Romans 2:11-16
"The work of the law written in their hearts"
- is it a reference to the natural,
or to the spiritual?
- is it nature, or grace?
The gist of the matter:
If it is nature, as so many carelessly assume, then it must be true of every man, both Jews, and Gentiles alike, without distinction and without exception. Then also, all men, without distinction or exception, "... do by nature [phusis] the things contained in the law." But this is obviously not true.
Romans 2:
14 For when
the Gentiles, which have not the law,
do by nature [phusis] the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew
the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)
16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 16:22:25 +0800 sing wrote:
Dear Reformed Brethren,
I don't know what is your interpretation of the Rom 2:11-16 passage, though I am familiar with the popular reformed view. Would you help me to understand your view by answering the following questions?
A basic premise:
I think you and I will need to agree that 'the work of the law written upon their hearts' is stated as the explanation why those particular Gentiles "do by nature the things contained in the law."
[Apostle Paul is speaking of those Gentiles who "do by nature the things contained in the law. Not all Gentiles do by nature the things contained in the law. All men, whether Jews or Gentiles, do by nature the things condemned by the law!] These Gentiles are doers of the law because the work of the law has been written in their hearts. The former is the effect of the latter; the latter the explanation for the former. If we cannot agree here, then we cannot proceed. If you do agree, then proceed:
Some Questions
Q1. What is Apostle Paul demonstrating by the illustration of these Gentiles here?
Q2. By 'the Gentiles' who "do by nature the things contained in the law" (v14) who does Apostle Paul refer to - all the mankind generally, those whom he has described in Rom 1:18ff, or to one of the two groups of mankind mentioned in Rom 2:7-10?
Rom 2
6 Who [God] will render to every man according to his deeds:
7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
(There are two groups of men: those described by verses 7 and 10 on the one hand, and those by verses 8 and 9)
Q3. By 'the Gentiles' does Apostle Paul mean the Gentiles who are among those mentioned in verse 2:7;10 - among the group who are the doers of the law?
- Are verses 7 and 10 describing those who are doers of the law (v13)? Do they have the work of the law written upon their heart?
- Are verses 8 and 9 describing those who are doers of the law or breakers of the law? Do they have the work of the law written upon their heart?
Q4. Is 'the work of the law written in their hearts' [i.e those Gentiles that are doers of the law] a reference to that innate moral attribute stamped upon their nature as the moral creature made in the image of God?
- If it is, then this work would be true of every man, whether Jew or Gentile, wouldn't it?
- If it is, then every man, whether Jew and Gentile, would be a doer of the law, wouldn't he? (since being a doer of the law is directly attributed to the work of the law written upon their hearts?
- If it is, then who are those described in v8 and 9 - are they the doers of the law also, or are they the breakers of the law? Do they have the work of the law written upon their heart also?
- If it is, then why there are two distinct groups mentioned in verses 7-10?
- If it is, and since every man has these innate moral attributes, why isn't every man a doer of the law, the Jews as well as the Gentiles??? Who are there those described in verses 8 and 9?
- If it is NOT, then what is this work of the law written in their hearts that distinguish them from the rest of the fallen humanity whom Apostle Paul has described in 1:18-32.
Q5. Is 'the work of the law written in their hearts' [i.e those Gentiles that are doers of the law] a reference to that divine work at the effectual call to grace and salvation of these Gentiles?
- If it is, does this divine work explains why these particular Gentiles are doers of the law in contrast to the general mankind who obeys unrighteousness and does evil?
- If it is, does this divine work explains the NEW nature of those Gentiles, by which those Gentiles do by nature the things on the law?
- If it is, how did God perform this divine work? Was it through having the written law of God?
- If it is, how did God perform this divine work? Was it through the instrument of some human activities like preaching?
- Does the Scripture anywhere speak of and declare concerning this divine work of writing the law upon the mind and heart of man? Check Heb 8:10, John 6:44-45.
Q6. How did/does/will God bring His elect to grace and salvation in those far-flung corners of the world among all the people and kindreds and tongues and nations of the world where no preachers have ever been, or where many preachers have been but preached another gospel?
Q7. Does the work of God in the effectually calling His elect to grace and salvation depend on the opportunity of having or hearing the gospel or not? What does Rom 2:11-16 say?
