believe you.

My position, of course, works with Genesis 15:6. You seem to almost be taking this position: "Well since Abraham's faith was credited to him as righteousness, we can ignore Paul's clear teaching about justification by works as per Romans 2:7:

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

My position, I will claim, takes both Genesis 15:6 and Romans 2:7 seriously. There have been no credible arguments as to why we can view Romans 2:7 as a path to justification that no one will take:

1. One poster has argued that this text is about the Jews only - that position is absurd, since Paul thrice underscores - this judgement is for Jew and Gentile.

2. It has also been argued that Paul tells us in Romans 3 that the path described in 2:7 is unattainable. Well that certainly makes Paul into an awfully odd writer - I will repost something in this respect shortly.

I agree with the general flavour of what unred has said as well.

 

[Drew]

Here is a repost addressing Romans 2:7

Just for the sake of the argument, let's suppose that it is indeed true that in Romans 2 all of Paul's statements about future justification by works describe a path to justification that none will successfully take. Let's suppose that Paul was a student in an English class and had submitted the entire book of Romans as an essay. Here is how I suggest that Paul would need to annotate a chunk of Romans 2 to explain to the teacher how it is this text is about the Jews (as I believe mondar has stated) and, more importantly, I would think, how the described path to justification will be successfully followed by precisely zero persons (as I believe mondar has also stated):

You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things {***Even though I have not said the following stuff is about the Jews only, and even though in chapter 1 verse 7, I address this to all in Rome, I am really only talking about the Jews}. 2Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?
5But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. 6God "will give to each person according to what he has done." 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. {***I do not really mean what I say here because later in this letter, chapter 3, I am going to write something different - that some will be justified without any reference at all to works, despite what I have just said. So while I have just said that those who persist in doing good will get eternal life, I intend to later say that there are zero persons in that set, but, by contrast, I do mean what I have just said in terms of the "wrath" - that set of person will contain a non-zero number of members. So even though it seems like I am talking about one real judgement with both 'good' and 'bad' verdicts rendered, I intend to communicate that this judgement will actually take place only in respect to the set who will experience wrath} 9There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile {***Yet I am really only talking about the Jews here, even though I refer to the Gentiles as well}. 11For God does not show favoritism.
12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous {***I do not really mean what I am saying here about being declared righteous by the law - I am really talking about a path to justification that cannot be attained. For some reason I am telling you about how you won't be justified}. 14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.

 

[Drew]

One of the reasons that I believe that Paul is referring to the "works of Torah" and not good works in Romans 4:2 is that such a view makes the entire line of thought from 3:20 forward into the middle of 4 much more coherent. On the other hand, if one believes that, in this block of text, Paul is setting justification by faith against justification by 'good works', the entire block becomes a rather incompetent hodge-podge of two entirely different points, all muddled together.

Here is Romans 3:20-22:

20. because (AB)by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for (AC)through the Law comes the knowledge of sin.

21But now apart from the Law (AD)the righteousness of God has been manifested, being (AE)witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,

22even the (AF)righteousness of God through (AG)faith (AH)in Jesus Christ for (AI)all those who believe; for (AJ)there is no distinction;

Is Paul setting faith against "good works" here or is he setting faith against the ethnic demarcations of Torah? In the first part of chapter 3, it is clear that Paul is centrally concerned with the Jew-Gentile distinction - will anyone challenge this? If this point is conceded, then it only makes logical sense that references to "works of the Law" in this block are not references to "good works" generally, but rather references to Torah.

But let's suppose that we ignore the preceding part of chapter 3. Can we still hold that it makes sense that, in the three verses above, Paul sets faith against "good works"?

If this what Paul really means, we have him, in verse 20, meaning two entirely different things by "Law", since I assume that we all agree that it is the Torah that is the referent of the second "Law" in that verse. So we effectively then get:

because by good works no flesh will be justified in His sight; for (AC)through the Torah comes the knowledge of sin

This a rather awkward way to write since the Torah contains a lot of "ceremonial" stuff that is simply not relevant to issues of "good works" generally. Perhaps you will try to argue that Paul is basically referring specifically to the "moral" aspects of Torah - such as the 10 commandments. Well, maybe, but I think that verses 21 and especially 22 make this unlikely.

