Protestants, What Do You Make Of Romans 2:5-13?

[BPW75]

This is totally accurate. Why always the self-doubt? It is what it is…accept it.

And considering the concept of merit, do you think that a response such as this will earn you further reward?

 

[Steadfast]

OTCA, I am glad you’re feeling better and I’m sorry for being such a stooge earlier in the thread.

 

[O.S.Luke]

This is totally accurate. Why always the self-doubt? It is what it is…accept it.

My point was that not all Protestants see it the way you depict it. That’s what I meant by inaccurate.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

And considering the concept of merit, do you think that a response such as this will earn you further reward?

Paul made it clear that our response is required for salvation here:

Phil 3

10I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, 11and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead. 12Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already been made perfect, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. 13Brothers, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, 14I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.
15All of us who are mature should take such a view of things.

 

[Steadfast]

This is where it gets a little academic and it is also where the more conservative Protestant traditions, if they clear away some accrued prejudices, can see some similarity with Catholic belief.

Where a Catholic would say that one is justified (made righteous before God) by faith and works together, or as it is popularly put, in “faith working itself out in love”, the Lutheran (for an example) would say that Faith Alone justifies but that this faith must show itself in works. The difference in mechanics would seem to be that while Catholics understand good works to have some saving merit, the Classical Protestant does not but sees them as the fruit of faith which alone justifies.

In both cases, works are necessary; for Catholics they (along with faith) merit grace while for the Protestant they are the necessary by-product of that faith which alone justifies.

It gets more confused when we realize that Catholics and Protestants have differing ideas of what Justification and Grace are.

For the former, Grace is a share in the life of God, it is a substance infused into the Christian, usually by means of Sacraments.

For the latter, Grace is the unmerited and unmeritable favor of God granted to Christians solely for the sake of Christ.

For Catholics, Justification is a real making righteous of the Christian, while for Protestants it is an imputation of the Righteousness of Christ to believers, or, as the Bible says, a reckoning of sinners righteous for His sake.

The reason this is all confusing is because in both understandings of either the way it works or what the words mean there are areas of convergence as well as departure.

I doubt the usefulness of Catholics simply rehearsing their soteriology and Protestants responding with theirs which is why I was so interested in hearing a Catholic deal with my exegesis of the passage OTCA originally posted.

I think what set me off was his “bump” where he said “still waiting” as though (ISTM he was assuming) Protestants could have no answer, so, to see nothing more than the introduction of new passages with the same interpretation from him was a little disappointing.

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

I will be back to answer, not feeling well again… sorry.

 

[guanophore]

The difference in mechanics would seem to be that while Catholics understand good works to have some saving merit, the Classical Protestant does not but sees them as the fruit of faith which alone justifies.

Do you think that good works don’t have any merit? I mean, it seems clear from the verse in the OP that they do.

In both cases, works are necessary; for Catholics they (along with faith) merit grace while for the Protestant they are the necessary by-product of that faith which alone justifies.

I think this is a misrepresentaton of the Catholic position. The Catholic Church teaches that there is nothing we can do to merit initial justification, which is based solely upon the grace of God. It is only after we are in a state of grace (justified) that we can engage in those works which God has prepared beforehand that we should walk in them, and thereby merit the type of grace written about in the OP.

For the former, Grace is a share in the life of God, it is a substance infused into the Christian, usually by means of Sacraments.

I think referring to grace - an intangible and eternal reality- as a “substance” carries inherent difficulties. However, I do agree that the Catholic church teaches infusion. Also, although the Sacraments are one means by which this happens, the Church teaches that God is not limited to the Sacraments for the transmission of His grace.

For the latter, Grace is the unmerited and unmeritable favor of God granted to Christians solely for the sake of Christ.

This is Catholic.

For Catholics, Justification is a real making righteous of the Christian, while for Protestants it is an imputation of the Righteousness of Christ to believers, or, as the Bible says, a reckoning of sinners righteous for His sake.

I think it would be proper to say that imputation used in this context, does mean “real”. God does not just “say” there is credit in the account. He actually deposits the credit.

I think what set me off was his “bump” where he said “still waiting” as though (ISTM he was assuming) Protestants could have no answer, so, to see nothing more than the introduction of new passages with the same interpretation from him was a little disappointing.

It seems to me that the passage is not talking about isomeone just “declared” righteousness, but actually righteous - imputed in the Catholic sense of the word where the righteousness is actually truly present in word an in deed, not just “accounted” to be present when it is not.

 

[Steadfast]

Guan,

Thanks for your response. I am no longer Catholic so I will happily accept your correction, but I ask that you bear in mind that I was giving thumbnails; descriptions not meant to be exhaustive.

Were I a Catholic attempting to represent the Protestant view as I have I am sure many would take issue with me for not fairly or completely describing their position.