- If it does, would the judgment of God still be impartial with those who never had the gospel preached to them or those who had only the perverted and false gospels preached to them?
- If it does, wouldn't the judgment be partial towards those who have the opportunity and the ability to hear, and partial against those who have no opportunity/ability to have or hear the gospel?
- Would the righteous judgment be still according to each man's deeds?
Q8. What does Apostle Paul want to VINDICATE by pointing out these Gentiles who are doers of the law who have never possessed or heard of the law of God, who never had privileges the Jews had???
[THE answer: eternal salvation is by God's free and sovereign grace alone, without any human or gospel instrumentality! The bestowal of the eternal salvation is completely by free grace, i.e. without any human instrumentality.]
Q9. Are these Gentiles the doers of the law because of the divine work of circumcising their hearts (Rom 2:28-29) WITHOUT the human instrumentality of gospel preaching?
[THE answer: Most certainly.]
Q10. How are these Gentiles in Rom 2:14 related to those mentioned in Acts 10:34-35?
"Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth, I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: but in every nation, he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him."
What accounts for those in every nation who fear God, and work righteousness, but have never had the gospel at all?
[Many will answer: There no such people; the preaching and hearing of the gospel are prerequisites to produce such who fear God and work righteousness. But this is precisely the fable REPUDIATED by the Apostle Paul in this passage because it is CONTRARY to salvation by free grace alone.
THE answer: The direct and immediate work of God in effectually calling them out of their native state of sin and death to that of grace and salvation in Jesus Christ - which explains why they fear God and works righteousness. They have no knowledge of their salvation yet... that has to come from the gospel ministry! Isn't it obvious and common sense - that your birth PRECEDES any knowledge you have of your birth? You did not have any knowledge of your birth for many years after your birth UNTIL you have been instructed as learned about it!]
Don't misunderstand me. The preaching of the gospel is very vital... but ONLY for the purpose which God has ordained it. And what is that purpose? Is it an instrument in the effectual call of the dead in trespasses to eternal life, OR is it an instrument in the instruction and conversion to the truth of those already effectually called to eternal life?
Apostle Paul wrote to those in Rome he described as "beloved of God," "the called of Christ Jesus" and "called saints." And yet he was very desirous and determined to have the gospel of God preached to these very same people. What does this tell us about Apostle Paul's view on "gospel regeneration" of many reformed people today?
just musing quietly,
sing
on 12.04.06 9:48 AM, Tomy wrote:
sing,
You will understand that there is much that many of us would like the opportunity to be immersed (no reference to baptism) in the writings of the puritans. But in between an overwhelming number of emails at work plus sermon and Sunday School preparation there is little time left for theological analysis. Nevertheless, I will attempt an 'answer' to the gist of your questions below.
1. Unlike the Jews, Gentiles did not have the written law given to them- reflecting the mind of God. However, some gentiles do live like enlightened people- i.e. obey common moral laws. This is because of the law written in the hearts of men (in general). This has nothing to do with Effectual Calling.
2. How God effectually calls the elect in the far flung corners of the earth - is exactly the same as how he called Abraham out of the Ur- by His Word (preached, read, spoken) through providence. If God has ordained the instrumentality of the gospel as the means in calling the elect I cannot argue with that. Similarly the connection between faith and eternal salvation- faith being a non-meritorious instrument but nevertheless a necessary ingredient in salvation.
I'm afraid these may not be sound theological 'shibboleth' but only a reflection of my 'kopitiam seminary' training; although I do believe these are 'roughly' what our Particular Baptists forefathers believed.
Tomy
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 11:39:07 +0800 sing wrote:
Brother Tomy,
Tomy said: You will understand that there is much that many of us would like the opportunity to be immersed (no reference to baptism) in the writings of the puritans. But in between an overwhelming number of emails at work plus sermon and Sunday School preparation there is little time left for theological analysis. Nevertheless, I will attempt an 'answer' to the list of your questions below.==
## I do understand. There is no need of immersion. If there are sprinklings now and then, it is good enough. So, I am not pushing you or anyone. It is just that I am handicapped with time with the folks in IEC. So, in between visits, I thought of sending something to stir the IEC's folks. It is more important to be adequately sprinkled with the Scriptures... than seeking the Puritans' immersion (they have lots of good things to say!)
