Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 2:17

Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,

17 29. Explicit exposure of Jewish responsibility, guilt, and peril

17. Behold ] Better, But if. A single additional letter in the Gr. makes this difference; and it should certainly be so read. The framework of the sentence is thus somewhat altered: “But if thou art a Jew, and dost glory in the name and privilege, say, dost thou act up to thy light?”

thou ] Emphatic, “thou, my supposed hearer or reader.”

art called ] Lit. art surnamed. Perhaps in the word “named” lies a slight reference to the contrast between external and internal “Judaism.” See Rom 2:28.

restest in ] Lit. restest upon. The possession of the Law was the foundation-rock of the man’s peace and hope. On this he reposed himself, thanking God that he was “not as other men were.” The Divine exposure of his sin he perverted into a reason for self-righteousness!

makest thy boast of God ] Lit. boastest, or gloriest, in God. A “boast” either most holy or most sinful according to the man’s view of God and of himself. See Isa 45:25, for the sacred promise perverted by Pharisaic pride.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Behold – Having thus stated the general principles on which God would judge the world; having shown how they condemned the Gentiles; and having removed all objections to them, he now proceeds to another part of his argument, to show how they applied to the Jews. By the use of the word behold, he calls their attention to it, as to an important subject; and with great skill and address, he states their privileges, before he shows them how those privileges might enhance their condemnation. He admits all their claims to pre-eminence in privileges, and then with great faithfulness proceeds to show how, if abused, these might deepen their final destruction. It should be observed, however, that the word rendered behold is in many manuscripts written in two words, ei de, instead of ide. If this, as is probable, is the correct reading there, it should be rendered, if now thou art, etc. Thus, the Syriac, Latin, and Arabic read it.

Thou art called – Thou art named Jew, implying that this name was one of very high honor. This is the first thing mentioned on which the Jew would be likely to pride himself.

A Jew – This was the name by which the Hebrews were at that time generally known; and it is clear that they regarded it as a name of honor, and valued themselves much on it; see Gal 2:15; Rev 2:9. Its origin is not certainly known. They were called the children of Israel until the time of Rehoboam. When the ten tribes were carried into captivity, but two remained, the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. The name Jews was evidently given to denote those of the tribe of Judah. The reasons why the name of Benjamin was lost in that of Judah, were probably,

(1)Because the tribe of Benjamin was small, and comparatively without influence or importance.

1. The Messiah was to be of the tribe of Judah Gen 49:10; and that tribe would therefore possess a consequence proportioned to their expectation of that event.

The name of Jews would therefore be one that would suggest the facts that they were preserved from captivity, that they had received remarkably the protection of God, and that the Messiah was to be sent to that people. Hence, it is not wonderful that they should regard it as a special favor to be a Jew, and particularly when they added to this the idea of all the other favors connected with their being the special people of God. The name Jew came thus to denote all the peculiarities and special favors of their religion.

And restest in the law – The word rest here is evidently used in the sense of trusting to, or leaning upon. The Jew leaned on, or relied on the Law for acceptance or favor; on the fact that he had the Law, and on his obedience to it. It does not mean that he relied on his own works, though that was true, but that he leaned on the fact that he had the Law, and was thus distinguished above others. The Law here means the entire Mosaic economy; or all the rules and regulations which Moses had given. Perhaps also it includes, as it sometimes does, the whole of the Old Testament.

Makest thy boast in God – Thou dost boast, or glory, that thou hast the knowledge of the true God, while other nations are in darkness. On this account the Jew felt himself far elevated above all other people, and despised them. It was true that they only had the true knowledge of God, and that he had declared himself to be their God, Deu 4:7; Psa 147:19-20; but this was not a ground for boasting, but for gratitude. This passage shows us that it is much more common to boast of privileges than to be thankful for them, and that it is no evidence of piety for a man to boast of his knowledge of God. An humble, ardent thankfulness that we have that knowledge a thankfulness which leads us not to despise others, but to desire that they may have the same privilege – is an evidence of piety.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Rom 2:17-29

Behold, thou art called a Jew.

The Jews also without excuse

Hitherto the apostle, in seeking to shut up the Jew unto the faith of Christ, has contented himself with an enunciation of the equitable principles on which the final judgment shall proceed, simply affirming, of both rewards and punishments, that they shall be to the Jew first, but also to the Gentile. He now proceeds, in a direct appeal to the Jew, to indicate to him the folly of any hope of escape but in the free grace of God as revealed in the gospel.

I. The appeal is made to the Jew as to the practical effect of the religion of which he made his boast upon his own character and conduct.

1. Did it make him to become a wiser or better man? If not, of what avail could it be in the day of final account? For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law, etc. (Rom 2:25). Circumcision therefore is not itself a saving rite, but the sign and seal of a salvation already secured by faith (Rom 4:10-11). But, if a mans life proclaims his profession of faith false, then the sign becomes a falsehood, and the seal a delusion and a snare. The sign is not the thing signified; nor does the thing signified of necessity wait upon the sign. The seal is not the treasure sealed; and neither is it produced by the magic influence of the sealing; nor does it of necessity remain so long as the seal remains. Marvellous it is that men should ever have imagined that God could be bound, by this mere external rite, to deliver men from the just punishment of their sins. How different the faith and reasoning of the great Father of the faithful! With him it was not a question of circumcision, but of righteousness (Gen 18:24-25).

2. But if an uncircumcised Gentile should practically meet the laws requirement he should be accounted as a circumcised person, and his conduct would condemn that of the unfaithful Jew (Rom 2:26, etc.). The inward and spiritual character of the religion required both by the Abrahamic covenant and the Mosaic law had been distinctly insisted upon by all the inspired writers, and the one ever-recurring complaint was that of Stephen, Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye (Act 7:51). By the testimony of Moses, and all the prophets, such circumcised ones were really and before God uncircumcised. But could an uncircumcised Gentile remaining uncircumcised, secure a position of grace equal to that which the disobedient Jew forfeited? By consenting to be circumcised he confessedly might. For that express provision had been made. But besides proselytes there were great numbers of Gentiles like the devout centurion (Luk 7:1, etc.), and devout Cornelius, who were truly godly men and accepted of God, and whose circumcision was that of the heart (Act 10:34). And why should the reference be restricted even to these? Surely there are men, even in purely heathen lands, who turn from sin seeking for redemption. And shall it be said that because they do not possess the light of revelation, and cannot exercise an intelligent personal faith in the Saviour of men, they must therefore be cut off from all interest in His great redeeming work? But if men, under such disadvantages, should become circumcised in heart and accepted of God, their fulfilment of the law would indeed judge those who, with all the advantages of revelation, continued still to be transgressors of the law.

