Gal 2:16 and Rom 2:13 : Works of the Law Justifies or not?

[fhansen]

No, I'm quite happy to consider what Rom 7 may have meant in this regard, but you're just doubling down and saying what I said you said. You are stating that what God told Israel under the Law was essentially meaningless *for them,* and making it all about revelation for *another people!*

Um, no, the New covenant is for everyone. The old covenant played its role. And the new one now brings it to fulfillment.

I don't know how you can say that? Our nature certainly did change after Adam and Eve sinned.

Rom 7.18 For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out.

As I stated, it doesn't say "sinful nature". The correct, nuanced, meaning is important in understanding the effect of the Fall on man. Again, it's not so much that his nature changed as it is that it lost something. He didn't become something new, iOW as if evil were added to him in some way ;he simply lost part of the goodness that he was created in. As is the case with all evil, evil is a privation of good, and everything that God created is inherently good.

Well, that is obviously untrue because when God's truth convicts a man, he repents, knowing he is distant from God. If fallen men can repent they can be made aware of their distance from God.

The church has correctly taught for centuries that grace necessarily precedes everything, including the revelation of truths and even our movement to respond to them. There are certainly "motives of credibility", as they're sometimes called, that the rational mind can perceive and react to, but ultimately to believe in God and the truth-claims of Christianity requires grace.

At least we agree on something! Yes, "freedom" is the catchword we hear continually in our age. But it is "freedom from God" the world is talking about. The world takes the worst possible side on every issue if only they can preserve their freedom from God! They don't like the Holy Spirit standing behind them, telling them what is wise and what is just. They want to determine their own fate. And they'll get their wish!

But you utterly fail to see, in this discussion, what the true difference is between the covenants. It is the issue of a permanent solution and Eternal Life, which failed under the old system but succeeds under the new system. However, the old system had far more benefits than you are crediting it with!

I just credited the old covenant with whatever it's due and whatever scripture credits it with. And the church teaches that there is much that is important in the old covenant as it shows us what we need to do to please God. We just need another Component in order to actually carry it out. The revelation, in "the fullness of time" that eternal life is the true promised land, that defines the real purpose and aspiration of the human heart, is all part of the fuller New covenant revelation, presented to us in "the fullness of time", of who God is and what His will for man has always been.

 

[RandyPNW]

Um, no, the New covenant is for everyone. The old covenant played its role. And the new one now brings it to fulfillment.

Don't you understand what I'm saying? You're saying that the Law, *during its term of aopplication,* was in your eyes essentially meaningless! It didn't atone for sin, didn't reconcile Israel to God, didn't forgive tthem or give them spiritual nourishment--nada! Why aren't you answering the question?

As I stated, it doesn't say "sinful nature". The correct, nuanced, meaning is important in understanding the effect of the Fall on man. Again, it's not so much that his nature changed as it is that it lost something. He didn't become something new, iOW as if evil were added to him in some way ;he simply lost part of the goodness that he was created in. As is the case with all evil, evil is a privation of good, and everything that God created is inherently good.

No, I quoted to you directly from the Scriptures. Reference to a "sinful nature" is a different *nature* than that Adam was created with. You apparently don't believe what the Scriptures said about his having obtained a "sinful nature?"

The church has correctly taught for centuries that grace necessarily precedes everything, including the revelation of truths and even our movement to respond to them. There are certainly "motives of credibility", as they're sometimes called, that the rational mind can perceive and react to, but ultimately to believe in God and the truth-claims of Christianity requires grace.

I don't think I've said anything different from that? God's grace is part of God's nature. He always initiates by HIs grace, whether it is creating the world or forgiving the sinner who repents. I'm not sure what you're arguing at this point?

I just credited the old covenant with whatever it's due and whatever scripture credits it with. And the church teaches that there is much that is important in the old covenant as it shows us what we need to do to please God. We just need another Component in order to actually carry it out.

Carry what out? What is it you're saying that the New Covenant is enabling Israel to "carry out?"

The revelation, in "the fullness of time" that eternal life is the true promised land, that defines the real purpose and aspiration of the human heart, is all part of the fuller New covenant revelation, presented to us in "the fullness of time", of who God is and what His will for man has always been.

Eternal Life is what I said from the start was what set the New Covenant apart from the Old Covenant. And now you're agreeing with me?