As for the passage in the OP, you have my exegesis of it, but I will recap:

Paul is talking about the law which is the only standard by which sinners will be judged whether that law is written (as with the Jews) or inscribed on the heart (as with the Gentiles). His point is to show the utter impartiality of God in salvation and the utter helplessness of all people against the power of sin operating in them, regardless of pedigree.

When he says that good works will earn life, he is reiterating that obedience to the moral law is the only way, ante-crucis, that a person can find favor with God; i.e. perfect righteousness. Later in the same letter he tells us what the law is for, it is a guide or a schoolmaster to lead us to repentance; i.e. it wasn’t given as a means to God’s favor but rather a hammer in the hand of God for the purposes of breaking our pride.

Which is why he later says, “but now” describing what has come about in Christ, God has put down the hammer, there is no more pleasing Him with works, in Christ He is well-pleased.

 

[O.S.Luke]

Get well, OTCA. I wouldn’t call any of this “burning” or life-dependent.

Praying for your healing and wholeness.

O+

 

[guanophore]

Guan,

Thanks for your response. I am no longer Catholic so I will happily accept your correction, but I ask that you bear in mind that I was giving thumbnails; descriptions not meant to be exhaustive.

Understandibly. However, if you believe otherwise, then you never really were Catholic, as what I have represented it the Teaching of the Church. You may have been baptized Catholic, then not properly catechized. This results in a lot of “catholics” going elsewhere, myself included.

As for the passage in the OP, you have my exegesis of it, but I will recap:

Paul is talking about the law which is the only standard by which sinners will be judged whether that law is written (as with the Jews) or inscribed on the heart (as with the Gentiles). His point is to show the utter impartiality of God in salvation and the utter helplessness of all people against the power of sin operating in them, regardless of pedigree.

So you are saying that this passage does not apply to Christians.

When he says that good works will earn life, he is reiterating that obedience to the moral law is the only way, ante-crucis, that a person can find favor with God; i.e. perfect righteousness. Later in the same letter he tells us what the law is for, it is a guide or a schoolmaster to lead us to repentance; i.e. it wasn’t given as a means to God’s favor but rather a hammer in the hand of God for the purposes of breaking our pride.

Yes, but God’s standard of right conduct has not changed “post crucis”. I think there are other passages in scripture that make it clear that his plan of salvation has not changed, either. Salvation has always been by grace, through faith, even for those under the law.

He is also speaking in the present tense in this passage, and is applying the principles to present day populatons, not “ante-crucis” people only.

Which is why he later says, “but now” describing what has come about in Christ, God has put down the hammer, there is no more pleasing Him with works, in Christ He is well-pleased.

God was never “pleased with works” unless they were based in faith. This is clear in Paul’s writings about Abraham. It was his faith that pleased God, and the works emanated from his faith.

 

[Steadfast]

No, you’re right, God’s standard has not changed, it is still perfect righteousness.

And this is Paul’s point when he says that the Law was given to show us our sin. He does not say that it was given as a way to deal with sin but that it was given as a mirror in which we see our sinfulness. It was given for the purpose of repentance. If we could keep it perfectly, I suppose it would make us perfectly righteous, but his point in saying that none are righteous and that all have fallen away is to point out that we cannot keep it perfectly. And anything less than perfect attendance upon it and obedience to it will not do.

God’s standard is still perfect righteousness. In Christ that standard has been met, His justice is satisfied, there is nothing else we need.

We agree that Abraham’s works proceeded from his faith and that they proceed from ours as well. What we disagree about is whether they actually “do” anything salvific.

 

[guanophore]

No, you’re right, God’s standard has not changed, it is still perfect righteousness.

And this is Paul’s point when he says that the Law was given to show us our sin. He does not say that it was given as a way to deal with sin but that it was given as a mirror in which we see our sinfulness. It was given for the purpose of repentance. If we could keep it perfectly, I suppose it would make us perfectly righteous, but his point in saying that none are righteous and that all have fallen away is to point out that we cannot keep it perfectly. And anything less than perfect attendance upon it and obedience to it will not do.

God’s standard is still perfect righteousness. In Christ that standard has been met, His justice is satisfied, there is nothing else we need.

We agree that Abraham’s works proceeded from his faith and that they proceed from ours as well. What we disagree about is whether they actually “do” anything salvific.

OK, we are in agreement on these points. What do you think it was that made people righteous under the law before Christ?

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Grace: is not earned it is freely given by God’s Mercy, one cannot earn Grace.

Humanity has the freewill to act (work out his/her salvation with fear and trembling) upon God’s Grace and Mercy.

The first act upon Grace is Baptism. Baptism “Saves you now”. That is why Catholics baptise infants because this Saving Grace from God cannot be earned. By the faith of Mary and Joseph, the infant Jesus was presented in the temple.

God’s mercy and Grace is not limited, but parted to each one’s disposition to God’s mighty Grace which abounds. God sends the rains upon the good and the wicked.

Where there is the law there is conviction, whereby Grace abounds one is free from the law. Grace is the Work of God to free humanity from the conviction of the law which is death.