II. Objections to the conclusiveness of the argument are answered (Rom 3:1, etc.).

1. If a Gentile, by keeping the law, might become, in the estimation of God, a Jew, while the Jew, through disobedience, might be reduced to the position of a sinful Gentile, then what profit could there be in circumcision? The advantage was much every way. First, indeed, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. The question to be solved was not how could a man be assured of perfect immunity from punishment, but how could he be most effectually rescued from the love and the practice of sin? For this Gentilism had no aptitude or power, but rather the contrary; while Judaism had both. In its sacred oracles, the need, the grace, the way, and the sure promise of salvation were made abundantly plain; so that, if the Jew did not secure it, he was without excuse. Then it is demanded–

2. If some of the Jews did not believe those sacred oracles, so as to secure possession of the promised salvation, would their unbelief invalidate the promise of God? Most surely not. For the fact that He had given the promise to believing and holy Israel could not be supposed to bind Him to insure salvation to every descendant of Abraham, whether believing and obedient or not. In respect to that, Let God be true, and every man a liar. David (Psa 51:4) would have vindicated God for excluding him from salvation, because of his sin; and he sought the restoration of the joy of that salvation only on the ground of the promise which free grace had made to the penitent. But now–

3. If our unrighteousness (who, being Jews, fail to manifest the faith and obedience of the covenant people) commend the righteousness of God, establish and make it more conspicuous, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance upon us whose very iniquities have served to promote His glory? (I speak as a man) God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world? If He must needs exempt from punishment all who contribute to His glory, then none can possibly be condemned. For His real glory is that He deals impartially with men according to their true characters, and not according to accidental relationship; and if it were possible for Him to depart from this rule, then the glory would also depart. For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto His glory, why am I yet to be judged as a sinner? Clearly because I am a sinner. If otherwise, why should we not say, as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we do say, Let us do evil that good may come? To that Jesuitry which carried out to its logical results would justify any crime, the apostle deigns no other reply than that the damnation of its promulgators is just.

III. As to actual moral and religious character, the Jew must stand sine by side with the Gentile, as a sinner, and exposed to just condemnation (Rom 2:9, etc.) (W. Tyson.)

The advantages of the Jews

consisted in their–

I. Bearing the name of Jew, which embraces three significations–confession, praise, and thanksgiving, by which that people was distinguished from all other nations. The Jew alone had been chosen as the confessor of God, while all the rest of the world abjured His service; he alone was appointed to celebrate His praises, while by others He was blasphemed; he alone was appointed to render thanksgiving to God for multiplied benefits received, while others were passed by.

II. Having received the law. They had no occasion to study any other wisdom or philosophy (Deu 4:6). In this they rested.

1. Labour was spared them of employing many years and great endeavours, and travelling to distant countries, as was the case with other nations in acquiring knowledge and certain rules of direction.

2. They had an entire confidence in the law as a heavenly and Divine rule which could not mislead them, while the Gentiles could have no reliance on their deceitful philosophy.

III. Having the true God as their God, while the Gentiles having only false gods were without God in the world. They had, therefore, great reason to glory in Him, and on this account David said, that in God was his strength and his refuge (Psa 18:1-50; Psa 62:7; Psa 144:1-15).

IV. Knowing His will, and that not by a confused knowledge, such as the Gentiles had by the revelation of nature, but a distinct knowledge by the revelation of the word, which the Gentiles did not possess (Psa 147:19-20).

V. Discerning what is evil. They knew the will of God, and consequently what was contrary to it, i.e., what He condemns.

VI. Their ability to teach and guide others. The law not only instructed the Jews for themselves, but also for others, and in this they held that they enjoyed a great superiority over the other nations, who are here called blind, for with all the lights of their philosophy, laws, and arts, being without true religion, they had no true saving light. (R. Haldane.)

Jewish boasting

I. The Jews grounds of dependence.

1. Their covenant relation. The Jew expected salvation because he was a Jew. Denominationalism, rather than the living personal Christ, is too often made a ground of trust. They rested in the law as their confidence, and boasted that God was their God and they His people.

2. Their superior knowledge. Divine things had been specially revealed to them; on this ground they expected special favour of God. They forgot that superior knowledge often enhances the guilt of sin, and increases the certainty, necessity, and severity of punishment. It should make us first anxious to do right ourselves and then to lead others right.

3. The fact of circumcision.

II. The just principles of Divine judgment. These are to be mens works or character, and the standard of judgment, the light we all severally enjoy. This is true both of Gentiles and Jews. The one will be judged precisely by the same principles as the other (Rom 2:28-29). (C. Higgins.)

The need of spiritual religion

Paul now addresses the Jew direct.

I. The false conceptions of the Jews.

1. The Jews were–

(1) Overweeningly proud of their national name. To be entitled to the name of Jew was the highest of earthly honours. To be an Athenian, or a Roman, was a much inferior distinction. Nor without reason; yet they should not have carried it to so ridiculous an excess. Alas! how has the fine gold now become dim (Deu 28:37).

(2) Boastful of their religious privileges, and vainly built upon them their confidence of final safety and present acceptance with God. He possessed the law, etc. With such distinguishing favours he gave himself wondrous airs of self-importance; and looked down upon Grecian sages and Roman legislators with contempt. As to the common people among the uncircumcised, they were mere dogs and swine.

(3) Thought themselves at liberty to indulge in all manner of unrighteousness with impunity. As the special favourites of heaven, God would be tolerant of their vices, and readily sanction them in their evil propensities. What would be a damnable crime among the heathen would, in a Jew, be a small and venial offence scarcely needing forgiveness.

2. Accordingly, the apostle boldly assails their refuges of lies, and shows them that their transgressions were as abhorrent to God as the corresponding iniquities of the heathen. And here he establishes the principle, that circumcision was never meant to be a substitute for personal holiness, and can never be accepted as such, while uncircumcision will not place at a disadvantage any virtuous and well-meaning Gentile. And why? Because God regards the heart rather than the outward appearance. The sign of the covenant is of little worth unless the terms of the covenant have been apprehended and accepted by the inner man. For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly, etc.

3. All that is essential in this teaching belongs to us, as professedly a Christian people. We have the form of saving truth and knowledge as well as they; and we are in the same danger of resting in that form, and then making it an excuse for sin and a cloak to our unrighteousness. Baptism stands in the place of circumcision. Do we not need, then, to be taught that he is not a Christian who is one outwardly only (1Pe 3:2).

4. This doctrine was, indeed, taught in the Old Testament, and the prophets severely rebuked their contemporaries for resting in the outward law, and thereby causing the name of Jehovah to be evil spoken of among the heathen, who, of course, judged of Him and His requirements by the conduct of His professing people (Deu 10:16; Deu 30:6; Eze 36:16-21; Eze 36:25-27).

II. The inward, true, and spiritual religion, on which the apostle so forcibly insists.

1. Its seat is in the heart. There is an outward form which is not to be despised; for wherever there is the power of godliness there will also be its appropriate expression, because a good tree must bring forth good fruit, and a pure fountain send forth pure streams. A piety which consists wholly of frames and feelings, and articles of belief, is a delusion and a snare. Yet, on the other hand, there may be an imitation of the form of godliness where its power is entirely absent. Sometimes there is a consciousness of hypocrisy, and a man puts on the livery of religion with the deliberate purpose of imposing on the world; but more frequently the error is the result of self-delusion. People observe the external proprieties of Christianity, while their hearts are utterly dark and dead. The difference between a formal Christian and a real one is that the one is an artificial tree, made of dead wood and wire, on whose branches oranges and apples are mechanically hung; while the other is a tree which bringeth forth his fruit in due season. The one is a painted fire, while the other is an altar on whose sacred hearth the flame truly burns.

2. It is not ours by nature, but it is the gift of God. By nature we have no religion, but we can, even if left to ourselves, easily acquire one. That which is outward is within the compass of our natural powers; but that which is inward and spiritual is like the flames which licked up Elijahs altar, which only Jehovah could flash forth. It is not enough that you read the Bible, say your prayers, etc. Are you the subject of a direct Divine working, changing your inward character? Is your circumcision, your consecration to God, that of the heart, in the spirit and not in the letter: whose praise is not of men but of God?