Tomy said: Unlike the Jews, Gentiles did not have the written law given to them- reflecting the mind of God. However some gentiles do live like enlightened people- ie obey common moral laws. This is because of the law written in the hearts of men (in general). This has nothing to do with Effectual Calling.
## I do appreciate your thoughts. Each view has its implications. How do you consider some serious inconsistencies and contradictions in such a view? Have you patiently worked through my questions? If you think your traditional view is consistent with the facts presented in the passage, then, by all means, remain in it. I was taught that view and regurgitate that view for quite a long while...BUT hard facts in the passage tell me something else.
Apostle Paul did say these Gentiles who are doers of the law of God shall be justified (vindicated) before God (v13). Shouldn't this be an indication to you that the WORK of the law written in the heart is more than the innate morality which is found in EVERY individual man, Jews and Gentiles alike??? If the work refers to something innate and is true of every man, then why aren't every man a doer of the law? Is it because the law was MORE written in some, and less in others? Are you thinking? Did you agree with the Basic Premise at the beginning?
Tomy said: How God effectually call the elect in the far flung corners of the earth - is exactly the same as how he called Abraham our of the Ur- by His Word (preached, read, spoken) through providence. If God has ordained the instrumentality of the gospel as the means in calling the elect I cannot argue with that. Similarly the connection between faith and eternal salvation- faith being a non-meritorious instrument but nevertheless a necessary ingredient in salvation.
## How do you think God called Abraham out of Ur - was it by the direct work of God or through the instrumentality of the gospel delivered by a preacher or through his reading of some written gospel message?
God has indeed ordained the instrumentality of the gospel - and the 1689.20 states very clearly its exact purpose as the only outward means of
REVEALING Christ and saving grace that was already effectually and insuperably worked in them. When you have time, give 1689.20.4 an honest reading.
I paste it here:
“4. Although the gospel be the only outward means of revealing Christ and saving grace, and is, as such, abundantly sufficient thereunto; yet that men who are dead in trespasses may be born again, quickened or regenerated, there is moreover necessary an effectual insuperable work of the Holy Spirit upon the whole soul, for the producing in them a new spiritual life;(8) without which no other means will effect their conversion unto God.(9)]
It states clearly that without this effectual call, there will be no conversion; without Christ and saving graces already worked in the person, the gospel preaching would not reveal any Christ and saving grace in the hearer. The gospel is the outward means to effect CONVERSION to God... do you read that? And the effectual call is the absolute prerequisite to conversion in the gospel call. Have I misunderstood what the Confession says?
Gospel preaching is like a powerful TORCH LIGHT. When its light beam falls upon a solid object it will produce a shadow. Christ and saving grace in a person is a description of the divine effectual call, see 1689.10.1. When the torchlight is shone upon a crowd of hearers, the presence of the solid object of Christ and saving grace will cast a solid shadow of faith in those that have that work of grace in them. In this way, the gospel is the outward means to reveal the INWARD spiritual reality by God's effectual calling to grace and salvation. When there is no Christ and saving grace in the hearer, no shadow of faith would be produced by the gospel light, no Christ and saving grace could be revealed. I hope you appreciate this simple illustration.
Since God has ordained the instrumentality of the gospel as the means in gospel calling the elect to CONVERSION, I humbly acknowledge His sovereignty and wisdom… Many dispute with God and insist that the instrumentality of the gospel is the means in EFFECTUAL CALLING the elect out of their native state of sin and death to that of grace and salvation, i.e. justification, regeneration, and adoption.
I do think it is a fearful thing to dispute with our all-wise and sovereign God.
Tomy said: I'm afraid these may not be sound theological 'shibboleth' but only a reflection of my 'kopitiam seminary' training; although I do believe these are 'roughly' what our Particular Baptists forefathers believed.
## You know, I think the 'kopitiam seminary' may actually be the best. Kopitiam seminary is less inclined to produce theological shibboleth. Those institutional seminaries may not even have biblical warrant, and are actually harmful in many ways. They have great vested interest (reputation) to protect and are less likely to switch course when shown the error.
sing
on 13.04.06 8:40 AM, Tomy wrote:
Sing,
Thanks for clarifying your thoughts. I paste the entire discussion interspersed with my reply (so as not to lose track). My new response follows yours ##...
