Drew said:
mondar said:
What are works? Works are the fruits of saving faith. Works are that which shows faith to be saving.
It will no doubt come as no surprise to you that I disagree. Here in Romans 2, Paul speaks of people being "saved" in terms of receiving eternal life according to their deeds:
God "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.
I think that Paul means exactly what he says here.
You are taking the poistion that "works are the fruits of saving faith".
I take the position that Paul discerns a
tense structure to both salvation and the closely related, yet distinct, concept of justification: there is a
present justification (salvation) by faith, and there is a
future justification (salvation) by good deeds (or goods works, if you prefer).
The way they work together is this:
Because of the transforming power of the Holy Spirit, which is given on the basis of faith and faith alone, the person is changed into the kind of person who will manifest the "good deeds" that will justify him (save him) at the end.
Thus one can agree with Paul that people are justified (in the present) based on their faith.
And one can also agree with Paul (in Romans 2) that these same people
will be justified, at the end, based on their deeds.
And one is not forced to sweep Romans 2 under the rug as many do.
As one who takes a high view of the authority of scriptures, I would not want to sweep anything in the scriptures under the rug. I hope you are not suggesting that I am doing that? And yes, of course I know we disagree strongly.
Why dont we both present a positive exegesis of Romans 2 and just let it go. I would suggest we focus on exegesis of the text and demonstrating how all parts fit together into a context, if you are willing. I will go first.
INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS ON CONTEXT
Romans 2 is not a chapter on the method of salvation. That does not come until Chapter 3. Romans 2 logically follows Romans 1. In Romans 1 it is shown how the nations are without excuse because of their rebellion against God. Romans 2 shows that Gods "impartial" judgment is also on the Jew. God is not showing favoritism to the Jew because he is Jewish.
11 for there is no respect of persons with God.
Romans 2 is especially about the impartial judgment of God specifically upon the Jew. It was the Jew that condemned the Gentile, but then the Jew turned around and did the same things as the Gentile.
1 Wherefore thou art without excuse, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judges another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest dost practise the same things.
In verse 1, the term "O man" is not referring to Gentiles, but Jews.
2 And we know that the judgment of God is according to truth against them that practise such things.
In verse 2, he again restates his theme, that the judgment of God is impartially against the Jew who practices the things that the same Jewish people judge gentiles for. The judgment of God is not according to favoritism, but according to "
truth."
3 And reckonest thou this, O man, who judgest them that practise such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?
4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?
5 but after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up for thyself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;
6 who will render to every man according to his works:
Notice again how verse 3 goes back to verse 1 and term "
O man" is repeated. Mr. Jew, or "
O man" is to be judged for practicing the same things as Gentiles. One of the great sins of Mr. "O man" is that he despisisest the riches of his goodness." This of course is a reference not to insufficient works, but a rejection of grace. Recognizing the context so far, verse 6 is not a statement that salvation is of works. That would be to isolate verse 6 from verses 1-5. Verse 6 is to be read in the context of 1-5 and seen as a statement that each will receive his own."
7 to them that by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and incorruption, eternal life:
Certainly the sinless will receive eternal life, but in light of the context, and the fact that it is about the impartially of Gods judgment, this verse is not a method of salvation, but only a statement of Gods impartial judgment.
*** If Paul is making a statement concerning Gods impartiality in judgment, he must of course also make a statement about the fact that if one can be righteous, God will reward him with eternal life. The idea of this statement is not a method of salvation, but a statement of the positive side of Gods impartiality.
8 but unto them that are factious, and obey not the truth, but obey unrighteousness, shall be wrath and indignation,
9 tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that worketh evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Greek;
This is of course a passage on the negative. It is to the Jew first. It is to "O man." In this passage, Paul makes it clear that Gods judgment is on both Jew and Gentile, but the passage is mainly about the Jew who judges the Gentile, and then practices the same things.
10 but glory and honor and peace to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek:
Again, to be impartial in judgment, Paul has to include this option. If only the judgment option was mentioned, would God without the possibility that God would reward righteousness, would it be a statement of God's impartiality?
11 for there is no respect of persons with God.
Key Verse
12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without the law: and as many as have sinned under the law shall be judged by the law;
13 for not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified: This passage is about the Jew and his judgment under the law. Notice verse 13 and the concept of "hearers of the law." Every sabbath, the Jew would read the Mosaic Law in the synagogue. They heard the reading of the Law and the Jew thought that because they had the Law, because they heard the Law, they were just before God. Paul tells the Jew that their future justification is based not upon the hearing of the Law, but their doing the Mosaic Law.
*** This cannot be a universal Law because of the concept of "hearing the Law" does not work with any concept of universal Law. Neither would it fit with the Jewish context. The "O man" is the Jewish person who judges the Gentile.
14 (for when Gentiles that have not the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are the law unto themselves;
Notice the proof that the Law referred to in verse 13 is the Msoaic Law. It is specificly stated here that the "
Gentiles that have not the law." If these verses were speaking of a universal Law, the Gentiles would be under that Law.
15 in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness therewith, and their thoughts one with another accusing or else excusing them); Even Gentiles will honor their parents. Even Gentiles will know that Adultry is actually wrong. How do they know these things? We were created with conscience and the image of God. The image of God was marred in the fall, but not irradiated.
*** It is important to note that this text does not refer to the New Covenant. The New Covenant speaks of regeneration. That regeneration is not for the unregenerate. These verses are not teaching universal regeneration, but that there is a remnant of the image of God and conscience left in the Gentiles who practice certain things found in the Mosiac Law.
16 in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men, according to my gospel, by Jesus Christ.
Notice the concept of judgment again. Paul is writing about the impartial judgment of God all the way through this context. That is the point of the passage. It is especially targeting the Jew under the Mosaic Law. In fact the universal Law of God does not come into play in this context.
17 But if thou bearest the name of a Jew, and restest upon the law, and gloriest in God,
18 and knowest his will, and approvest the things that are excellent, being instructed out of the law,
Again, notice the Jewishness of the context and how it refers to the Mosaic Law. The Jew is mentioned by himself here. The Jew did not rest of the universal Law, but the Mosaic Law.
19 and art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them that are in darkness,
20 a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having in the law the form of knowledge and of the truth;
21 thou therefore that teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?
22 thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou rob temples?
23 thou who gloriest in the law, through thy transgression of the law dishonorest thou God? This is the final text I am going to include in this post. Again, just read the verses. The context begins with Paul accusing Mr. O Man of judging another for doing what he practices himself. As verse 21 says, Mr. O man is a teacher of the Gentiles who does not teach himself. Notice the 10 commandments here. This again is not the universal Law.
CONCLUSION
Take things back to verse 13. Verse 13 is not talking about a universal law as the basis of justification. It is talking about the Mosaic Law. To read the Chapter as speaking of God's impartial justice with reference to the Jew is consistent with all parts. To isolate certain verses like verse 7, 10, and 13, and then to make a case that it is a means of "future justification" on the basis of the works of a universal law of God does not consider the entire context.
I observe that few on these threads have the ability to go beyond a verse or 2 for a context. I challenge the reader to not merely consider verses 7, 10, and 13, but to consider how they fit in with the larger context of this chapter, and also the whole of Romans.
-----------
Your turn Drew, can you comment on each verse and demonstrate how they are connected to a whole context?
