Is Gods Mercy Merited Or Arbitrarily Bestowed?

[CASteinman]

It depends on the context. Mercy and Grace are given to all freely by the mere fact of the resurrection. Do you think this is too little mercy or grace given to all humanity? There is no condition given for living for eternity. HOW one lives for an eternity is a matter of judgment and is contingent upon our own thoughts, choices, and actions.

I don't mean to be just a curmudgeon, but I seem addicted.

There is at least one condition for Mercy and Grace:

There stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell and we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them; and they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever.

Edited July 15, 2012 by CASteinman

[CASteinman]

Given the defination of capricious below I think I have explained how #4 would not be suitable. Characterized by or subject to whim; impulsive and unpredictable.

Due to the close relationship between arbitrary and capricious, and the tyrannical undertones it carries with it we would never use the term to describe Gods choices. Like I've already said his choice to bestow mercy is gracious and loving, his choice to show wrath is just.

Yes, I know you would not use those terms, but being unwilling to use them is not the same thing as them not being applicable and appropriate.

For example: How is God's choice not an "impulse" that arises out of his desire to show his sovereign power? How is the choice itself "Predictable"? He takes the exact same lump of clay and damns part of it and saves the other part. How do you, a priori, predict it?

Seems like it exactly fits the definitions of arbitrary and capricious. I don't see you actually demonstrating otherwise, but only saying that these are not very nice words. On the other hand, my sense of things is that Calvinism is not a very nice view of God, but that these (admittedly human) words work perfectly in describing a Calvinistic God -- even if Calvinists do not like them.

It seems to me that the only escape here is to say "We don't really believe God is in any way arbitrary or capricious but we don't really have a clue about it. We consider it an "impossible to understand" mystery -- that he is loving and kind and consistent and reasonable -- even if we are not able to actually see any of that in his actions. After all, his ways are not our ways and his mind is not our mind."

But what this escape does is that it does not actually change God's nature. Rather it changes who or what Calvinists are.

Edited July 15, 2012 by CASteinman

[Storm Rider]

I don't mean to be just a curmudgeon, but I seem addicted.

There is at least one condition for Mercy and Grace:

There stood aone among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell and we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them; and they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever.

Nope, would disagree with your position. Let's focus on my statement above, "HOW one lives for an eternity is a matter of judgment and is contingent upon our own thoughts, choices, and actions." There obviously was a time of judgement to merit moving on to further progression in the second estate. Those who did not keep their first estate, did not merit moving forward. Their actions prevented such progress. Mercy and grace remain intact and active.

[CASteinman]

How the do you interpret the verses from Romans 9 you quoted?

I am about to go to sleep but I did not want to just leave this open.

We interpret Romans 9 in the context of a pre-existant life where choices were made and where certain noble individuals were foreordained (chosen) to come through the lineage of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to be a blessing to all Nations.

We do not believe that God hated one person and loved the other out of shear random choice. We believe that there was a reason that was rooted in His knowledge of them and their character from before the foundations of the world. Also, we believe the translation for "hate" is a bit too strong.

[CASteinman]

Nope, would disagree with your position. Let's focus on my statement above, "HOW one lives for an eternity is a matter of judgment and is contingent upon our own thoughts, choices, and actions." There obviously was a time of judgement to merit moving on to further progression in the second estate. Those who did not keep their first estate, did not merit moving forward. Their actions prevented such progress. Mercy and grace remain intact and active.

I don't see how they get any Mercy or Grace. Seems to me to be reserved for those who kept their first estate -- as all those who did not are consigned to "outer darkness" without hope.

[djholmess]

For example: How is God's choice not an "impulse" that arises out of his desire to show his sovereign power? How is the choice itself "Predictable"? He takes the exact same lump of clay and damns part of it and saves the other part. How do you, a priori, predict it?

Seems like it exactly fits the definitions of arbitrary and capricious. I don't see you actually demonstrating otherwise, but only saying that these are not very nice

Ok going on these definitions of impulse and capricious; you seem to be accusing me of describing Gods choice as a choice that he makes on the spot with no consistent reason behind why he makes that choice and all the other similar choices he makes. This is what I am responding to when I say He isn't arbitrary.

