Romans
1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

Paul was obviously referring to OT Jews. Why? Because they were God’s covenant people, and only they could be covenant breakers. God did not enter into a covenant with the Gentiles until the NT. After writing that even the Gentiles can, by nature, obey the principles of the law, He wrote:

Romans
2:17 Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,
2:18 And knowest [his] will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law;
2:19 And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness,
2:20 An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.

In Romans chapters 1 and 2 Paul recounts the historical record of a people who held "the truth in unrighteousness" and turned their backs on God and committed all manner of sins. It is true that Gentiles were, in some cases, aware of the truth. But they were not chosen by God to share it with the rest of the world.

Where in the Bible does it say God made a covenant with the Gentiles, a covenant to hold the truth in righteousness? The Gentiles were guilty of the things Paul named from the very beginning. They didn't start off with the truth and then later on "changed the truth of God into a lie." In Romans 2:13-15 Paul says they did not know the law.

In Romans Paul is developing an argument that all are guilty, and need to be saved by Christ. First Paul starts out his argument treating Gentiles. Then he goes on to the Jews. This covers everybody, after which Paul concludes that all are guilty.

Every Commentary I've ever seen sees the framework. If you look at Bibles with section headings, you'll see this too. (e.g. the NIV has "God's wrath against mankind" for Romans 1:18ff, and then a bit later "the Jews and the law")

In addition to Romans 1, you have John 1:9 and Ps. 19 which speak of how God communicates the truth to all men. Jesus is the true light which lightens every person in the world. It is through Christ that God communicates truth to us. We are not like animals which act purely (or even primarily) by instinct.

Okay, once again, Tom, we must agree to disagree. No problem. We're used to it by now, eh? I believe Rom 2:13-15 is talking about those Gentiles who “have not the law”. What does it mean to have and not have the law? I believe to have the law means to have it the way the Jews did. God gave them the law on Sinai to cherish and to protect and to obey and to share with the rest of the world.

Not having the law means the opposite. In other words, God did not entrust them with it. He did not commission the Gentiles to preserve in the Ark of the Covenant or to obey it or to share it with the rest of the world. They were not God’s chosen people to protect and to proclaim the law.

Nevertheless, they did by nature the things contained in the law. They followed their conscience and convictions and God accepted it as law keeping. It showed that the "work" of the law was written in their hearts. The question is - When were these works written in their hearts? I believe it was written in their hearts in Adam. That is, it is left over from being a descendent of Adam, who was made in the image and likeness of God. It is akin to the instincts that govern animal behaviour.

"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: which show 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."

Just to clarify, everyone agrees Rom. 2:13-15 is dealing with Gentiles. There's no disagreement there. The disagreement is regarding Romans 1:18ff where you believe it's talking about the Jews and everybody else believes otherwise.

The reason I quoted Rom 2:13-15 is to prove that we are born with an instinctive knowledge of what is fundamentally morally right and wrong as defined by the last six commandments. And, from what I can tell, we both agree. We also agree there are moral details we can, and must, learn later on in life through Bible study and prayer.

However, it appears we disagree as to what constitutes hidden character defects. I believe they are dormant inherited traits of character residing within us of which we are ignorant and have not, therefore, cultivated or turned into character. You do not agree.

I also believe character is the direct result of willfully, knowingly, deliberately choosing to obey or disobey our conscience and convictions. A born again, Spirit-filled believer will not and cannot unwittingly, ignorantly or accidentally possess or develop one of the sinful traits of character Paul listed in Galatians 5. No one, whether converted or unconverted, who possesses or develops one or more of them will inherit the kingdom of God. You disagree.

Do you have anything more you’d like to add?

The reason I quoted Rom 2:13-15 is to prove that we are born with an instinctive knowledge of what is fundamentally morally right and wrong as defined by the last six commandments. And, from what I can tell, we both agree. We also agree there are moral details we can, and must, learn later on in life through Bible study and prayer.

I think it's wrong to emphasize the instinctive part. I think that a minor portion of what we know. God should receive much greater credit for the active role He takes. Jesus Christ is the light which lightens every man who comes into the world. The Gentiles know what they do, not by birth, but because of what God has revealed to them. This is the consistent revelation of inspiration, including, for example, Ps. 19, John 1:9, and Romans 1. Here's a statement from the Spirit of Prophecy:

quote:

---

Those whom Christ commends in the judgment may have known little of theology, but they have cherished His principles. Through the influence of the divine Spirit they have been a blessing to those about them. Even among the heathen are those who have cherished the spirit of kindness; before the words of life had fallen upon their ears, they have befriended the missionaries, even ministering to them at the peril of their own lives. Among the heathen are those who worship God ignorantly, those to whom the light is never brought by human instrumentality, yet they will not perish. Though ignorant of the written law of God, they have heard His voice speaking to them in nature, and have done the things that the law required. Their works are evidence that the Holy Spirit has touched their hearts, and they are recognized as the children of God.(DA 638)

---

1)They cherished His priniples.
2)Through the influence of the Spirit they have been a blessin.
3)They have heard His voice speaking to them in nature.
4)The Holy Spirit has touched their hearts

Notice she doesn't attribute their knowledge or ability to keep the law to anything instinctual, but rather as a result of the direct working of God. I don't see that have you provided any evidence to support your claim that our moral knowledge is only instinctual. I've provided evidence that it comes through the working of God, but you have not acknolwedged this.

Also I wouldn't limit what God teaches to the last six commandments. I see no reason to do so. Romans 1 specifically states that God has revealed Himself, so they all should give thanks to Him, so this is entering into areas covered by the first four commandments.

However, it appears we disagree as to what constitutes hidden character defects. I believe they are dormant inherited traits of character residing within us of which we are ignorant and have not, therefore, cultivated or turned into character. You do not agree.

I don't think I disagree too much with the concept you are trying to present regarding what I would call sins of ignorance, but I do disagree with the words you have used to present your idea. It makes no sense to me for you to speak of hidden character defects given you do not see the dormant inherited traits as either defective nor having to do with character.

I also believe character is the direct result of willfully, knowingly, deliberately choosing to obey or disobey our conscience and convictions. A born again, Spirit-filled believer will not and cannot unwittingly, ignorantly or accidentally possess or develop one of the sinful traits of character Paul listed in Galatians 5. No one, whether converted or unconverted, who possesses or develops one or more of them will inherit the kingdom of God. You disagree.

I'm not sure I disagree with the concept you are presenting here. Once again, it's more the words. For example the phrase "accidentally possess one the sinful traits of character"; what exactly does that mean? Is it possible to do accidentally possess one of the sinful traits of character listed? This seems like a meaningless phrase to me, and if it does mean something, I have no idea what that would be.

Here's how I would state it. Paul in Galatians 5 is discussing the difference of those who walk according to the Spirit and those who walk according to the flesh. Those who walk according to the Spirit will develop the fruit of the Spirit. Those who resist the Spirit, and insist and walking according to the flesh, will develop the works, or fruit, of the flesh and will not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

The cause of not entering into heaven is not having the works of the flesh, but of refusing to respond to the Spirit. The sign of those who resist are the works of the flesh.

MM, I think you're misquoting me again. Please quote something I said that you have in mind. I don't recall saying what you are saying I said. I think I've expalined myself half a dozen times or so about this, but you keep misquoting me. But if you can produce a statement where I say that a born-again believer can ignorantly develop and possess one or more of the sins on Paul's list, I'll apologize.

Waiting with baited breath,

Tom