## I do appreciate your thought. Each view has its implications. How do you consider some serious inconsistencies and contradictions in such a view? How you patiently worked through my questions? If you think your traditional view is consistent with the facts presented in the passage, then, by all means, remain in it. I was taught that view and regurgitate that view for quite a long while...BUT hard facts in the passage tell me something else.
Apostle Paul did say these Gentiles who are doers of the law of God shall be justified (vindicated) before God (v13). Shouldn't this be an indication to you that the WORK of the law written in the work is more the innate morality which is found in EVERY individual man??? If the work refers to something innate and true of every man, then why aren't every man a doer of the law? Is it because the law was MORE written in some, and less in others? Are you thinking? Did you agree with the Basic Premise at the beginning?
tomy: I cannot pretend to have understood Romans in depth and will take the risk of displaying my ignorance here.
The law of God is written in the hearts of men- much like every man is created in the image of God. Has that image disappeared? Similarly, Romans 1 provides the basis of the interpretation - i.e. sinners suppress that which is written in the heart. Some suppress more than others - hence accountable on the day of judgment. Is there anything more to be read into the passage? I think that would be stretching the intention of Paul.
## How do you think God called Abraham out of Ur - was it by the direct work of God or through the instrumentality of the gospel delivered by a preacher or through his reading of some written gospel message?
God has indeed ordained the instrumentality of the gospel - and the 1689.20 states very clearly its exact purpose as the only outward means of revealing Christ and saving grace already effectually and insuperably worked in them. When you have time, give 1689.20.4 an honest reading.
tomy: How did God call Abraham? That is a good question! God could have called him in a voice/a dream/ an appearance - all consistent with outward call through the instrumentality of the word, followed by effectual call leading to regeneration and faith.
## I paste it here: 4. Although the gospel be the only outward means of revealing Christ and saving grace, and is, as such, abundantly sufficient thereunto; yet that men who are dead in trespasses may be born again, quickened or regenerated, there is moreover necessary an effectual insuperable work of the Holy Spirit upon the whole soul, for the producing in them a new spiritual life;(8) without which no other means will effect their conversion unto God.(9)]
It states clearly that without this effectual call, there will be no conversion; without Christ and saving graces already worked in the person, the gospel preaching would not reveal any Christ and saving grace in the hearer. The gospel is the outward means to effect CONVERSION... do you read that? And the effectual call is the absolute prerequisite to conversion in the gospel call. Have I misunderstood what the Confession says?
Gospel preaching is like a powerful touch. When its light falls upon a solid object it will produce a shadow. Christ and saving grace in a person is a description of the divine effectual call, see 1689.10.1. When the touch is shone upon a crowd of hearers, the presence of the solid object of Christ and saving grace will cast a solid shadow of faith. In this way, the gospel is the outward means to reveal the INWARD spiritual reality by God's effectual calling to grace and salvation. When there is no Christ and saving grace in the hearer, no shadow of faith would be produced... no Christ and saving grace is revealed. I hope you appreciate this simple illustration.
tomy: The confession statement above seems to concur with the standard reformed view that the eternal salvation of a sinner is both by word and Spirit. By the preaching of the word itself - nothing will come out of it. When the gospel is accompanied by the work of the Spirit- there is salvation. My question would be: are we allowed to pull asunder the intricate work of regeneration and conversion? I believe this is where we unnecessarily introduce controversy to no benefit. I may be wrong but the Scripture does not intend for us to dissect the work of regeneration and conversion.
## Since God has ordained the instrumentality of the gospel as the means in gospel calling the elect to CONVERSION, I humbly acknowledge His sovereignty and wisdom. Many dispute with God and insist that the instrumentality of the gospel is the means in effectual calling the elect to grace and salvation, i.e. justification, regeneration and adoption.
tomy: Is there Scripture warrant to insist one way or the other? I would rather be contented with the view that gospel preaching is the ordained means for the salvation of the elect. How that is intricately worked out by the Spirit- we can only speculate. Charnock is probably correct in saying that gospel preaching is the instrumental means in regeneration.