Impulse

A sudden wish or urge that prompts an unpremeditated act or feeling; an abrupt inclination: had an impulse to run away; an impulse of regret that made me hesitate; bought a hat on impulse.

Capricious

Characterized by or subject to whim; impulsive and unpredictable. See Synonyms at arbitrary.

We believe that God premeditated and planned His choices relating to the bestowal of grace before the creation of the world and that these choices were based on His plan and purpose to create and govern a world in which the glory of His grace is completely and fully displayed. Therefore is would then be wrong to accuse us of believing God makes such choices on an impulse, they are part of a premeditated plan to which God has been working since the creation of the world.

I don't believe I need to be able to predict a choice of Gods before I can say it wasn't based on an impulse.

Again it would be helpful if you could explain how you understand Romans 9 in a way that isn't arbitrary- that may help me be more clear in answering your objection as I see no reason to think anything I just said about Gods choice's leading to the conclusion that God is arbitrary.

[CASteinman]

you seem to be accusing me of describing Gods choice as a choice that he makes on the spot with no consistent reason behind why he makes that choice and all the other similar choices he makes. This is what I am responding to when I say He isn't arbitrary.

Well, first of all, no.. I don't think you personally are describing it that way. And in fact, I don't believe that any Calvinist really truly believes what their theology teaches. I don't mean that as an insult at all. In fact, I consider it a compliment. But I accept that it does not look like one at first blush. However, I don't mean it in any negative way.

Secondly though, I accept your description of his reasoning as consistent, but I see it as consistently mysterious and arbitrary. Like Lightening bolts out of the sky that hit people seemingly at random. Yes, God has some pre-planned reason behind it -- a reason that involves showing everyone how powerful he is... but not to any actual end of affecting their behavior -- because after all, not only is that predetermined also, but it does not even matter to their salvation as that is already determined.. No, his purpose is just to show his power.

While that may be rational from God's point of view and not at all arbitrary or capricious --- for those of us here on earth consigned to catching thrown spears -- it seems to fit the definition of arbitrary and capricious. Remember -- these are human words and meanings, not Gods words and meanings.

And, given the apparent timeline of God's existence (forever) even if he had thought about and planned who he was going to roast and who he was going to bless for aeons, its still basically an impulse on his timeline.

I don't believe I need to be able to predict a choice of Gods before I can say it wasn't based on an impulse.

I would agree. But if you cannot predict it.. and if no one can predict it, then it would be unpredictable. And fit the definition.

Again it would be helpful if you could explain how you understand Romans 9 in a way that isn't arbitrary- that may help me be more clear in answering your objection as I see no reason to think anything I just said about Gods choice's leading to the conclusion that God is arbitrary.

I will explain it tomorrow. Sorry.. I am blitzed tonight.

[djholmess]

On the contrary I do really believe the truth of the doctrines of grace, I do acknowledge however that for someone to really see and love them it takes a supernatural work of God (the new birth).

Like I said before if by arbitrary you only mean that the choice was based solely on God's desires with no conditions pertaining to the individual then I agree..

However if by arbitrary you also want to communicate the concept of Gods choices being 'on a whim' 'random choice' 'tyrannical' 'without reason' then I strongly disagree and have already given the consistent reason upon which I believe Gods choices are made.

It seems like you are accepting my statement (1) that Gods choice is unconditional with regard to the individual and then running with it alone. Hence the lightening bolt analogy. I agree that if that is all you were to 'see' it would appear random. However I have also said (2) that God has revealed that there is a good, loving and just reason behind every choice (even if he hasn't explained the specifics for each choice). I hold and believe both of these statements together, they are inseperatable. Therefore to simply take 1 and accuse me of presenting a God who makes this choice 'on a whim' (or any of the others) is to unfairly attack my position.

Maybe I should say it like this, Gods choice is unconditional with regard to the individual, however it is conditional with regard to His eternal plan and purpose. Whilst God hasn't revealed how these conditions play out in every individual choice he has made (that would require billions of individual explanations) he has given us the general over arching guidelines upon which he made his decisions - for the purpose of fully displaying his glory.