3. Let us delineate it. Circumcision was the sign of the covenant with Israel. God pledged Himself to be their King and Father. They, on the other hand, were to be willing to obey and serve Him. Our consecration is to be substantially of the same order. Let us view it as relating to–

(1) The will. As Gods creatures, we ought to be subject to His will. Nor should this be a hardship when we reflect on His perfect wisdom, goodness, and righteousness. Yet, man is a self-willed creature. This tendency reveals itself in earliest childhood. And then, afterwards, when our thoughts are directed to a higher quarter, when we become aware of a God whom it is our duty to honour and obey, the guilty struggle is renewed. Or, perhaps, we try to put Him off with a half-hearted and pretended service. The necessity of religion and the triumph of grace is to subdue this mutinous spirit, and make us willing and ready to say, Father, not my will, but Thine be done. Now, this subjection of the will to God shows itself in submission to His dealings with us, and obedience to His requirements of us.

(2) The motives follow the will. It is true that the will is influenced by motives; but it is also true that the will has a prior power of choosing its own motives. Now, ordinarily, men are constrained by a love of money, pleasure, power, etc. The man of God may be the subject of the same tendencies and incentives so far as they are in themselves lawful and right; but then he will not yield himself up to them blindly or absolutely; he will subordinate the whole to the supreme principle of seeking first the Divine glory and being actuated by love to God (Corinthians 10:31).

(3) The affections participate in the effects of inward holiness.

(a) Love is an acknowledged necessity of our existence. If carnally minded, our love will be impure, misleading, dangerous; but if spiritually minded, its great and all-satisfying object will be God Himself.

(b) Closely allied to love is fear; for what we love we fear to lose. And if we love God we shall fear to offend or displease Him; and having that we need have no fear beside.

(c) Where our love and fear centre thither will our desires ascend.

(d) From this feeling will spring both trust and hope. We shall confide with unfaltering affiance in Him whom our soul loveth. We shall have boldness before His presence, and know that, as He liveth, we shall live also. We shall not be dismayed by the prospect of death, or tremble when we think of judgment. Conclusion: Such is spiritual religion, the circumcision of the heart. It is produced within us by the Holy Ghost. The instrument is the Word of truth. And especially does He employ and apply to our hearts those doctrines which relate to the atoning sacrifice of Christ, to Gods readiness to be a Father to us and acknowledge us as His children, and to the dread realities of the world to come. Let us again ask ourselves if we possess real, inward, and spiritual religion? If not, a mere form and profession will be found in vain. (T. G. Horton.)

The nominal Christian

I. What he boasts (Rom 2:17-20).

II. What he does (verses 21-21).

III. What is the result. He is condemned–

1. By his own principles.

2. By the upright heathen.

3. By the gospel law. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

The professor

1. His exalted privileges.

2. His honourable calling.

3. His faithless conduct. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

And approvest the things that are more excellent.

Sensitiveness of moral sense

The phrase is explained by Alford as provest (in the sense of sifting and coming to a conclusion on) things which differ; and by Vaughan as–

1. Discernest things that differ; art able to discriminate, as by an infallible test, things true and false, right and wrong.

2. Approvest things that excel (cf. Php 1:10; Rom 12:2)

. The boast, here, clearly refers to accuracy of judgment and to the sensitiveness of the moral sense. As the wild huntsman can hear a footfall at incredible distances; as the Indian of the prairie can track a trail, which to a dull-eyed European is invisible; as the connoisseur can distinguish the slightest shades of flavour in food and in wines of various vintages; as the artist can at a glance decide if a picture be that of a master or not; so the Jew boasted he could discern the good from the bad, the right from the wrong, and unloose all kind of casuistical knots of morality. (C. Neil, M. A.)

And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind.—

Jewish treatment of Gentiles

Four terms set forth the moral treatment to which the Jew, as the born physician of mankind, subjects his patients, the Gentiles, to their complete cure. Thou art confident describes his pretentious assurance. And, first, he takes the poor Gentile by the hand as one does a blind man, offering to guide him; then he opens his eyes, dissipating his darkness by the light of revelation; then he rears him, as one who would bring up a being yet without reason; finally, when through all this care he has come to the stage of the little child (one who cannot speak–a designation of proselytes), he initiates him into the full knowledge of the truth, by becoming his teacher. (Prof. Godet.)

Unsaved workers

Now, I should like to ask a question of two or three classes, and then send you home. There are a great many of us here tonight who are teachers of others. Some of you are deacons, elders, Sunday school teachers, street preachers. I thank God that you are a busy people, and you are doing much for Christ. There is a question I want to ask of you and of myself: Are we who teach others sure that we have believed in Christ ourselves? It is well to ask that question; it is a very dangerous thing indeed for an unsaved man to begin to work for Christ, for the probabilities are that he will take for granted what he ought diligently to have proved. In many cases he never will seek to be saved; but go on, on, on, never pausing to examine himself, and so, while professing to work for God, he may be a stranger to the work of God on himself. There is an old story I recollect reading somewhere of a lunatic in an asylum, who one day saw a very lean cook. Accosting him, he said, Cook, do you make good food? Yes, said the cook. Are you sure? Yes. And does anybody get fat on it? Yes, again was the reply. Then, said the man, you had better mind what you are after, or else, when the governor comes round, he will put you in along with me, for if you make good food, and yet are so thin yourself, you must be mad, for you do not eat it, or else you would get fat too! There is some sense in that. You teach others, you say; you give them spiritual food; but why not feed on it yourselves? Master, what right hast thou to teach if thou wilt not first learn? Physician, physician, heal thyself! Brother, it will go hard with you and with me, if we are lost. What will become of us teachers of others, if, after having led others to the river, we never drink; after bringing others the heavenly food, we perish of spiritual famine ourselves? (C. H. Spurgeon.)

An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes.–

The Sunday school teacher

I. His work and office. An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes.

1. In these words this is comprehensively described, both as respects the material upon which the teacher has to work, and the appliance which he brings to bear upon it. He has to deal with human nature in its ignorant and helpless condition: to make the naturally foolish wise unto salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

(1) The foolish! According to Scripture, the natural state of mankind is one of folly, and the way of sin the way of foolishness. And right reason agrees with this; for surely it is folly to neglect the great end of a mans being, and to come short of eternal happiness. Surely it is a gross infatuation to risk that precious jewel, the soul, in seeking to grasp the pomps of the world, or to grovel in the dust of its pollutions. And this foolishness, though not so exaggerated as in more advanced years, is incident to the years of childhood. It is bound in the heart of a child; childhood and youth are vanity (Pro 22:15; Ecc 11:10). It is so in the very nature of things. Impressible for good as the mind of a child unquestionably is, and free as it is from the prejudices of riper age, still when left to itself it will invariably take the wrong direction, and by degrees develop its sinful tendencies. The soil of the heart, if it be not cultured for the good seed of the Divine word, will be speedily sown with evil principles, and bring forth an abundant measure of foolish and evil habits.

(2) Thus foolish, the young are mere babes as far as regards spiritual health and strength. This designation sufficiently expresses mens natural inability to recover themselves out of the way of folly, and advance in the true life of God (Jer 10:23). And, if this is true of man in mature life, how much truer must it be of his childhood. But the Sunday school teacher has to deal literally with babes, and needing as much care, in a moral point of view, as the very babe which hangs upon its mothers breast. They are the lambs of the flock, the young and tender, who stand in need of kind assistance, of gentle leading, of suitable provision. They are those of whom the good Shepherd spake (Joh 21:15).