 

[fhansen]

Don't you understand what I'm saying? You're saying that the Law, *during its term of aopplication,* was in your eyes essentially meaningless! It didn't atone for sin, didn't reconcile Israel to God, didn't forgive tthem or give them spiritual nourishment--nada! Why aren't you answering the question?

But I never said it was meaningless. I basically said this:

For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8 But God found fault with the people and said:

“The days are coming, declares the Lord,
when I will make a new covenant
with the people of Israel
and with the people of Judah.
9 It will not be like the covenant
I made with their ancestors
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they did not remain faithful to my covenant,
and I turned away from them,
declares the Lord.
10 This is the covenant I will establish with the people of Israel
after that time, declares the Lord.
I will put my laws in their minds
and write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
11 No longer will they teach th neighbor,
or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
12 For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more.”[c]

13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear. Heb 8:7-13

God found fault with the people. Why? Because the OC could not produce the cure for what ailed them! I also gave a broader meaning as well. But here's a fuller treatment that I agree with from a catechism I'm familiar with:

1961 God, our Creator and Redeemer, chose Israel for himself to be his people and revealed his Law to them, thus preparing for the coming of Christ. The Law of Moses expresses many truths naturally accessible to reason. These are stated and authenticated within the covenant of salvation.

1962 The Old Law is the first stage of revealed Law. Its moral prescriptions are summed up in the Ten Commandments. The precepts of the Decalogue lay the foundations for the vocation of man fashioned in the image of God; they prohibit what is contrary to the love of God and neighbor and prescribe what is essential to it. The Decalogue is a light offered to the conscience of every man to make God's call and ways known to him and to protect him against evil:

God wrote on the tables of the Law what men did not read in their hearts.13

1963 According to Christian tradition, the Law is holy, spiritual, and good,14 yet still imperfect. Like a tutor15 it shows what must be done, but does not of itself give the strength, the grace of the Spirit, to fulfill it. Because of sin, which it cannot remove, it remains a law of bondage. According to St. Paul, its special function is to denounce and disclose sin, which constitutes a "law of concupiscence" in the human heart.16 However, the Law remains the first stage on the way to the kingdom. It prepares and disposes the chosen people and each Christian for conversion and faith in the Savior God. It provides a teaching which endures for ever, like the Word of God.

1964 The Old Law is a preparation for the Gospel. "The Law is a pedagogy and a prophecy of things to come."17 It prophesies and presages the work of liberation from sin which will be fulfilled in Christ: it provides the New Testament with images, "types," and symbols for expressing the life according to the Spirit. Finally, the Law is completed by the teaching of the sapiential books and the prophets which set its course toward the New Covenant and the Kingdom of heaven.

There were . . . under the regimen of the Old Covenant, people who possessed the charity and grace of the Holy Spirit and longed above all for the spiritual and eternal promises by which they were associated with the New Law. Conversely, there exist carnal men under the New Covenant still distanced from the perfection of the New Law: the fear of punishment and certain temporal promises have been necessary, even under the New Covenant, to incite them to virtuous works. In any case, even though the Old Law prescribed charity, it did not give the Holy Spirit, through whom "God's charity has been poured into our hearts."18

 

[fhansen]

No, I quoted to you directly from the Scriptures. Reference to a "sinful nature" is a different *nature* than that Adam was created with. You apparently don't believe what the Scriptures said about his having obtained a "sinful nature?"

That's been explained, maybe twice now. You quoted a poor translation while I gave the correct translation along with the word that was translated-and the correct understanding of its relationship to the effects of the Fall on man.

I don't think I've said anything different from that? God's grace is part of God's nature. He always initiates by HIs grace, whether it is creating the world or forgiving the sinner who repents. I'm not sure what you're arguing at this point?

No, I have no idea why you're arguing this point. You objected to my statement: "And of course fallen man has no consciousness of his distance from God; he has no real consciousness of God to begin with because he’s born distant from Him and has no means to find Him, if he even has that desire. That distance from God-and the family tradition of pride that it stemmed from-is an evil, an injustice, in itself. We need no other “sin”, no other state of being, than that alienation into a world with no God in sight ending in physical death in order to guarantee a sinful life/world."

 

[fhansen]

Carry what out? What is it you're saying that the New Covenant is enabling Israel to "carry out?"