The "NT Wright" interpretation is a lot more workable. Law is Torah (all of it) in both its uses in that verse - no need to argue that "Law" means 'good works' in its first usage and the specifically moral aspects of Torah in its second usage - an argument that would make Paul a decidedly wonky writer. Such lack of consistency in usage of terms is something a high school student would be chided for. And Paul was a well educated pharisee.

The "standard" interpretation of verse 21 is also awkward, since it again requires Paul to have meant "good works" in the first usage and "Torah" in the second. Why must Paul mean Torah in the second usage? If the connection to "the Prophets" were not strong enough to establish this, it seems hardly credible to see how "good works" can "witness" anything. Although Paul is attributing the ability to witness to an inanimate thing, it is far more sensible for "Law" to mean Torah in it second usage in this verse, since at least Torah (as opposed to 'good works') is a clear and well bounded kind of entity.

The "NT Wright" take on verse 21 is not awkward at all - Law means Torah in both its uses here.

In verse 22, Paul concludes that there is "no distinction". On the "standard" view, it is entirely confusing as to what, exactly, is being distinguished from what. The "standard" view does not require this "there is no distinction" qualifier - the verse works perfectly well with that view without it. So why is it there?

On the "NT Wright" view, this qualifier is apt and necessary - it refers to the distinction between Jew and Gentile, an issue that has been in view throughout chapter 3. And, of course, that distinction lies not in issues of "doing good works", but in the ethnic specificity of the practices of Torah that mark out the Jew from the Gentile.

 

[Drew]

Is there a "one verse-zinger" that shows that Paul is focussing specifically on the "demarcating" aspects of Torah and is not, instead, focusing on the 'moral" content of Torah? I do not think so. But I think we need to give Paul the credit for being a good writer. In Romans 4:9-12 he homes in on circumcision - clearly not a "moral" issue. I think it is a real strain to think that Paul did this for reasons other than to underscore the distinction between Jew and Gentile.

All throughout the letter, Paul critiques the "boast of the Jew" - the Jew who thinks that his possession of Torah gives him an inside track on justification. From Romans 10:

2For I can testify about them that they (***ethnic Jews, obviously) are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. 3Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness.

Paul is critiquing the pervasive belief among the Jews that grace is confined to one race. I suspect that some may argue that the Jews were trying to establish a righteousness based on their moral good works. Well, consider what Paul goes on to say at the very end of the chapter:

Again I ask: Did Israel not understand? First, Moses says,
"I will make you envious by those who are not a nation;
I will make you angry by a nation that has no understanding."[j] 20And Isaiah boldly says,
"I was found by those who did not seek me;
I revealed myself to those who did not ask for me."[k] 21But concerning Israel he says,
"All day long I have held out my hands
to a disobedient and obstinate people

Again, I would appeal to the reader to at least provisionally assume that Paul is not a schizophrenic writer. In the above material, he is clearly concerned with the distinction between the Jew and the Gentile, not with "Pelegianism". If we let Paul be a coherent writer, we see that here, yet again, the issue is ethnicity, not good works.

 

[RadicalReformer]

Drew, Scripture is not complex. Just on the basis that you admit that your "scheme of justification" (never heard of Biblical doctrines being called 'schemes' before *shrug*) is "relatively complex" - your scheme losses footing.

Again, you simply claim that Scripture is not complex as if God "owes" us something simple. You are not engaging in fair and proper debate here - you cannot merely deny the truth of something just because it is not as simple as you would like it to be.

God is a very sophisticated and subtle - it is not at all surprising to me that justification is not as simple as "accept Jesus today and you are in"

Genesis 15:6 is the reference point for Romans 4:4-5. On this basis your scheme falls flat.

Let the reader read Scripture, not some convoluted "scheme" that is "relatively complex".

Drew - Justification is a done deal for the believer. Christ is either our propitation for our sins or He is not. Look up the meaning and understand the whole compass of propitiation.