2. The office must be of the last importance. It is to train the little ones in the way they should go; to bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. The Sunday school is a nursery for heaven. It is true that it has afforded a means of education to many a poor child; but its grand object is to make scholars in the school of Christ, This may be done now with greater ease than at any other time. The young plant may be trained to assume almost any shape, if bent and turned while it is yet flexible, To preoccupy and cultivate the ground should be the aim of the Christian philanthropist: it will not long lie fallow; for Satan and his agents will be assiduous enough in their endeavours to plant it with tares. If we do not train the foolish and helpless for God, Satan will train them for himself (Deu 6:6-7; Psa 78:3-7; Eph 6:4; Pro 22:6).

II. The spirit in which he should engage in his work.

1. Sincere desire to promote the spiritual well-being of the children. What we want is to Christianise our people, and when is this so likely to be brought about as in youth? Do not think, then, that you have done enough when you have taught them to read the letter of the Bible: you must seek to imbue them with its spirit. But here an inquiry will naturally be suggested, are you competent for this, i.e., are you a converted character, or only a professor. Here is your test. Thus, only as you are led by the Spirit of God are you fit to be an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes.

2. Self-denial, patience, and perseverance. There will always be much to try and discourage you: the waywardness of some, the dulness of others, and the uncertainty of not a few. There is much call for gentle and cautious treatment: the variety of dispositions and capacities must be noted, and dealt with in various ways; and the difficulty of so doing will often occasion discouragement. Some require to be urged on, while others must rather be restrained (Gen 33:13). You are sorely tried on account of the little impression which seems to be made upon your children; but little is manifest as the result of your teaching; do not despair, the seed often remains a long time in the soil before it begins to fructify: if you work in a proper spirit, your labour shall not be in vain in the Lord (Ecc 11:1). You cannot expect to do everything at once.

3. Unwavering dependence upon Divine aid. While on the one hand the inquiry may be made, Who is sufficient for these things? on the other hand, it may be confidently, though humbly, urged, I can do all things through Christ, which strengtheneth me. He whom we serve has all hearts and all things at His disposal: He can overturn or remove this or that obstacle, and make our way smooth before us, and so interpose as to leave us without excuse, if we grow weary or faint in our duty. Hence we must fervently pray for Divine enlightenment and teaching. We want wisdom as well as strength. And in seeking for the guidance of the Spirit, we are not to despise or pass by all proper human aids. We may the more confidently crave the teaching of the Spirit, when we have duly sought after available knowledge; for the Divine blessing is invariably given in the use of means.

4. A single eye to the Divine glory. When the Christian sets this before him as the end of his life, he will not regard ordinary difficulties. This will lead him to strive after the conversion of souls.

III. The encouragements.

1. The general assurance of success. Enough is said to encourage every labourer to prosecute his work with assiduity. And not a few instances might here be recorded of pleasing results. Not only have children been instructed and converted to God, but they have proved the means of instruction and conversion to their parents and others. How many who now occupy stations of eminence and usefulness owe their all, under God, to Sunday schools.

2. Personal benefit. In many cases the instructor has been savingly taught himself, while teaching others. And where he has been truly pious, when engaged in the work, the graces of the Christians life have been called into exercise, and their growth promoted.

3. The final reward (Mat 25:40). (J. S. Broad, M. A.)

Ineffectual opinions

Opinions may play upon the surface of a mans soul, like the moonbeams on the silver sea, without raising its temperature one degree or sending a single beam into its dark caverns. And that is the sort of Christianity that satisfies a great many of you, a Christianity of opinion, a Christianity of surface creed, a Christianity which at the best slightly modifies some of your outward actions, but leaves the whole inner man unchanged. (A. Maclaren.)

Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself?—

The teacher taught

In His conversation with Nicodemus our Saviour enunciated the principle to which all Christian usefulness must eventually be referred (Joh 3:11). The model Pharisee asserted for himself the most edifying orthodoxy, flawless morality and eminent devotion; he claimed extraordinary keenness in discrimination, approving only what was excellent; he could inform the ignorant, illumine the darkened, give counsel to illumined adults, and help forward untaught children. Yet with all these assumptions the apostle seems to have discovered that which led him to rate such a creature as a mere spiritual quack. This man, so earnest against thieving, had a touch of dishonesty; so stern in pressing the penalties of the seventh commandment, had some sins which would look ill under scrutiny. In a word, he was instructing others with no word for himself. And so St. Paul reiterates the grand principle of the gospel: religious instruction is to be indorsed by the living experience of the instructor. Consider:–

I. The great common need under which humanity lies. It has pleased God to make men instruments of good to each other. Hence the proclamation of the gospel is necessarily experimental. Come all ye that fear God, and I will declare what He hath done for my soul. Naaman was just the person to tell lepers of the prophet who had bidden him go wash in the Jordan. Bartimeus was just the right one to lead blind men to Jesus, who had opened his eyes. Hence, it is perfectly natural that we demand of him who teaches that he should first have felt the truth he proffers. Otherwise he lays himself open to the taunt, Physician, heal thyself!

II. The aim of all religious instruction. The conscience must be reached, and through its monitions the entire life must be influenced, or else all teaching is wasted. Nothing is so mysterious as the forms of operation which this inner monitor chooses. Sometimes it seems to render a man harder and more violent; and yet at that very wildest moment he is nearer yielding than ever before. Sometimes it melts a man into deep emotion; and yet we painfully discover afterward that this has been mere ebullition of excited feeling. Now, we cannot grow skilful in distinguishing these external shows, without diligent study of our own experience. Conscience must be watched in its working within our hearts. As in water, face answereth to face; so the heart of man to man. That truth is most effective which, having proved itself forceful in reaching our own consciences, goes from its success there upon the intrenchments of another.

III. The variety of forms employed in Scripture instruction. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, etc. But then, how much there is of it! and what room for skill in discriminating what doctrine, principle, or precept to apply in each given case. Now, many of our Sunday school teachers are at a loss here. When the tossed vessel is drifting, and a passenger lies at the point of death, are there none who hurry to the Bible, as a sailor to the medicine chest; and yet stand appalled at the formidable array of spiritual drugs, any one of which possibly might be helpful or hurtful, if only they could know which? How can we learn what phases of truth to present? Let the Scriptures be studied experimentally. Let the Christian teacher rework every principle he offers to others, first into his own mind, and outwork it into his own life.

IV. The power of a godly example. Men are imitative, and in nothing so much as religious observance. Moreover, they insist upon identifying a moral teacher with what he teaches. They will not suffer a limping man to propose an effective cure for lameness. Hence there can be no failure more ridiculous in the eyes of the world than that of a man who urges a truth and lives a lie. But, on the other hand, whenever fully possessed of the power of the gospel, and radiant with its light, a grand life goes about doing good, that life has a majestic driving force to it almost unlimited.

V. The law of the Holy Spirits action. Truth is propagated not by transmission through mere symbols, but by radiation through conductors in contact. The lens of a burning glass will not only suffer the free passage of the suns rays, but will concentrate them, until what they fall upon bursts into flame; meanwhile the lens itself will remain perfectly cool. Wonderful experiments of this sort have been performed with even a lens of ice, which kindled a fire and continued unmelted. You can find nothing, however, in religious matters to which this phenomenon would answer. The torch, not the burning glass, is the emblem of spiritual life; it flames while it illumines, and is warmed as it sets on fire. He influences others most who has been nearest in contact with Christ. No religious teacher can give more than he gets. Conclusion: Whichever way we look, then, we reach the same conclusion. The heart lies behind the hand which proffers religious truth.