## I do think it is a fearful thing to dispute with our all wise and sovereign God.
tomy: Perhaps a question from me. How different do you see your present view against the standard reformed view? Admittedly no one will have perfect agreement on all theological points., but in the context of gospel fellowship is your view so diametrically opposed to the standard reformed view? - this is an honest question. (I may not have much time next week to respond to your emails but will try to read them at least)
kopitiam theologian, tomy
on 13.04.06 12:57 PM, sing wrote:
Tomy,
Keep speaking brother, and be honest with the Scriptures.
My further response is marked ## a. When we reach 'z', we shall stop, ;-))!
Tomy: I cannot pretend to have understood Romans in depth and will take the risk of displaying my ignorance here. The law of God is written in the hearts of men- much like every man is created in the image of God. Has that image disappeared? Similarly Romans 1 provide the basis of the interpretation - i.e. sinners suppress that which is written in the heart. Some suppress more than others- hence accountable on the day of judgement. Is there anything more to be read into the passage? I think that would be stretching the intention of Paul.
## a: First, I suggest that you have introduced or imagined something which is not in Romans 1:18-32 at all. There is nothing said about the work of the law written in the hearts there. Quite the opposite.
Verses 19-21 say this: "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened."
This has nothing to do with the 'work of the law written in their hearts' in 2:15. This is plain and obvious, is it not? The work here (1:18-32) refers to the compelling evidence and witnesses of the created world that left all men without excuse. Because of prejudice,
it is very easy to mistake the words, "that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them" in 1:19 as God's "work of the law written in their hearts" in 2:15.
Consider also the VAST AND UNBRIDGEABLE gulf between the effects of the two situations. The effect of one is "they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened" and they shall be without excuse. The effect of the other leaves them as doers of the law of God by nature, and they shall be justified (vindicated) by God. And you still want to insist that the two passages are speaking of the same??? Prejudice can be a terrible handicap.
Tomy said: How did God call Abraham? That is a good question! God could have called him in a voice/a dream/ an appearance - all consistent with outward call through the instrumentality of the word, followed by effectual call leading to regeneration and faith.
##a: I take it that you do agree that Abraham was called to grace and salvation without any HUMAN instrumentality - without the preached word by men, without possessing the written word of God delivered to him by man, i.e. God called Abraham to grace and salvation IMMEDIATELY, not mediately with human instrumentality. Am I correct? In any case, that was what I meant.
Tomy said: The confession statement above seems to concur with the standard reformed view that the eternal salvation of a sinner is both by word and Spirit. By the preaching of the word itself - nothing will come out of it. When the gospel is accompanied by the work of the Spirit- there is salvation. My question would be: are we allowed to pull asunder the intricate work of regeneration and conversion? I believe this is where we unnecessarily introduce controversy to no benefit. I may be wrong but the Scripture does not intend for us to dissect the work of regeneration and conversion.
##a: 1689.14.1 says that when the gospel call is ACCOMPANIED by the work of the Spirit - there is faith, the evidence and fruit of salvation.; Christ and saving grace is revealed. The preaching of the gospel draws out faith from a person who is ALREADY saved by the IMMEDIATE and effectual call of God. It reveals Christ and saving grace that is ALREADY in the person.
The gospel call through human instrumentality MUST BE PRECEDED by the effectual call for the gospel call to make manifest or reveal Christ and saving grace in those already effectually called to grace and salvation. Drawing out faith from the hearer is to reveal Christ and saving grace ALREADY in the hearer.
Your very good question, 'are we allowed to pull asunder the intricate work of regeneration and conversion' displays some confusion of biblical truths. You question presupposes that regeneration and conversion are inseparable twins... that regeneration is invariably accompanied with gospel conversion. The simple facts are that, from the Scriptures as well as from the 1689, they are distinct, and separate. All elect, without exception, are effectually called, i.e. justified, regenerated and adopted freely by grace. However, not all elect are converted because not all elect are capable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the word - either because there was no opportunity or no ability. Even standard reformed theologians like Berkhof, and Baptist theologians like Boyce and Robertson readily admit that regeneration logically and chronologically precede conversion.
To lump regeneration (divine work) and conversion (human response to divine work) together is a mixture that has produced lots of confusion and the common errors of gospel regeneration. This is no longer free sovereign grace. This has conditioned the eternal salvation of God's elect upon the instrumentality of man!!!