Sanctitfication is the process of God, transforming the believer into the likeness of Christ after the believer has already been Justified in the eyes of God.

If your response to my position is to simply state that I am wrong without explaining yourself or showing specific errors in my position, I think the careful reader will have no reason to believe you.

My position, of course, works with Genesis 15:6. You seem to almost be taking this position: "Well since Abraham's faith was credited to him as righteousness, we can ignore Paul's clear teaching about justification by works as per Romans 2:7:

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

My position, I will claim, takes both Genesis 15:6 and Romans 2:7 seriously. There have been no credible arguments as to why we can view Romans 2:7 as a path to justification that no one will take:

1. One poster has argued that this text is about the Jews only - that position is absurd, since Paul thrice underscores - this judgement is for Jew and Gentile.

2. It has also been argued that Paul tells us in Romans 3 that the path described in 2:7 is unattainable. Well that certainly makes Paul into an awfully odd writer - I will repost something in this respect shortly.

I agree with the general flavour of what unred has said as well.

Drew - who did Paul address in Romans 2:17?

Oh... I have put unred on my iggy list - so I do not see his posts. Under "User Control Panel" one can name posters as "foes" which block their posts.

 

[Drew]

Drew - who did Paul address in Romans 2:17?

The Jews.

But there is no way someone can argue that the verses before it are directed to only the Jews. No less than three times does Paul make it clear that in the in block leading up to 2:17, he is talking about Jews and Gentiles. This is, quite frankly, beyond dispute:

5But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. 6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11For God does not show favoritism.

12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.

The above block of text is so clearly about both Jews and Gentiles, I am utterly mystified that anyone would try to argue that this is about the Jews. I am not saying that you are saying this necessarily.

 

[unred typo]

quote by RadicalReformer:
Drew - who did Paul address in Romans 2:17?

Answering a question with a question really isn't an answer, is it? *smirk* You see, by asking me another question, you have not provided *your* answer. I know what I think on the subject, the point of the original question is to learn your understanding.

Oh, I should credit who I learned that bit of wisdom from:

quote by RadicalReformer in General Forum, Re: Athiest query on Mon Dec 31, 2007:

Answering a question with a question really isn't an answer, is it? *smirk* You see, by asking me another question, you have not provided *your* answer. I know what I think on the subject, the point of the original question is to learn your understanding.

Great answer, Rad. I may have to use it again. :wink:

quote by RadicalReformer:
Oh... I have put unred on my iggy list - so I do not see his posts. Under "User Control Panel" one can name posters as "foes" which block their posts.

Great. That means I can answer your posts without listening to your exasperating replies. I never could understand the concept of an ignore list. It’s like blindfolding yourself and tying your hands behind your back when facing your opponent. Duh. And, Rad, remember, no fair peeking... 8-) :-D

 

[unred typo]

quote by Drew:
My position, of course, works with Genesis 15:6. You seem to almost be taking this position: "Well since Abraham's faith was credited to him as righteousness, we can ignore Paul's clear teaching about justification by works as per Romans 2:7:

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

My position, I will claim, takes both Genesis 15:6 and Romans 2:7 seriously. There have been no credible arguments as to why we can view Romans 2:7 as a path to justification that no one will take:

1. One poster has argued that this text is about the Jews only - that position is absurd, since Paul thrice underscores - this judgement is for Jew and Gentile.

2. It has also been argued that Paul tells us in Romans 3 that the path described in 2:7 is unattainable. Well that certainly makes Paul into an awfully odd writer - I will repost something in this respect shortly.

Still no answer to your question here. There apparently are no credible answers as to why they view Romans 2:7 as a path to justification that no one will take. I’m a little mystified as to why they do not at least try something with the ‘all have sinned’ angle, but if a person wants to hold onto their error, it’s better to keep a false hope stored away and not let all their fallacies be blown to bits. I suspect that the answer is that they know it is wrong but they prefer it to the truth. And why not? The downhill path is easier for coasting.