The NC enables all to fulfill what God wants for and from man, to come to love and serve Him, to fulfill Micah 6:8, for example, to realize eternal life by doing His will on earth as it is in heaven.
"And what does the Lord require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy
and to walk humbly with your God." Micah 6:8

Eternal Life is what I said from the start was what set the New Covenant apart from the Old Covenant. And now you're agreeing with me?

I only maintained that you can't reduce it to that one thing, the difference is in how we get there-and the OC is insufficient while the NC is sufficient. Reconciliation with, resulting in communion with, God, beginning in this life, is the key to understanding the NC. You said the OC already had all that.

 

[fhansen]

But you changed this argument to something else, to "good indwelling the flesh"--whatever that means?

Show me where I said it and then maybe I can explain what it means. It doesn't sound right TBH, or like something I would've wrote, unless it's just awkward outside of the context.

The human will has the ability to resist sin. God told Cain that before he murdered his brother. If a person chooses not to rely on God's goodness, of course he will be overcome by evil desires.

Yes, that's why the will of man continues to play its part in his sin. And yet, until man enters fellowship with God, he will never enter or procure the love that can-and ultimately will- ward sin off eternally.

But I think you should go back and read this conversation more carefully or something-and study God’s word more as well as the early fathers. As it is this has been more or less an exercise in wheel-spinning.

 

[RandyPNW]

The NC enables all to fulfill what God wants for and from man, to come to love and serve Him, to fulfill Micah 6:8, to realize eternal life by doing His will on earth as it is in heaven.
"And what does the Lord require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy
and to walk humbly with your God." Micah 6:8

I only maintained that you can't reduce it to that one thing, the difference is in how we get there-and the OC is insufficient while the NC is sufficient. Reconciliation with, resulting in communion with, God, beginning in this life, is the key to understanding the NC. You said the OC already had all that.

I'm not really sure we're communicating at this point. Perhaps it's best to let things lie?

 

[fhansen]

I'm not really sure we're communicating at this point. Perhaps it's best to let things lie?

Good idea. Cheers.

 

[Lukaris]

in Gal 2:16, we read;

"know that a man is not justified by works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified."

However, in the Romans 2:13, it is written;

"For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but it is the doers of the law who will be declared righteous."

?

I believe the difference is that Christians are saved by grace, through faith, for good works with hope ( Ephesians 2:8-10, John 14:15-18, Romans 8:24-25, Hebrews 11:1-3 etc.). Outside of this all individuals face possible condemnation but God will judge our works and will honor those He approves ( Ezekiel 18:4-9, Psalm 15:1-5, Romans 2:6-16, John 3:16-21, John 5:22-30 etc.).

 

[RandyPNW]

Good idea. Cheers.

Yea, sometimes we get stuck in a mindset and can no longer match points. That could be you, me, or both of us. No matter--take care.

 

[NewLifeInChristJesus]

Which no one can do and, therefore, no one will be declared righteous by observing the law.

The theme of Ro at this point is the unrighteousness of all mankind where, having shown the unrighteousness of the Gentiles, Paul is now showing the unrighteousness of the Jews based on the law, which they are unable to keep perfectly.

His point is to show that all mankind, Gentile and Jew, are condemned (Ro 3:20) and in need of salvation.

I like your approach... direct and to the point.

 

[BelieveItOarKnot]

in Gal 2:16, we read;

"know that a man is not justified by works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified."

However, in the Romans 2:13, it is written;

"For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but it is the doers of the law who will be declared righteous."

?

You might consider a "doer" of the law is one who UPHOLDS the law against our own internal sin and lawlessness, even though it's quite factually against those workings in us all.

Not a common approach, but it eliminates confusions

I am quite happy God is against my own sin and lawlessness. Not that I can somehow escape that conclusion.

 

[BelieveItOarKnot]

Disobeying God is what separated us

As if Perfect Obedience was ever on the table?

An unlikely no way

 

[BelieveItOarKnot]

The old covenant is permanently against the evil within everyone, with the sole exception being Jesus, sinless, without fault or blemish.

Jesus was and is The Living Law, yes, of the O.T. Word of God also. He Is that Word.

Is it a bad thing that Jesus is against all evil and sin? I'd think not. In fact I'd expect God to be that way, wouldn't you?