To insist that regeneration is conditioned upon gospel call; that they must be together is to rob or deny God of His sovereignty to effectually call His elect to grace and salvation. Please don't reply by saying that God voluntarily subject himself to this limitation imposed upon Him by some misguided men. He didn't, and the facts of Scriptures declare so. Do you think for a moment that He would subject Himself to some fickle and weak preachers, o yes, redeemed men, concerning the eternal salvation of His elect? God did appoint them as instrument in the work of making disciples, and NOT in the work making God's children!!! God did appoint them to be the means of instructing His children, NOT in helping Him to father His children... born NOT by the will of sincere misguided preacher, but of God Himself!
The truth is obvious. Regeneration is the immediate work of God. Can you imagine God having to depend for a preacher (for that matter, a right kind of preacher...) to come along so that He can regenerate His elect? I know He didn't in the case of Abraham and Melchizedek... He didn't in the case of Cornelius or Lydia...
Tomy said:. Is there Scripture warrant to insist one way or the other? I would rather be contented with the view that gospel preaching is the ordained means for the salvation of the elect. How that is intricately worked out by the Spirit- we can only speculate. Charnock is probably correct in saying that gospel preaching is the instrumental means in regeneration.
##a: You would agree that the GC is very intimately related to the instrumentality of the gospel. The GC is to make disciples. Perhaps you would agree that disciples can only be made of those whom God has effectually called to grace and salvation. I do believe that only those whom God has effectually called can be converted, made disciple through the preaching of the gospel. I wouldn't dare to think that the preaching of the gospel plays any part in God's sovereign and free grace work of effectual call. Some might and you know many of them.
I agree with you that gospel preaching is the ordained means for the salvation of the elect.
Consider this for a minute. The salvation that comes by the effectual call of God and the salvation that comes from the gospel call are not the same in nature. This may sound very strange in your ears, but it shouldn't. There is a salvation which is utterly by God's free grace. The is a salvation which comes by the obedient responses of the effectually called, children of God. The former must logically and chronological precede the latter; the former is the cause, the latter is the effect/manifestation of the former!
The elect are SAVED BY GOD (by His direct divine acts) so that they may hear, and hearing and believing they may save themselves, not from eternal lake of fire (that's already done by God's free grace), but temporal salvation from the ways and miseries of the perverse and wicked generation. On the day of Pentecost, apostle exhorted the hearers to believe and repent - to "SAVE YOURSELVES FROM THIS PERVERSE GENERATION." Apostle Peter didn't say, 'Believe, and save yourself from eternal damnation.' That's what reformed people think. [Believing will save those Jews from that perverse generation that shall be destroyed by the Romans in AD 70.]
There is a salvation which God's elect must work out in fear and trembling... and their first to the last acts in this work saves them from this perverse generation. God alone saved them from eternal damnation. Nothing His elect does contribute anything to this.
You may wish to agree with Charnock then. We can always quote men who seem to agree with what we want to believe.
Tomy said: Perhaps a question from me. How different do you see your present view against the standard reformed view? Admittedly no one will have perfect agreement on all theological points., but in the context of gospel fellowship is your view so diametrically opposed to the standard reformed view? - this is an honest question. (I may not have much time next week to respond to your emails but will try to read them at least)
## Interesting question. How different? You be the judge. How different are they to you?
How diametrically opposed? You be the judge too!
Standard reformed: gospel regeneration
A kopitiam student: immediate regeneration, gospel conversion
Standard reformed: must believe in order to have life.
Standard reformed: faith in order to be legally justified
A kopitiam student: faith evidences legally justified
A kopitiam student: given life in order to believe.
Standard reformed: No elect among the unconverted by the gospel
A kopitiam student: There are elect regenerate who are not converted by the gospel
Standard reformed: Man plays a crucial role in his eternal salvation
A kopitiam student: Man plays ZERO roles in his eternal salvation. Man plays a crucial role in his temporal salvation from the perverse wicked generation he lives in.
What meaneth by 'gospel fellowship'? I have no problem to fellowship with any child of God, however deficient and inconsistent his ideas about his free grace salvation may be. I am not much better than God's other children.