 

[RadicalReformer]

1 Cor 3:11 - For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ

Drew, let us begin this study by noting the foundation that I trust we both have - Jesus Christ. May the Holy Spirit guide our studying and our understanding. While you might have addressed some of these things in the previous pages... to be honest, I find long drawn out posts daunting to read. Therefore, I would like to focus on small sections of text.

Let's start in Chapter 3 verse 20 and continuing through to verse 24. I will be using the NASB.

• 20because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin.
  21But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,
  22even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction;
  23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
  24being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;

in verse 20, Paul gives us the purpose of the Law - it is "through the Law" that we have "knowledge of sin". And as verse 9 and verse 23 says, all are under sin - both Jew and Gentile. However, it is important to understand that Paul is addressing a primarily Jewish audience. That is not to say that these passages apply only to the Jews - however, to understand what Paul is writing, we do need to know the audience that he is addressing.

Continuing in verse 21, Paul says that the "righteousness of God" has been witnessed by the Law and the Prophets and even the righteousness of God is witnessed "through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe."

There is no distinction between the righteousness witnessed through the Law and Prophets, and that of faith in Jesus Christ. In other words, the righteousness that the Gentiles experience through faith in Jesus Christ is the same as the righteousness that the Jews experience through the Law and Prophets.

There is no distinction because "all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God." The Jew and the Gentile. Paul references the Gentiles to show the Jews that they are no different. They cannot claim superiority - that their "righteousness" is better.

We conclude this section with Paul's words that we (those who have put their faith in Christ) are all "justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus."

Here the Holy Spirit, using Paul, is very clear that justification comes not by our works, but rather is a gift. A gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus. In other words, the work that Christ did on the Cross - His redemptive work is used by God in His grace to grant us justification.

 

[RadicalReformer]

Drew, in response to verse 2:7, I would suggest that we would should start a new thread on the subject. The question that I would have for this passage of Scripture is: Is this passage dealing with the "salvation of God" or the "judgment of God"?

I would contend that Romans 2 is not dealing with salvation, but rather dealing with judgment. Verse 1-2: "Therefore you have you excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. And we know that the judgment of God rightly falls upon those who practice such things."

 

[Drew]

Drew, in response to verse 2:7, I would suggest that we would should start a new thread on the subject. The question that I would have for this passage of Scripture is: Is this passage dealing with the "salvation of God" or the "judgment of God"?

I would contend that Romans 2 is not dealing with salvation, but rather dealing with judgment. Verse 1-2: "Therefore you have you excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. And we know that the judgment of God rightly falls upon those who practice such things."

I already started a thread on the subject of Romans 2 - no one has responded to it. It is in the Apologetics forum.

But on the distinction between "salvation" and "judgement", I think Romans 2:7 makes it quite clear - eternal life is at stake.

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

Paul is not merely describing a judgement where "rewards" in heaven are handed out, with one's membership in heaven otherwise secured.

 

[unred typo]

quote by RadicalReformer:
1 Cor 3:11 - For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ

Drew, let us begin this study by noting the foundation that I trust we both have - Jesus Christ. May the Holy Spirit guide our studying and our understanding. While you might have addressed some of these things in the previous pages... to be honest, I find long drawn out posts daunting to read. Therefore, I would like to focus on small sections of text.

You talk a good game but your admission here tells the story:

quote by RadicalReformer:
…to be honest, I find long drawn out posts daunting to read. Therefore, I would like to focus on small sections of text.

This inability to read the entire subject and gain an understanding of the overall picture can really hamper us when we read a challenging book like Romans. If we have a firm foundation, as you so correctly pointed out, we can focus on small sections of text without getting tunnel vision. That foundation is Christ and the message of love for the world that he brought from heaven itself: The word from God who is love. It was the message of this love of God that was made flesh and demonstrated for us with the ultimate sacrifice for the ultimate unworthy.

quote by RadicalReformer:
Let's start in Chapter 3 verse 20 and continuing through to verse 24. I will be using the NASB.