1. We learn here the proper use to make of the Scriptures. All religious instruction must be received experimentally. Thus the Bible becomes personal in every one of its utterances. How is it now (see Isa 29:11-12)? What renders the learned and the unlearned together so at fault is not want of education, but want of experience. It may be worth knowing, as a geographical fact, that there is no water in the Kidron valley save after a shower: it may be important to learn, as a historic fact, that Capernaum was located at Khan Minyeh; but this is not what is going to save souls. We must embody truth in life, and reduce vague information to vital and available help.

2. We learn to distinguish between gift and grace. Mere intellectual gift sometimes even hinders grace. Christ, said Legh Richmond, may be crucified between classics and mathematics. It is not our want of aptitudes for doing good which stands in our way, half so much as it is our want of communion with God. The rule is, Oh! taste and see that the Lord is good! Out of this experimental acquaintance with truth grows our power fitly to offer it. Scholarship is only a means to an end. The gospel light is much like the solar light; its beauty is not its efficiency. You may divide the sunbeam into seven beautiful colours, and not one alone nor all together will imprint an image on a daguerreotype plate. Just outside the spectrum, in the dark, there is one entirely invisible ray, called the chemical ray, which does all the work. No man ever saw it, no man every felt it; and yet this it is which bleaches and blackens a dull surface into figures of loveliness and life. I care not how luminous a mans personal or intellectual qualities may be; if he lacks, amid the showy beams that are shining, this one which is viewless–this efficient but inconspicuous beam of spiritual experience–all his endeavours will surely prove inoperative for good.

3. We learn here the advantage of seasons of discipline. In all the round of Gods dealing with His children, there is nothing like suffering as an educator. Anything that loosens the hold of the soul on earthly things, and shuts it up to God, is valuable; but, as a preparation for usefulness, is priceless. Any man expert in sea life could have said all that the apostle said when he came forth to quiet the sailors in the midst of a shipwreck. The force of his counsel lay not so much in the prudence of what he suggested, as in the experience which was embodied in it–that long abstinence in which he had received his vision. One mysterious but remembered hour there was which gave his speech all its efficiency (Act 17:22-25). It is just this which is the element of power in any counsel. The angel of experience is sent to one, and then he is ready to say, I believe God!

4. We learn the secret of all success, and the explanation of all failure. It would seem at first sight that truth is efficient in itself. But now we understand that first it must pass through the teachers experience. When the plague was raging in Ireland, the priests gave out that if any man would take from his own fire a piece of burning peat and light his neighbours fire with it, he would deliver the family from an attack of the disease. The whole region was instantly alive with brands passing to and fro. Oh! if superstition could do this much, ought not zeal to do more? But the kindling was to come from ones own hearthstone then; and the kindling must come from ones own heart now. Calvins seal motto was a hand holding a heart on fire, with the legend, I give thee all, I hold back nothing! What we need is to have our entire level of Christian experience lifted. We are too busy about appliances and places and theories.

5. We learn the last essential of preparation for teaching. We must have the presence of the Holy Ghost. You see this most evidently in the case of Paul. They called him Paullus, because he was little. He had a distemper in his sight. His bodily presence was said to be weak, and his speech contemptible. But no man ever equalled him in power as a religious teacher. (C. S. Robinson, D. D.)

The teacher animated and urged to duty

I. Let us attempt to produce animation by an appeal to you as teachers of others. Be not weary in well-doing; implies that in well-doing we may be weary–though sinners are not often weary in ill-doing.

1. Fill your minds with the magnitude and importance of your work.

(1) When you look upon your little charge, you are not merely to regard them as beauteous shells scattered on the shore of the ocean, but as each a pearl of incalculable value. When you are called to be teachers of babes, you are not called to play with toys.

(2) But, as an incalculable value is impressed upon them, so they are exposed to imminent danger. Though naturally depraved, this depravity is increased by indulgence, and rivetted by practice; and, if you interpose in time, you may rescue many.

(3) Recollect that God calls the greater part of His people in early life.

2. Let me charge on your consciences your obligations to attend to the work.

(1) Think that you are all now listening to Him who says, Lovest thou Me?–feed My lambs. The Saviour takes a little child in His arms, and He says, Suffer little children to come unto Me, etc. He that receiveth one such little child in My name, receiveth Me. While others look at the Saviour, as He issues His command, and say, Is this all? our imaginations are filled with something greater, we would be preachers, writers, missionaries, martyrs–anything but teachers of babes:–you say, What! disdain to stoop to babes, when Christ takes the little ones up in His arms.

(2) And while Christ thus aims to bind you by a sense of obligation, let me remind you what He has done for you. Has He not, as it were, washed your feet? and should you not wash the feet of His meanest disciples?

3. Recall to your grateful recollection the blessings with which God has crowned this work. Train up a child in the way that he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it. Some may say that they have turned out ill who were brought up well; but we may say, Be of good cheer; for I believe God that it shall be even as it was told me. Let us then look round, and see what blessings have attended the instruction of the rising race; and, while we look around, let us inquire, What hath God wrought?

(1) Take this school and all the children who have been instructed in it–add to them all in the metropolis–in the kingdom–in the world.

(2) And such being the numbers of those collected in Sabbath schools, think how many blessings have been carried into families. Consider how the first tidings of salvation have been thus conveyed.

4. Tremble at the thought of neglecting this work. Woe to us if Sunday schools should expire! We have waked up the world so completely that it will not soon go to sleep again. We have taught this generation that they must teach the next. We must go on: we have advanced too far to recede. The great enemy of man is at work to ruin the world, by the very same means which we employ to benefit the world.

II. Attend to the expostulation which is contained in the second part of the text, Teachest thou not thyself? I would expostulate with you.

1. With regard to over-enlisting. Sabbath schools are at once our glory and our shame. We should earnestly wish their extinction; it is a disgrace to us that they are needed. When the children of pious and instructed parents are sent to a Sunday school, it is a perversion of things. There should be a Sunday school in every house. There are but two exceptions to this–the first is where the parents are so ignorant that they need instruction themselves; the children of these you ought to take and instruct. The other is where the parents have small families, and can take their children with them to a Sunday school: thus they may instruct the children of the poor and their own children at the same time. No mortal living has a right to transfer the care of his children to others, while he can take care of them himself.

2. Against overworking. Overdoing is often undoing. All should be anxious to do as much as possible; but you must remember that the Lords day was intended to be a day for the rest and edification of your own souls. Let there be no long singing, long prayers, long lessons. For the childrens sakes, as well as for your own, avoid overworking. As long as you can keep the attention judiciously awake, you do good; but when you see the spirits flagging you may be certain very little will be done.

3. Beware of over-valuing. Nothing is more common than for persons to think highly of that in which they are engaged.

4. Beware of undervaluing. Do not suppose that because a man is wise to his own salvation he is therefore wise enough to teach others.

(1) You should know much; you should have some time for study; and all your knowledge should be made subservient to your grand design.

(2) And then there must be, also, the art of teaching. This must be acquired, or, with all your knowledge, you will not be wise to win souls.

(3) There must be the art of ruling: if you have not the ability to hold sway over your own spirits, the children will soon perceive it, and will soon manage you. (J. Bennett, D. D.)

Teaching and example

He that giveth good precepts, and follows them by a bad example, is like a foolish man who should take great pains to kindle a fire, and, when it is kindled, throws cold water upon it to quench it. (Abp. Secker.)

Teaching and practice

The contradiction between the two is–

1. Common.

2. Inexcusable.

3. Damnable. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

The responsibility of the teacher

A misplaced switch or a wrong signal may send hundreds into eternity unprepared.