Regarding the unpredictable idea, if you want to say from a human perspective it seems unpredictable then I'm ok with that, I have no way of knowing who the elect are before they come to faith. Again however there's a big difference between saying Gods choice seems unpredictable from my point of view and saying there is no thought out reason behind the choices he makes.

It's the difference between saying;

'God appears unpredictable but I know he isn't

And

'God is unpredictable because his choices have no consistent reason or purpose behind them.

Your Romans 9 interpretation sounds interesting, I look forward to hearing in in more detail. One thing though, do you have any link or anything to a defence of the idea that Paul was writing with the concept of a preexistent state? Obviously any interpretation should be seeking to understand what Paul himself meant.

[DonBradley]

Reading the title of this thread, the answer that immediately comes to my mind is "No."

Grace, by definition, cannot be merited. "Grace" and "reward" are two very different concepts.

It seems similarly problematic for divine grace to be arbitrary. A Calvinistic god who doles out blessings to some on whimsy and withholds them from others for similarly sufficient reason does not seem much like what we mean by the terms "merciful," "just," and "all good."

But if grace is neither merited nor arbitrary, what is it?

To answer the question of how grace works in our salvation, we need to form a clear idea of what we mean by salvation. Fortunately, we Latter-day Saints have a great deal of light on salvation that other do not have, which provides us also a greater understanding of the role of grace in its accomplishment.

Salvation, in the scriptures and the doctrines of the Restoration, is to be in full relationship with God and be like Him in character, abilities, and life. Eternal life is to live with God and share in God's life.

Given this reality, how do we acquire a saving relationship with God, the kind of relationship with Him that is salvation? In the first place, God initiates the relationship--He freely offers it to us. Since a true relationship must be freely offered, there is no way for us to "earn" or "merit" God's loving offer of relationship. Thus the saving relationship (at-one-ment) with God, through Christ, is offered by grace.

But to enter a relationship is not yet to have fully grown the relationship or to have lived in enduring fidelity to that relationship. So, while the relationship is offered by God as an act of sheer grace, we will only enjoy its full fruits if we honor it in our lives and cooperate with Him in growing that relationship to its ultimate and eternal potential.

The second, and closely related, aspect of salvation is becoming like God. God makes this possible in a number of ways--such as creating us, teaching us, and quickening the elements by His light so we can live (D&C 88:7-13). We do not "earn" our creation, His love, His quickening, or His willingness to teach us. But neither can He simply "give" us the perfect moral character we must have to be like Him. This character, while crafted under His tuition, must be built up by our choices.

These two elements of salvation--divine relationship and divine character--build on one another. We can only enter into deep relationship with God as we begin to become like Him in character. And only as we grow into deep relationship with Him can we perfect a divine character.

Having a Restored Gospel understanding of the "what" of salvation--participating in the divine relationship shared by Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and becoming like God in character and attributes--let us use it to measure some popular images of the "how" of salvation:

Salvation by works: To claim that salvation comes by works without grace would deny that God has any role in salvation. It would deny that God offers the saving relationship, that God provides the conditions we need in order to become like Him, and that interaction with God makes us more like Him. No one who embraces Latter-day Saint scripture and doctrine has ever believed this.

Salvation by grace through faith alone: To claim salvation by faith alone assumes that there are no terms to our relationship with God--that a saving relationship with God can be one of faithless faith, in which we profess faith in God but do not live faithful to His love and His will. It also assumes that salvation does not mean becoming perfect in character and divine in attributes and life. Recipients of this kind of salvation are not saved from their sins, but in them. They are not co-creators with God, but only favored creatures of God. Such a concept of how grace works in salvation assumes a false and apostate view of what salvation is and is thus a false and apostate doctrine of grace.

Salvation by grace that 'makes up the difference': On this view, we work toward salvation, do everything we can to acquire it, but we are like a child who wants an expensive toy but can only provide pennies toward it. Thus Christ makes up the difference, and gives us, as a gift, what we are seeking. Or, looking at it from another angle, he sees our good effort and rewards it with an outsized reward.