20because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin.
21But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,
22even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction;
23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
24being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;


in verse 20, Paul gives us the purpose of the Law - it is "through the Law" that we have "knowledge of sin". And as verse 9 and verse 23 says, all are under sin - both Jew and Gentile. However, it is important to understand that Paul is addressing a primarily Jewish audience. That is not to say that these passages apply only to the Jews - however, to understand what Paul is writing, we do need to know the audience that he is addressing.

The audience he is addressing is “To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.†Depending on your theology, that can mean ‘the chosen few elected for salvation,’ or it can mean all those who have been called to salvation and especially to those who have responded and are already part of the body of believers. Paul’s mission is to equip those who believe to reach out to those who still dwell in darkness with the gospel that Jesus taught.

Reading your section of Romans 3:20 in the correct light we have:
20because by the works (ceremonial works of Torah) of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law (moral law of God and the Torah) comes the knowledge of sin. (How does circumcision show sin? Hint: 2:29 It is only a picture of removing sin from our hearts, not to be confused with any merit in the actual rite of circumcision if it is done only outwardly, and not on the heart as well)

quote by RadicalReformer:
Continuing in verse 21, Paul says that the "righteousness of God" has been witnessed by the Law and the Prophets and even the righteousness of God is witnessed "through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe."

There is no distinction between the righteousness witnessed through the Law and Prophets, and that of faith in Jesus Christ. In other words, the righteousness that the Gentiles experience through faith in Jesus Christ is the same as the righteousness that the Jews experience through the Law and Prophets.

True. Faith in Christ is the same faith that the Jews displayed when they obeyed the law and the prophets. It is a faith that shows they believed that what God promised to do, he would most certainly deliver.

quote by RadicalReformer:
There is no distinction because "all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God." The Jew and the Gentile. Paul references the Gentiles to show the Jews that they are no different. They cannot claim superiority - that their "righteousness" is better.

This is true also. God concluded them all under sin that he might have mercy upon all. The distinction of national heritage had nothing to do with personal merit or eternal salvation. The faith of the Gentile was as redeeming as the faith of the Jew.

quote by RadicalReformer:
We conclude this section with Paul's words that we (those who have put their faith in Christ) are all "justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus."

Here the Holy Spirit, using Paul, is very clear that justification comes not by our works, but rather is a gift. A gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus. In other words, the work that Christ did on the Cross - His redemptive work is used by God in His grace to grant us justification.

Here you have made a critical error. The law was a gift from God to the Jews. Just because he gave it to them, didn’t mean that they didn’t have to follow it. The sacrificial system whereby they received atonement for sins was a gift. That didn’t mean they didn’t have to sacrifice their animals and obey the laws that pertained to the offerings. The way of salvation that Jesus taught was also a gift. Does that mean we don’t have to follow it? The blood of Christ was a gift to remove our sin. Does that mean we don’t have to confess and repent to have it work for us? Read this again:

24being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;

Our redemption is in Christ. He that has the son has life. If his word is not in us, if we are not obeying it and following him, we are still dead in trespasses and sins. We have not received the gift. If we walk in the light as he is in the light, the gift of the blood cleanses us from all unrighteousness. He that hears those sayings of Christ and does them have built their life on the foundation of the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[mondar]

Drew, in response to verse 2:7, I would suggest that we would should start a new thread on the subject. The question that I would have for this passage of Scripture is: Is this passage dealing with the "salvation of God" or the "judgment of God"?

I would contend that Romans 2 is not dealing with salvation, but rather dealing with judgment. Verse 1-2: "Therefore you have you excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. And we know that the judgment of God rightly falls upon those who practice such things."

RR, you are so very correct in your reading of the contexts. You recognize that it is a very incorrect method of reading context to import a misreading of Romans 2 into an obvious passage like Romans 4:4-5. Romans 4:4-5 could not be more clear that works only brings debt. Faith brings justification.

Sorry for not keeping up with the thread. Other things are taking my time right now.

 

[Drew]

Continuing in verse 21, Paul says that the "righteousness of God" has been witnessed by the Law and the Prophets and even the righteousness of God is witnessed "through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe."