Truths best taught by life

In how quick a time a man can take round the hands of a watch when he has the key! But who can tell the hour from that? It is a different thing when slowly, moment by moment, the machinery within works them round so that every hour and every minute is marked correctly. So a man may run the whole round of Christian doctrines in speech, but it is not half so effective as when he lives and shows them forth day by day, and as events arise, in this difficult life of ours.

The teacher must make the truth part of his inner experience

I am afraid that very often the truth which we deliver from the pulpit–and doubtless it is much the same in your classes–is a thing which is extraneous and out of ourselves, like the staff which we hold in our hand but which is not a part of ourselves. We take doctrinal or practical truth as Gehazi did the staff, and we lay it upon the face of the child, but we ourselves do not agonise for its soul. We try this doctrine and that truth, this anecdote and the other illustration, this way of teaching a lesson and that manner of delivering an address; but so long as ever the truth which we deliver is a matter apart from ourselves and unconnected with our innermost being, so long it will have no more effect upon a dead soul than Elishas staff had upon the dead Child. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?—

Sacrilege

That the Jew of Pauls time, and for generations long before, abhorred idols there can be no question. In the Babylonish captivity, the nation became so disgusted with idolatry that the hatred of it then engendered was left as a legacy to all time. But did the Jew at the same time commit sacrilege? To answer this question we must first clearly understand what we mean by sacrilege.

1. We may take the alternative reading, Dost thou rob temples? And then the inference would be that this hater of idolatry was none the less sometimes profiting by it, stealing the gifts of Pagans from their altars, and turning them to his own account; as we may suppose in our own time one who should inveigh fiercely against the liquor traffic, and derive a part of his income from the rental of a spirits vault.

2. Leaving this, however, and accepting the text as it stands, our idea of sacrilege is that of the profanation of sacred things. Uzziah, e.g., assuming priestly functions, or Belshazzar using the sacred vessels in the orgies of a bacchanalian revel. To speak more generally, sacrilege is diverting from its Divine purpose anything that God has given us. The undue exaltation of sacred things may be sacrilege, and herein the Jew might commit idolatry in the spirit while he vehemently protested against it in the letter. A superstitious reverence for sacred things, such as, e.g., the worship of the brazen serpent in Hezekiahs time.

3. Herein we think the integrity of the antithesis that runs through the questions from the 21st verse is sustained, Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?Thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou–by thy foolish superstitions, by using and exalting some of thy sacred things in a way never intended by the Lord as well as in degrading them to common purposes–dost thou commit sacrilege, and so in spirit fall into that sin of idolatry against which thou criest out so loudly? And now to turn this question to good account. Is it possible for us who have renounced idolatry to commit sacrilege in the sense of becoming idolaters in spirit, while in the letter we denounce it? I think it is–

I. We may commit sacrilege with Divine ordinances, with baptism and the Lords Supper, e.g., by investing them with a mechanical efficacy never intended by their Author.

II. Selfishness is sacrilege, self-worship being one of the worst and most subtle forms idolatry can take.

1. Know ye not, brethren, that your bodies are the temples of the Holy Ghost, that you are not your own, but bought with a price, and, if this be so, what greater sacrilege or idolatry can any man commit than to use his God-given powers and faculties as if they were his own? Selfishness, self-worship, is a kind of sacrilege that brings with it its own most certain retribution. No leprosy may break out upon our persons as in the case of Uzziah; no handwriting may appear upon the wall as in the case of Belshazzar; but, none the less, the retribution will surely come.

2. Selfishness is sacrilege in relation to others as well as to ourselves, for what right have we to use our fellows for our own selfish ends and purposes? How dare we make capital out of others weaknesses? Every mans person is sacred; he is an image of God. Wherefore let us honour all men, recognise the sacred uses and possibilities that are in them, lest losing reverence for the human we lose it also for the Divine.

3. Selfishness is sacrilege against God, too, for in His great house we are all of us vessels of gold, or of silver, of wood, or of stone, and if we use ourselves as for ourselves, forgetful of His sacred service, we are like servants that waste their masters goods, like priests who desecrate all sacred things, and abuse their solemn functions.

III. The love of others, where it leaves in the soul no room for love to God, is sacrilege. We may degrade them, and so fall into this sin, but we may also so exalt them as to fall into the same. When we hear it said that a woman is devoted to her child, or that she idolises her husband, if we were to adhere to the letter we should say that this is sacrilege. We do not think upon the whole that we are in very much danger of loving our dear ones either unwisely or too well. We can love the Lord our God with all our hearts, and also yet love our husbands, our wives, our children, as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself for it. We are more likely on the whole, I think, to become sacrilegious by loving them too little than too much. Yet if it should be so with any of us that these relationships come between us and our God, then indeed do we commit sacrilege against them as certainly as against Him.

IV. Worldliness of spirit, the excessive love of this worlds goods is sacrilege and idolatry. If we are the devotees of fashion or of pleasure, if the shows of this world so engross us as to leave no time nor heart for the spiritual, then we are committing sacrilege. The most common gifts, the most earthly things are amongst the all things that work together for our good, but they work together for our harm when, instead of using them for God, we use them for mean purposes. The silver and the gold are the Lords, and we may be sacrilegious if we discern not this and use them not for Him. Whether we waste our money or hoard it, we are committing sacrilege with it, for money answereth all things, even the ends of grace as well as the means of ruin. Let us reverently handle even our money, using it as God Himself would have us use it, and so in things sacred or in things secular, it will be consecrated to Him in a true life service.

V. The love of nature to the exclusion of the love of God, the worship of mere material forms, is sacrilege. The earth is the Lords and the fulness thereof; the heavens declare His glory, etc., and to see nothing beyond this state of things is to commit sacrilege. For these do as truly reveal Him as does the Bible. But just as we may be bibliolatrous, so there is a nature-worship which, while it seems to elevate, does but desecrate and degrade. (J. W. Lance.)

Sacrilege

I.e., temple robbery.

I. The Jews were guilty of it.

1. In reference to heathen temples (Act 19:37).

2. In withholding or misappropriating tithes and offerings (Mal 3:8).

II. In not giving God the glory which is His due. They made the temple a den of thieves (Jer 7:11; Mat 21:13), and were charged with offering the blind and lame for sacrifice (Mal 1:8). Thus they abhorred false gods, but robbed and dishonoured the true God.

II. We may commit sacrilege by–

1. Withholding what is Gods.

2. Appropriating to our own use what properly belongs to God in regard–

(1) To property: a portion claimed for His service (Mal 3:10).

(2) To time: the whole of the weekly Sabbath claimed as His own (Exo 20:8). It is sacrilege, therefore, to appropriate any part of it to business or pleasure (Isa 58:13).

Conclusion:

1. Sacrilege the climax denoting intense coveteousness.

2. Unrenewed men only substitute one idol for another. (T. Robinson, D. D.)

For the name of God is blasphemed among the heathen through you.—

Nominal Christians, the occasion of blasphemy to the heathen

If the fifth commandment be the first with promise, the third is the first with threatening. In no point is the Almighty so sensitive as the honour of His name. Hence His Son has taught us to pray, Hallowed be Thy name. And in no sin is God more provoked than in that which brings dishonour upon His name. Hence this charge, which we shall illustrate–

I. In its application to Israel.

1. It is essential to remember that Israel were Gods chosen, peculiar, separate people, whom He had called forth in order that He might make them the lamp into which He would introduce the light of revelation for a lost world. To them He committed all the institutions of His holy worship, and all the laws of His Divine will. To the world at large, they were as Goshen in the midst of the land of Egypt in the plague of darkness. So that the whole earth borrowed what little light streaked its dark horizon from the solitary lamp lighted upon Zion; and just in proportion as that lamp east forth its beams was the moral darkness relieved, and the Gentile nations came to the brightness of the hope that was in Zion.