But if salvation is being like God, including having a perfect divine character, how are to be "given" or "rewarded" with it? Salvation in this sense is not remotely analogous to receiving a material object from a parent. Rather, it is like growing up to be a parent. So let us appropriately substitute this into the analogy, to reflect the true nature of salvation: A child goes to her father and asks, "Daddy, I want to be just like you, and to have a close relationship to you as your adult child---today," to which the father wisely replies,"Alright, dear. You just try as much as you can to be like me today, and whatever growth, maturation, and mature relationship with me you can't achieve by dinner time, I'll make up the difference by giving you maturity, adulthood, and a close grownup relationship with me then."

Is this anything like real life? Of course not. Whatever the child may want, the parent knows this isn't how things work. There is no circumventing the process of growing up and of expanding and strengthening the parent-child relationship over time. The parent has created the child, initiated a relationship with the child, will continue to sustain the child's life, teach the child, and provide opportunities for the child's growth, but he cannot suddenly "zap" the child from childish to mature or from a loving, but undeepened, relationship with him to a strong and time-tested relationship.

Mature adulthood and strong adult relationships are not rewards given to young children after a period of good behavior. Mature adulthood is the result of a necessary process of growth and development, made possible by the parent but requiring cooperation from the child. And a strong adult relationship between parent and child is the result of cooperation between parent child and shared experiences together over time.

If salvation were actually like a material reward or gift (e.g., 72 virgins or a plot of coveted real estate in Heaven), then it might make sense to say it will be bestowed like one in this way. But since salvation is a divine relationship and a fully developed divine nature, and thus nothing like a material reward or gift, it makes no sense whatsoever to say it will be bestowed like one. There is no short cut to full participation in the divine relationship shared by the members of the Godhead or to a divine character and a fully actualized divine nature.

That it is "by grace we are saved, after all we can do" means at least two things.

First, the idea of salvation is not even intelligible without grace. It was not we who were in a position to initiate the offer of relationship to God or create a plan whereby we could become like Him. These things had to come from divine grace or not at all.

Second, salvation is also inconceivable without our "doing." After we accept God's offer of relationship, growing it into a relationship of "one heart and one mind" requires our free, active, and persistent cooperation with Him. And building a divine character requires that we choose to increasingly learn and obey divine laws and principles.

The elements that comprise salvation--divine relationship and divine character--are neither independent achievements nor gifts and rewards. They are participatory divine creations. God makes these creations possible, initiates the processes of creation, sustains them, and oversees them. But to come to fruition these processes of creation require that we do what "we can do" as free agents--that we cooperate with Him in growing that relationship and choose for ourselves to follow each principle that comprises life as God lives it: eternal life.

We are both God's creatures and embryonic creators in our own right. No one among us can be saved without an absolute profusion of divine grace--God's exercise of His creative power on our behalf. But God will not, and cannot, save any of us without our choice--our exercise of our creative power on our own behalf. While God might make a physical object out of inert matter by His power alone; to make a god of a man requires that both exert their respective powers. The greatest of all God's creations occurs at the intersection of agency and grace, the cooperation of our creative power with His.

Don

[Duncan]

Reading the title of this thread, the answer that immediately comes to my mind is "No."

Grace, by definition, cannot be merited. "Grace" and "reward" are two very different concepts.

It seems similarly problematic for divine grace to be arbitrary. A Calvinistic god who doles out blessings to some on whimsy and withholds them from others for similarly sufficient reason does not seem much like what we mean by the terms "merciful," "just," and "all good."

But if grace is neither merited nor arbitrary, what is it?

To answer the question of how grace works in our salvation, we need to form a clear idea of what we mean by salvation. Fortunately, we Latter-day Saints have a great deal of light on salvation that other do not have, which provides us also a greater understanding of the role of grace in its accomplishment.

Salvation, in the scriptures and the doctrines of the Restoration, is to be in full relationship with God and be like Him in character, abilities, and life. Eternal life is to live with God and share in God's life.

Given this reality, how do we acquire a saving relationship with God, the kind of relationship with Him that is salvation? In the first place, God initiates the relationship--He freely offers it to us. Since a true relationship must be freely offered, there is no way for us to "earn" or "merit" God's loving offer of relationship. Thus the saving relationship (at-one-ment) with God, through Christ, is offered by grace.

But to enter a relationship is not yet to have fully grown the relationship or to have lived in enduring fidelity to that relationship. So, while the relationship is offered by God as an act of sheer grace, we will only enjoy its full fruits if we honor it in our lives and cooperate with Him in growing that relationship to its ultimate and eternal potential.