The only sad thing is when we are deluded enough to think we escape it's LAWFUL conclusions of GUILTY, because that never happened for anyone. Yet there are such parading about as if they are perfectly obedient and that Jesus made them so. A very bad joke played on them I'm afraid. Only Jesus is Perfectly Compliant and He is only satisfied with His Own Perfect Performance. Anyone else would just be a sorry poser.

There is nothing wrong with being saved by Grace, through no performance of our own. That's kind of the whole point is it not?

And our abilities to perform do not change after salvation. The evil in no one can love our neighbors "perfectly" either. It's just not even possible. So there's another delusion.

We all get a little candle light put within us that reveals our own darkness. That's as much as we get in this present life.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

As if Perfect Obedience was ever on the table?

An unlikely no way

It was before the fall and God promises through Him, He can make us this way again Mat 1:21 John 14:15-18

 

[RandyPNW]

You might consider a "doer" of the law is one who UPHOLDS the law against our own internal sin and lawlessness, even though it's quite factually against those workings in us all.

Not a common approach, but it eliminates confusions

I am quite happy God is against my own sin and lawlessness. Not that I can somehow escape that conclusion.

My view is that Man can do good even in his Sinful Condition. Sin does not prevent us from choosing to accept Christ. Sin does not prevent non-Christians from choosing to cooperate with God's word, consciously or unconsciously.

What Paul means by "Works of the Law not justifying us" is that our *record of good works* is insufficient to qualify for Eternal Life. Just a single flaw, and we're "kicked out of Heaven."

So, the Works of the Law were never intended to justify us or to give Israel a way to obtain Eternal Life. The Works of the Law benefited Israel in keeping them close to God and temporarily accepted of God, but they were also a reminder that Israel could not obtain by those flawed works Eternal Life.

It was just a temporary means for Israel to stay in step with God until redemption could be provided for them by Christ, whose works did in fact qualify us for Eternal Life. We obtain righteousness that qualifies for Eternal Life by choosing to live in his spirituality.

Again, our having a righteousness with a flawed record never impeded the free exercise of our free will, nor the ability to choose for God or to do good. What we are impeded from is access to the Tree of Life on the basis of Israel's flawed Works of the Law or on the basis of any human works that omit Christ's justifying works and their record of sinlessness.

But if we are to benefit from Christ's Justification we must exercise a faith that not only believes in it but actively chooses to live by it. To believe in his perfect works is to choose to live by his spirituality, which we can do even in our flawed condition. Our choice to live in Christ qualifies us to be forgiven for when we fail to live in his spirituality.

 

[BelieveItOarKnot]

It was before the fall and God promises through Him, He can make us this way again Mat 1:21 John 14:15-18

He can or did?

IF it's the case of kicking the can down the road to a post death position, I could agree.

Unless you're making the case that you've been made perfectly legally obedient now?

 

[BelieveItOarKnot]

Sin does not prevent us from choosing to accept Christ.

The evil in no one chooses Christ. It resists God all the days of our lives. If we're honest about it.

The Works of the Law benefited Israel in keeping them close to God and temporarily accepted of God, but they were also a reminder that Israel could not obtain by those flawed works Eternal Life.

The law didn't do Israel any favors. They were eventually defeated and scattered. And rightfully so.

Again, our having a righteousness with a flawed record never impeded the free exercise of our free will

No amount of freewill ever made anyone perfectly obedient. More along the lines of perfectly disobedient and deceitful, if anything. The notions that our supposed freewill gained us anything is a simple delusional fib.

But if we are to benefit from Christ's Justification we must exercise a faith that not only believes in it but actively chooses to live by it

I see. So your view is that without our freewill in action, everything about God, His Will, Work and Ways are meaningless and worthless?

That again is a very very unlikely tale.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

He can or did?

IF it's the case of kicking the can down the road to a post death position, I could agree.

Unless you're making the case that you've been made perfectly legally obedient now?

There is no limit to what Jesus can do today if we submit ourselves to Him and His will.

 

[BelieveItOarKnot]

There is no limit to what Jesus can do today if we submit ourselves to Him and His will.

Jesus can basically do nothing without you then? Is that your final answer?

Have you ever considered our disobedience serves His Perfect Judgment against it?