2. We must remember, further, that for a lengthened period the people of God were not missionaries, sent abroad to communicate their prophecies, laws, and ordinances to the Gentile lands; but rather the people from afar, hearing the fame of what God had done for Israel, came up to Jerusalem to inquire and worship, even as the Ethiopian eunuch came. And many were the proselytes that were led to join themselves to the people of the God of Israel. But in process of time God lifted up His hand to scatter them among the nations, so that long ere their final dispersion at the destruction of Jerusalem, there was scarcely a known spot where some of the wanderers of Zion were not to be found. And how did they go? They went still as the people of God. And consequently the heathen could not but regard them with deep curiosity and attention, in order that they might trace in them the character of their faith.

3. And what was the consequence? When the heathen saw that their vices were dark as their own, whilst they were puffed up with pride, because of their privileges, then it came to pass that the name of God was blasphemed among the Gentiles through the people of God (Eze 36:19, etc.). And the apostles had to encounter no obstacle in the progress of the truth that was more fatal than the dark misconduct of the scattered Israelites.

II. In its application to our own favoured land.

1. Englishmen undoubtedly stand nearest to the condition of the ancient people of God. If Israel stood in the relation of a covenant people to God, so do we. We are a baptized, as they were a circumcised, people; and if all their rebellion and inconsistency did not loose the bond of the covenant, but God spoke of them as His people, is it not so with ourselves? However deeply we may disgrace the name of Christians, that name is fastened upon us. He has taken this nation into peculiar union with His truth and His faith; He has identified us with His cause. And have not other lands looked to us as their example, and sought us for light and holy knowledge? And then God has brought us into contact with all nations. As of old the Jews were everywhere intermingled, so has it come to pass with the English. But Israel was scattered by the sword; they were exiles and wanderers, despised and cruelly entreated. But our sons are abroad through the richness of the blessing of God given to their mother land; so that her merchants visit every shore, her travellers explore every waste, her mariners are on every sea and in every haven–and over the whole world an Englishmans name constitutes a passport. And everywhere, too, our land has a mighty influence, and an empire so vast, that the sun never sets upon its limits. One fourth of the whole family of the earth acknowledges the sway of our Queen, and the other three-fourths are more or less influenced, and mightily too, by our land.

2. What ought to have been the results of such unexampled influence? It ought to have been that wherever Britons sons went they should have carried the blessed savour of Britains truth; and wherever they planted their feet, they should be recognised at once as witnesses for Christ. Alas! the charge brought against Israel may with equal emphasis be brought against ourselves. The name of God hath been blasphemed among the Gentiles through us. What has been our colonisation but, to a terrific extent, an annihilation of the tribes whose lands we have usurped, and whose homes we have ravaged? Our missionaries, one and all, concur in telling us that the most fatal and formidable obstacle in the way of the reception of Christs gospel among the Gentiles is the blasphemy occasioned to the name of our Redeemer by those who bear it but to defile it. And until this great stumbling block be removed, the gradual progress of Divine truth must be retarded; that we could only have our mariners, merchantmen, travellers, and colonial settlers going forth as living epistles, known and read of all the heathen lands through which they pass, then indeed would there go forth from Britains shore a voice which would come home to every heart–the voice of a godly life.

3. Then, if such be the application of this solemn charge against our own favoured land, it follows that there is not a more pressing or urgent claim upon Christian restitution, Christian justice as well as Christian sympathy and Christian zeal, than that every means should be used to redeem our title to the Christian name. (Canon Stowell.)

Inconsistency: its evil effects

How many sinners every year are driven away from all thought of religion by the inconsistency of professors! And have you ever noticed how the world always delights to chronicle the inconsistency of a professor! I saw only yesterday an account in the paper of a wretch who had committed lust, and it was said that he had a very sanctified appearance. Ay, I thought, that is the way the press always likes to speak: but I very much question whether there are many editors who know what a sanctified appearance means! at least they will have to look a long time among their own class before they find many that have any excess of sanctification. However, the reporter put it down that the man had a sanctified appearance; and of course it was intended as a fling against all those who make a profession of religion, by making others believe that this man was a professor too. And really the world has had some grave cause for it, for we have seen professing Christians in these days who are an utter disgrace to Christianity, and there are things done in the name of Jesus Christ which it would be a shame to do in the name of Beelzebub. There are things done, too, by those who are accounted members of the Church of our Lord Jesus, so shameful that, methinks, Pandemonium itself would scarcely own them. The world has had much cause to complain of the Church. O children of God be careful. The world has a lynx eye: it will see your faults, it will be impossible to hide them; and it will magnify your faults, making much of little, and of much a boundless mass. It will slander you if you have no open faults; give it, at least, no ground to work upon; let your garments be always white; walk in the fear of the Lord, and let this be your daily prayer, Hold Thou me up, and I shall be safe. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Inconsistency hinders the spread of Christianity

When Brainerd was among the American Indians, he stopped at a place where he offered to instruct them in Christianity. He was met by the retort, Why should you desire the Indians to become Christians, seeing that the Christians are so much worse than the Indians? The Christians lie, steal, and drink worse than the Indians. They first taught the Indians to be drunk. They steal to so great a degree, that their rulers are obliged to hang them for it; and even that is not enough to deter others from the practice. We mill not consent, therefore, to become Christians, lest we should be as bad as they. We will live as our fathers lived, and go where our fathers are when we die. By no influence could he change their decision.

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 17. Behold, thou art called a Jew] What the apostle had said in the preceding verses being sufficient to enforce conviction on the conscience of the Jew, he now throws off the cover, and openly argues with him in the most plain and nervous manner; asserting that his superior knowledge, privileges, and profession, served only to aggravate his condemnation. And that, in fact, he who, under all his greater advantages, transgressed the law of God, stood condemned by the honest Gentile, who, to the best of his knowledge obeyed it. Dr. Taylor.

And restest in the law] Thou trustest in it for thy endless salvation. The word , implies the strongest confidence of safety and security. Thou reposest thy whole trust and confidence in this law.

And makest thy boast of God] That thou knowest his nature and attributes, which are not known to the Gentiles. The word, , implies the idea of exulting in any thing, as being a proper object of hope and dependence: and, when referred to GOD, it points out that HE is the sure cause of hope, dependence, joy, and happiness; and that it is the highest honour to be called to know his name, and be employed in his service. As if the apostle had said: You rejoice in God as the object of your hope and dependence; you praise and magnify him; you account it your greatest honour that HE is your God, and that you worship him.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

He now comes to deal more particularly and expressly with the Jews, reciting their privileges, in which they trusted, and of which they boasted; and shows, that notwithstanding them, they stood in as much need of the righteousness of God as the Gentiles did.

Thou; he speaks in the singular number, that every one might make the readier application of what he said.

Art called a Jew; so called from Judah; as of old, Hebrews from Heber, and Israelites from Israel: the title was honourable in those days, and imported a confessor or worshipper of one God. Thou art so called, but art not so indeed: see Rom 2:28, and Rev 2:9.

Restest in the law; puttest thy trust in it.

Makest thy boast of God; that he is thy God, and in covenant with thee; and that thou hast a peculiar interest in him: see Joh 8:41. The phrase seems to be borrowed from Isa 45:25.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

17-24. Behold“But if”is, beyond doubt, the true reading here. (It differs but in a singleletter from the received reading, and the sense is the same).