The second, and closely related, aspect of salvation is becoming like God. God makes this possible in a number of ways--such as creating us, teaching us, and quickening the elements by His light so we can live (D&C 88:7-13). We do not "earn" our creation, His love, His quickening, or His willingness to teach us. But neither can He simply "give" us the perfect moral character we must have to be like Him. This character, while crafted under His tuition, must be built up by our choices.

These two elements of salvation--divine relationship and divine character--build on one another. We can only enter into deep relationship with God as we begin to become like Him in character. And only as we grow into deep relationship with Him can we perfect a divine character.

Having a Restored Gospel understanding of the "what" of salvation--participating in the divine relationship shared by Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and becoming like God in character and attributes--let us use it to measure some popular images of the "how" of salvation:

Salvation by works: To claim that salvation comes by works without grace would deny that God has any role in salvation. It would deny that God offers the saving relationship, that God provides the conditions we need in order to become like Him, and that interaction with God makes us more like Him. No one who embraces Latter-day Saint scripture and doctrine has ever believed this.

Salvation by grace through faith alone: To claim salvation by faith alone assumes that there are no terms to our relationship with God--that a saving relationship with God can be one of faithless faith, in which we profess faith in God but do not live faithful to His love and His will. It also assumes that salvation does not mean becoming perfect in character and divine in attributes and life. Recipients of this kind of salvation are not saved from their sins, but in them. They are not co-creators with God, but only favored creatures of God. Such a concept of how grace works in salvation assumes a false and apostate view of what salvation is and is thus a false and apostate doctrine of grace.

Salvation by grace that 'makes up the difference': On this view, we work toward salvation, do everything we can to acquire it, but we are like a child who wants an expensive toy but can only provide pennies toward it. Thus Christ makes up the difference, and gives us, as a gift, what we are seeking. Or, looking at it from another angle, he sees our good effort and rewards it with an outsized reward.

But if salvation is being like God, including having a perfect divine character, how are to be "given" or "rewarded" with it? Salvation in this sense is not remotely analogous to receiving a material object from a parent. Rather, it is like growing up to be a parent. So let us appropriately substitute this into the analogy, to reflect the true nature of salvation: A child goes to her father and asks, "Daddy, I want to be just like you, and to have a close relationship to you as your adult child---today," to which the father wisely replies,"Alright, dear. You just try as much as you can to be like me today, and whatever growth, maturation, and mature relationship with me you can't achieve by dinner time, I'll make up the difference by giving you maturity, adulthood, and a close grownup relationship with me then."

Is this anything like real life? Of course not. Whatever the child may want, the parent knows this isn't how things work. There is no circumventing the process of growing up and of expanding and strengthening the parent-child relationship over time. The parent has created the child, initiated a relationship with the child, will continue to sustain the child's life, teach the child, and provide opportunities for the child's growth, but he cannot suddenly "zap" the child from childish to mature or from a loving, but undeepened, relationship with him to a strong and time-tested relationship.

Mature adulthood and strong adult relationships are not rewards given to young children after a period of good behavior. Mature adulthood is the result of a necessary process of growth and development, made possible by the parent but requiring cooperation from the child. And a strong adult relationship between parent and child is the result of cooperation between parent child and shared experiences together over time.

If salvation were actually like a material reward or gift (e.g., 72 virgins or a plot of coveted real estate in Heaven), then it might make sense to say it will be bestowed like one in this way. But since salvation is a divine relationship and a fully developed divine nature, and thus nothing like a material reward or gift, it makes no sense whatsoever to say it will be bestowed like one. There is no short cut to full participation in the divine relationship shared by the members of the Godhead or to a divine character and a fully actualized divine nature.

That it is "by grace we are saved, after all we can do" means at least two things.

First, the idea of salvation is not even intelligible without grace. It was not we who were in a position to initiate the offer of relationship to God or create a plan whereby we could become like Him. These things had to come from divine grace or not at all.

Second, salvation is also inconceivable without our "doing." After we accept God's offer of relationship, growing it into a relationship of "one heart and one mind" requires our free, active, and persistent cooperation with Him. And building a divine character requires that we choose to increasingly learn and obey divine laws and principles.