There is no distinction between the righteousness witnessed through the Law and Prophets, and that of faith in Jesus Christ. In other words, the righteousness that the Gentiles experience through faith in Jesus Christ is the same as the righteousness that the Jews experience through the Law and Prophets.

It is clear that you have not read all of my posts, otherwise you would know how I am going to respond. I claim that the phrase "faith in Jesus Christ" from verse 22 entails a decision on the part of the NIV translator's to render the original Greek in that manner when it is also legitimate to have rendered that expression as "faithfulness of Jesus Christ". In fact, consider the Youngs "literal" translation rendering:

and the righteousness of God through the faith of Jesus Christ to all, and upon all those believing, -- for there is no difference.

For exactly the same technical reasons (having to do with Greek genitives - we can get into that if you like), verse 21 can also be legitimately translated as:

But now God's own righteousness (i.e. his fidelity to the covenant), apart from law, has been made known....

If these alternate translations are more faithful to the overall letter, and I think they are for reasons I have already gone into, then the "reformed" mistake is to see these verses as describing a righteous state that we get from God. Part of my whole argument is that what is being described is the righteous behaviour on the part of God - righteous in the sense of His being true to His covenant.

So Paul is not even talking about something that Jew or Gentile "experience", he is talking about God's faithfulness, not any kind of imputed state that we get.

Just one of many items of evidence in support of this position is the following from earlier in Romans 3:

What if some did not have faith? Will their lack of faith nullify God's faithfulness? 4Not at all!

Paul is clearly talking about God's faithfulness to his covenant. I suggest that he is on the same subject in verses 20 and following. God demonstrates his own righteousness, through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ.

 

[unred typo]

quote by RadicalReformer:
Drew, in response to verse 2:7, I would suggest that we would should start a new thread on the subject. The question that I would have for this passage of Scripture is: Is this passage dealing with the "salvation of God" or the "judgment of God"?

I would contend that Romans 2 is not dealing with salvation, but rather dealing with judgment. Verse 1-2: "Therefore you have you excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. And we know that the judgment of God rightly falls upon those who practice such things."

Drew has started a new thread on the subject but no one has bothered to answer it. If you read my previous post to Drew, you might have gotten a ‘heads up.’ you can see it here: When you take your blindfold off that is… 8-) :-D
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=30806

Since it would be a mess up of this thread to follow up here, I’m going to post in the new thread, but I really was waiting to see who else would respond. At least a dozen people have read it by now.

 

[Drew]

RR, you are so very correct in your reading of the contexts. You recognize that it is a very incorrect method of reading context to import a misreading of Romans 2 into an obvious passage like Romans 4:4-5. Romans 4:4-5 could not be more clear that works only brings debt. Faith brings justification.

Sorry for not keeping up with the thread. Other things are taking my time right now.

It is understandable that you have been busy.

However, you are simply stating a position here. I, admittedly with more time on my hands perhaps, have provided a detailed argument about Romans 4:4-5. I suggest that I have satisfactorily addressed each of your objections, such as the "circumcision is not really a work of Torah objection" and your arguments about imputation.

Please, if you think that this is not so, we can revisit. But lets be clear: just like I would not expect the reader to accept my "say-so" about what Romans 4 (and Romans 2) is all about, I would not think s/he will accept your "say-so".

The reader deserves an explanation of why s/he should see things a certain way. If and when you have time, please critique the arguments in this thread and / or explain if you think all your objections have not been satisfactorily addressed.

 

[tblaine74]

I don’t believe I am even close to qualified to post in this thread in response to the specifics of what is being considered. However, I do have some related thoughts. If Christian faith is dependant on works for substantiation, then the justification argument for either in particular seams a bit trivial? I recognize the importance of this thread, as it seems necessary for dealing with someone who forfeits reason to accept an interpretation of writing. In which case, Drew would need to demonstrate that they have accepted the wrong interpretation, in order to reconcile them with reason. Assuming you are trying to relieve the ignorance of “faith without works†doctrine, I will start a thread in hopes of addressing the problem from a theological or philosophical perspective. I think your work in this thread is very impressive.