Ipoh East Church may not want me to preach soon... I can understand that because the church may not want to hear things they may not agree with. I might as well be honest - I don't preach things people can agree with. I preach things that agree with the Scriptures, as I understand it, of course. When I am shown wrong, I will make a public correction. I have done that not a few times here in SDC. I am a student, and a fallible student, so put a mantle of charity over me.
Sama-sama a kopitiam theologian, therefore no vested interest or reputation to protect or defend), Glad to have your company.
Have another cup of kopi and a few rolls of yue-jar-kuey, and read again what I have said.
May the Lord bless you.
I remain,
your brother and servant in Christ,
sing
=======
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 08:25:21 –0400 Rob wrote:
Sing,
Sometimes your posts on this group seem to me to have some hidden agenda behind them. i.e. to see if you can prove that some doctrinal belief has some holes in it etc. I am not sure if that is your purpose or if you are truly seeking to understand the passage or doctrine that is brought out in the passage. For you then seem to attack some traditional interpretation of a passage. You and God, of course, are a better judge of what your motives are then me.
With that ahead of me I will now make a couple comments on your multitude of questions.
These verses are not talking about salvation in men's hearts as you seem to intimate. Paul is referring to the fact that men have the law of God written on their hearts so that they know what is right and wrong, not that they have been given a new heart to believe. Just look at the context and at the transition of chapter 2, verse 1 from the end of chapter 1. There is the connection word "therefore" in verse 1 so we know it is tied to verses and the context in chapter 1. The law that Paul is writing about is the fact that all men (yes that means Jew and gentile) in their consciences know what is right and wrong. It is written in their hearts and we can see that today with people who know nothing about the written word of God and specifically the 10 commandments. People know it is wrong to kill someone or to lie or to steal etc. However, he designates between Jew and gentile since the Jew had the special revelation of the written word of God and the gentile typically did not. The context here is very important as is always the case when trying to understand what the writer is talking about.
Regarding a different subject which you bring into your homiletics is how can men be saved without ever hearing the gospel and I think Romans 10 gives us a picture of how God uses His word and Spirit and the preacher to work in men's hearts to their salvation or damnation.
Sincerely,
Rob
On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 10:40:51 +0800 sing wrote:
Rob son of Morri,
Thanks for your response. Please see some comments in your post.
Rob said: Sometimes your posts on this group seem to me to have some hidden agenda behind them. i.e. to see if you can prove that some doctrinal belief has some holes in it etc. I am not sure if that is your purpose or if you are truly seeking to understand the passage or doctrine that is brought out in the passage. For you then seem to attack some traditional interpretation of a passage. You and God, of course, are a better judge of what your motives are then me.
## No hidden agenda, only an open agenda, and here it is. I am a student of the Scriptures and wish to sound out the great minds of reformed men like you. I want to subject what I tentatively believe to the most vigorous cross-examination possible. If no credible objection (shibboleth aside), then I would be more comfortable with my own understanding since the accepted understanding has not a few insurmountable objections to it. I believe a belief that leaves serious inconsistencies and objections are not worth holding to. So, you need not speculate about my motives. If you disagree with my beliefs, you would do me the greatest favour by raising credible objections. This way you will save me from errors. I am willing to learn.
I am disturbed when there are vast differences in beliefs from people who claim to subscribe to the same Confession of Faith. Both can't be right if they believe contradictory things. Both may be wrong. Every statement has implications... so every statement you made below also has implications.
See some comments marked ## in your post:
Rob said: These verses are not talking about salvation in men's hearts as you seem to intimate. Paul is referring to the fact that men have the law of God written on their heart so that they know what is right and wrong, not that they have been given a new heart to believe.
## What is Apostle Paul intimating by those words??? So "Who will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile." You can read these words and say these verses are not talking about salvation???
Isn't a man's deed a revelation of the state of his heart??? Have you not heard the words of Christ?
- Mt 15:19-20 "For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: these are the things which defile a man: but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not a man.
-Mk 7:21 " For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders....."
- Mt 12:33-35 ‘… A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.’
- Mt 7:17-18 ‘… good tree good fruit… bad tree bad fruit.
I would say that Paul is saying that a man is SAVED BY God's free GRACE ALONE, NOT by having access to or enjoying privileges like having the law or the hearing of the word BUT by God's free and gracious work of writing the law in the heart - which explains why some men by their new nature are doers of the law and the rest breakers of the law of God, whether Jew or Gentiles.