The elements that comprise salvation--divine relationship and divine character--are neither independent achievements nor gifts and rewards. They are participatory divine creations. God makes these creations possible, initiates the processes of creation, sustains them, and oversees them. But to come to fruition these processes of creation require that we do what "we can do" as free agents--that we cooperate with Him in growing that relationship and choose for ourselves to follow each principle that comprises life as God lives it: eternal life.

We are both God's creatures and embryonic creators in our own right. No one among us can be saved without an absolute profusion of divine grace--God's exercise of His creative power on our behalf. But God will not, and cannot, save any of us without our choice--our exercise of our creative power on our own behalf. While God might make a physical object out of inert matter by His power alone; to make a god of a man requires that both exert their respective powers. The greatest of all God's creations occurs at the intersection of agency and grace, the cooperation of our creative power with His.

Don

wow, that was awesome!

[Glenn101]

Maybe I am off base, but it seems that the thread has evolved from talking about mercy to discussing grace. If I understand mercy correctly, it is the forgiveness of sins for which one has repented. This act of mercy is only possible through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus the Christ that He made in the Garden of Gethsemane. In order to obtain this mercy, we must meet God's requirements, and in that light, the mercy we receive is merited.

Glenn

[CASteinman]

Grace, by definition, cannot be merited.

This one little statement is not really the core of your whole post -- it is sort of a minor point in all that you were saying. But I think its a big point in the world and in this thread.

And I do not agree that Grace cannot be merited. As I have explained elsewhere.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

We read in the Torah about How God bestows his mercy thusly...

Exodus 20:6

6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

Deuteronomy 5:10

10 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments.

Deuteronomy 7:9

9 Know therefore that the Lord thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations;

According to this Gods mercy is bestowed to commandment keepers even unto a thousand generations.

Then we have modern Calvinists reading Romans as God arbitrarily bestowing mercy on whom every he wants to.

http://www.insearchoftruth.org/articles/romans_9.html

So which is the true God? The God of Deuteronomy or the God of the Calvinists?

Is Gods mercy conditional/merited or arbitrary?

If you are the one hurting; to you I seems "arbitrary".

[CASteinman]

Maybe I am off base, but it seems that the thread has evolved from talking about mercy to discussing grace. If I understand mercy correctly, it is the forgiveness of sins for which one has repented. This act of mercy is only possible through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus the Christ that He made in the Garden of Gethsemane. In order to obtain this mercy, we must meet God's requirements, and in that light, the mercy we receive is merited.

Glenn

In my view, Grace and Mercy are tightly connected concepts. Its not a huge leap between them although you are right -- they are not the same things.

I also agree with you that Mercy is Merited.

This however, is not a popular view. One (I think good reason) is that there is some Mercy which does not require any further or additional Merit from us -- we have already achieved it. This gives the appearance -- and for all earthly practical purposes, the sense -- that Merit is not required. We know, for example, that all who kept their first estate will be resurrected. This is not unmerited -- we kept our first estate. But that is now past and ignoring that history -- no further merit is required to be resurrected.

The ignored or forgotten pre-existence leads us to sometimes think of Mercy as unmerited.

But I think it is all merited.

A different argument would revolve around the question: "Is what we have done sufficient payment -- does it balance the reward? Or are we being given rewards well beyond our "merit"? Seems like that question would be mostly toward a negative answer.

[Zakuska]

Calvinists also believe that all those who have been born again by the unmerited grace of God (and only them) will do good works.

So what of all these "zombies" who are doing good works?

Romans 2

13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature 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;)

Surely all these "gentiles" aren't born agian?

Edited July 16, 2012 by Zakuska

[Anakin7]

We are Saved by True Grace [charis] by way of True Faith [pistis]

In His Debt/Grace

Anakin7

LDS JEDI KNIGHT

Edited July 16, 2012 by Anakin7

[djholmess]

So what of all these "zombies" who are doing good works?

Romans 2

13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature 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;)I

Surely all these "gentiles" aren't born agian?

Read the rest of the passage, Paul makes it very clear how many people actually do these good works as a result of the work of the law being on their hearts- none! See specifically 3:9-18 for Paul's conclusion.