Those saved by Grace, as a child of God, do the works of him (Jesus) who sent him. Grace is not faith, Grace is from God, Faith and Works are the result from God’s saving Grace.

It takes Faith and Works to “work out ones salvation with fear and trembling” in Grace.

Those who wish to be perfect, must take up his cross and follow Jesus. To take up ones cross is a faith revealed by works acting upon God’s Grace.

 

[O.S.Luke]

Gabriel, you are certainly a good Catholic.

You would make a good Methodist, too.

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

Get well, OTCA. I wouldn’t call any of this “burning” or life-dependent.

Praying for your healing and wholeness.

O+

Thank you, I do appreciate your sincerity (I think)… :hug1:

 

[look3467]

Question on this quote:

The first act upon Grace is Baptism. Baptism “Saves you now”. That is why Catholics baptize infants because this Saving Grace from God cannot be earned. By the faith of Mary and Joseph, the infant Jesus was presented in the temple.

If infant Baptism “save you now” and “grace can not be earned”, what happens to the now saved, unearned grace person who commits and act worthy of hell?

Is all that lost in the act?

It seems that the one hand is saying that baptism “saves you now” and the other hand may be an iffy, depending on God’s grace via our actions, might just condemn us to hell?

Something wrong with that picture?

Peace>>>AJ

 

[Steadfast]

OK, we are in agreement on these points. What do you think it was that made people righteous under the law before Christ?

Well, again, we have an issue of semantics.

Making righteous is a matter of sanctification; being conformed to the image of Jesus daily.

But justification is something more than this. It is a reckoning by God (see Romans 6:11), an accounting of us as righteous for the sake of Christ.

In either case though it’s always been the same, people have always been sanctified by God in the works He has prepared before hand for us and in being conformed to His image, and people have always been justified by faith alone.

 

[Steadfast]

Well, the discussion could get pretty broad if we start pulling in ideas about the freedom of the will.

Suffice to say that the bible does not teach that people are absolutely free to believe. What it teaches is that the heart is degenerate and must be regenerated by God first before it can believe. Before this the bible’s language about its state is pretty stark; that it is at enmity with God is about as gentle as it gets.

The passage about working out ones salvation however is illustrative of what I am saying. We do have the responsibility to grow in faith and grace and, again, be conformed to His image. But do not mistake me, even this is God’s work in us, there is no synergy beyond that of the man pulled from the swirling maelstrom agreeing that it was good that he was rescued.

Grace is not faith, but faith is grace. We cannot believe unless God gives us faith. I know you will differ in how you interpret Ephesians 2:8-10, but I believe this is what it is saying.

 

[guanophore]

Grace: is not earned it is freely given by God’s Mercy, one cannot earn Grace.

This is true, but by conforming oneself to the will of God, one can merit grace, which means that one has chosen to walk in the deeds of righteousness that he prepared before the foundation of the world, and thus, can improve one’s relationship with God (more grace). To the one that has, more will be given.

Humanity has the freewill to act (work out his/her salvation with fear and trembling) upon God's Grace and Mercy.

The first act upon Grace is Baptism. Baptism "Saves you now". That is why Catholics baptise infants because this Saving Grace from God cannot be earned. By the faith of Mary and Joseph, the infant Jesus was presented in the temple.

I would say that the first act is a profession of faith, but that accompanies or is followed by baptism.

 God's mercy and Grace is not limited, but parted to each one's disposition to God's mighty Grace which abounds. God sends the rains upon the good and the wicked.

Yes, but to those who are so disposed, He gives more grace.

 Where there is the law there is conviction, whereby Grace abounds one is free from the law. Grace is the Work of God to free humanity from the conviction of the law which is death.

Those saved by Grace, as a child of God, do the works of him (Jesus) who sent him. Grace is not faith, Grace is from God, Faith and Works are the result from God’s saving Grace.

Well said!

It takes Faith and Works to “work out ones salvation with fear and trembling” in Grace.

I think this is the aspect that is missing in the Sola Fide and Sola Gratia approaches. Faith is never alone.

Those who wish to be perfect, must take up his cross and follow Jesus. To take up ones cross is a faith revealed by works acting upon God's Grace.

Do you think the passage in the OP is speaking of believers, or unbelievers?

 

[guanophore]

Question on this quote:

If infant Baptism “save you now” and “grace can not be earned”, what happens to the now saved, unearned grace person who commits and act worthy of hell?

This is an excellent question.

Is all that lost in the act?

No. sin separates us from God, so our relationship with God, made right by grace through faith, has been disrupted by sin.

It seems that the one hand is saying that baptism "saves you now" and the other hand may be an iffy, depending on God's grace via our actions, might just condemn us to hell?

No, God’s grace is sufficient. If we confess our sin, He is faithful and just and will forgive our sins.

Something wrong with that picture?

The only common “wrong” with this picture is that some believe that being put in right relationship with God, we can never be separated again from Him by sin.

AJ

Thanks for the great question!