Rob said: Just look at the context and at the transition of chapter 2, verse 1 from the end of chapter 1. There is the connection word "therefore" in verse 1 so we know it is tied to verses and the context in chapter 1.
## All men by nature are condemned... apostle Paul proves it quite adequately in 1:18-2:1.
From 2:1, a new subject is introduced... the nature of the judgment of God: according to truth, according to each man's deeds, and with no respect of person. All these in context of the humanity divided into two groups stated in v7-10.
What makes some men, those in v7 and 10 different from the others, those in v8 and 9??? GRACE and FREE GRACE and SOVEREIGN FREE GRACE ALONE. HOW? By God's gracious work of the law written in their hearts. The battle for pure undefiled free sovereign grace has started here...
Rob said: The law that Paul is writing about is the fact that all men (yes that means Jew and gentile) in their consciences know what is right and wrong.
## I hope you agree that having an innate knowledge of what is right and wrong says NOTHING about whether a person is a doer of the law or a breaker of the law. Every man has an innate knowledge of morality. That is agreed upon.
By nature, this innate moral knowledge has not made a single man a doer of the law. Apostle Paul has conclusively proven that! If this innate knowledge of right and wrong makes a person a doer of the law, THEN all men, Jews and Gentiles alike, are doers of God's law. This interpretation makes apostle Paul appear like a fool, it contradicts everything apostle Paul has established thus far.
Rob said: It is written in their hearts and we can see that today with people who know nothing about the written word of God and specifically the 10 commandments. People know it is wrong to kill someone or to lie or to steal etc. However, he designates between Jew and Gentile since the Jew had the special revelation of the written word of God and the gentile typically did not. The context here is very important as is always the case when trying to understand what the writer is talking about.
## Does people's knowing it is wrong make them doers of the law? If you are consistent, you would have to say that ALL of them are ALSO doers of the law then. But are they?
Are they "them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life, that worketh good"? Or are they "them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, that doeth evil"?
1. All men, Jews, and Gentiles, as moral creatures of God, have the innate knowledge of morality. This IS NOT the same as saying that they have the law written in their heart - otherwise the whole mankind, without exception, would be doers of the law.
2. All the Jews have the written laws of God. Some have the law of God written in their hearts. The rest don't have the law written in their heart.
3. Many Jews, though having the written law of God, and heard the gospel are not doers of the law because the law of God is not written in their heart.
4. All the Gentiles, by nature, do not have the written law of God. Those that joined themselves to the Jewish nation as proselytes have the written laws; these may or may not have the law written in their hearts
5. Some Gentiles have the law written in their hearts EVEN THOUGH they never had the written law of God; they are, by their new nature, doers of the law.
Rob said: Regarding a different subject which you bring into your homiletics is how men can men be saved without ever hearing the gospel and I think Romans 10 gives us a picture of how God uses His word and Spirit and the preacher to work in men's hearts to their salvation or damnation.
## Faith comes by hearing; not regeneration comes by hearing. Only one whom God has effectually called to grace and salvation is capable of hearing and believing. Preaching is for the saved (eternally by God) that they may be saved (temporally by their own working out their salvation with fear and trembling.) Preaching is foolishness to those who are perishing. 1Cor 1:18
The elect are SAVED BY GOD (by His direct divine acts) so that they may hear, and hearing they may be saved, not from hell (that's done by grace already), but temporal salvation from the ways and miseries of the perverse and wicked generation. "SAVE YOURSELVES FROM THIS PERVERSE GENERATION" - Apostle Peter didn't say, 'Believe, and save yourself from eternal damnation.' That's what reformed people think.
There are God's elect who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the word, 1689.10.3. The ministry of the word is designed for those who have the mental capacity to hear and believe, never for those who have not. There are elect who have the mental capacity to hear and to believe BUT who are never reached by the gospel. Some have no ability, others have no opportunity... but all are effectually called, freely by God's free grace.
Just my opinions at no charge. If you don't agree, give credible reasons, and I would be thankful. I don't want to hold a deficient or inconsistent opinion.
Sing-cerely,
sing in the south seas.
==============
no further reply