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Behold, thou art called a Jew,…. From hence to the end of the chapter the Jews are particularly addressed; their several privileges and characters are commemorated, which by an ironical concession are allowed them; several charges are brought against them, even against their principal men; and the plea in favour of them, from their circumcision, is considered; and the apostle’s view in the whole, is to show that they could not be justified before God by their obedience to the law of Moses: “behold”; take notice, observe it, this will be granted: “thou art called a Jew”; thou art one by name, by nation, and by religion; but no name, nor outward religion, nor a mere profession, will justify before God:

and restest in the law; which may be understood of their having the law and the knowledge of it, what is to be done and avoided easily, without any fatigue and labour; of their pleasing and applauding themselves with the bare having and hearing of it; of their trust and confidence in it; and of their inactivity and security in it, as persons asleep; and so of their coming short of the knowledge of the Gospel, and of Christ the end of the law for righteousness, their whole confidence being placed in that: so the Targumist in Jer 8:8 paraphrases the words,

“we are wise, “and in the law of the Lord”, , do we trust;”

and makest thy boast of God. There is a right boasting of God in opposition to boasting in the creature, when men ascribe all the blessings of nature and grace to the Lord alone, and praise him for all their enjoyments, temporal and spiritual; and when they trust in, and glory, and make their boast of Christ as the Lord their righteousness, in whom alone they are, and can be justified. But the boasting here spoken of, was such that was not right; these men boasted of their bare external knowledge of the one God, when the Gentiles around them were ignorant of him; of their being the covenant people of God, when others were aliens and strangers; and of their having the word and worship of the true God, which other nations were unacquainted with; and, on these external things they depended, which was their fault.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

The Pretensions of the Jews; The Depravity of the Jews.

A. D. 58.

      17 Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,   18 And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law;   19 And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness,   20 An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.   21 Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?   22 Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?   23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?   24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.   25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.   26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?   27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?   28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:   29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

      In the latter part of the chapter the apostle directs his discourse more closely to the Jews, and shows what sins they were guilty of, notwithstanding their profession and vain pretensions. He had said (v. 13) that not the hearers but the doers of the law are justified; and he here applies that great truth to the Jews. Observe,

      I. He allows their profession (v. 17-20) and specifies their particular pretensions and privileges in which they prided themselves, that they might see he did not condemn them out of ignorance of what they had to say for themselves; no, he knew the best of their cause.

      1. They were a peculiar people, separated and distinguished from all others by their having the written law and the special presence of God among them. (1.) Thou art called a Jew; not so much in parentage as profession. It was a very honourable title. Salvation was of the Jews; and this they were very proud of, to be a people by themselves; and yet many that were so called were the vilest of men. It is no new thing for the worst practices to be shrouded under the best names, for many of the synagogue of Satan to say they are Jews (Rev. ii. 9), for a generation of vipers to boast they have Abraham to their father, Matt. iii. 7-9. (2.) And restest in the law; that is, they took a pride in this, that they had the law among them, had it in their books, read it in their synagogues. They were mightily puffed up with this privilege, and thought this enough to bring them to heaven, though they did not live, up to the law. To rest in the law, with a rest of complacency and acquiescence, is good; but to rest in it with a rest of pride, and slothfulness, and carnal security, is the ruin of souls. The temple of the Lord, Jer. vii. 4. Bethel their confidence, Jer. xlviii. 13. Haughty because of the holy mountain, Zeph. iii. 11. It is a dangerous thing to rest in external privileges, and not to improve them. (3.) And makest thy boast of God. See how the best things may be perverted and abused. A believing, humble, thankful glorying in God, is the root and summary of all religion, Psa 34:2; Isa 45:15. But a proud vainglorious boasting in God, and in the outward profession of his name, is the root and summary of all hypocrisy. Spiritual pride is of all kinds of pride the most dangerous.

      2. They were a knowing people (v. 18): and knowest his will, to thelema—the will. God’s will is the will, the sovereign, absolute, irresistible will. The world will then, and not till then, be set to rights, when God’s will is the only will, and all other wills are melted into it. They did not only know the truth of God, but the will of God, that which he would have them to do. It is possible for a hypocrite to have a great deal of knowledge in the will of God.–And approvest the things that are more excellent—dokimazeis ta diapheronta. Paul prays for it for his friends as a very great attainment, Phil. i. 10. Eis to dokimazein hymas ta diapheronta. Understand it, (1.) Of a good apprehension in the things of God, reading it thus, Thou discernest things that differ, knowest how to distinguish between good and evil, to separate between the precious and the vile (Jer. xv. 19), to make a difference between the unclean and the clean, Lev. xi. 47. Good and bad lie sometimes so near together that it is not easy to distinguish them; but the Jews, having the touchstone of the law ready at hand, were, or at least thought they were, able to distinguish, to cleave the hair in doubtful cases. A man may be a good casuist and yet a bad Christian–accurate in the notion, but loose and careless in the application. Or, we may, with De Dieu, understand controversies by the ta diapheronta. A man may be well skilled in the controversies of religion, and yet a stranger to the power of godliness. (2.) Of a warm affection to the things of God, as we read it, Approvest the things that are excellent. There are excellences in religion which a hypocrite may approve of: there may be a consent of the practical judgment to the law, that it is good, and yet that consent overpowerd by the lusts of the flesh, and of the mind:–

——–Video meliora proboque Deteriora sequor. I see the better, but pursue the worse.

and it is common for sinners to make that approbation an excuse which is really a very great aggravation of a sinful course. They got this acquaintance with, and affection to, that which is good, but being instructed out of the law, katechoumenos—being catechised. The word signifies an early instruction in childhood. It is a great privilege and advantage to be well catechised betimes. It was the custom of the Jews to take a great deal of pains in teaching their children when they were young, and all their lessons were out of the law; it were well if Christians were but as industrious to teach their children out of the gospel. Now this is called (v. 20), The form of knowledge, and of the truth in the law, that is, the show and appearance of it. Those whose knowledge rests in an empty notion, and does not make an impression on their hearts, have only the form of it, like a picture well drawn and in good colours, but which wants life. A form of knowledge produces but a form of godliness, 2 Tim. iii. 5. A form of knowledge may deceive men, but cannot impose upon the piercing eye of the heart-searching God. A form may be the vehicle of the power; but he that takes up with that only is like sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal.

      3. They were a teaching people, or at least thought themselves so (Rom 2:19; Rom 2:20): And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind. Apply it, (1.) To the Jews in general. They thought themselves guides to the poor blind Gentiles that sat in darkness, were very proud of this, that whoever would have the knowledge of God must be beholden to them for it. All other nations must come to school to them, to learn what is good, and what the Lord requires; for they had the lively oracles. (2.) To their rabbis, and doctors, and leading men among them, who were especially those that judged others, v. 1. These prided themselves much in the possession they had got of Moses’s chair, and the deference which the vulgar paid to their dictates; and the apostle expresses this in several terms, a guide of the blind, a light of those who are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, the better to set forth their proud conceit of themselves, and contempt of others. This was a string they loved to be harping upon, heaping up titles of honour upon themselves. The best work, when it is prided in, is unacceptable to God. It is good to instruct the foolish, and to teach the babes: but considering our own ignorance, and folly, and inability to make these teachings successful without God, there is nothing in it to be proud of.

      II. He aggravates their provocations (v. 21-24) from two things:–

      1. That they sinned against their knowledge and profession, did that themselves which they taught others to avoid: Thou that teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? Teaching is a piece of that charity which begins at home, though it must not end there. It was the hypocrisy of the Pharisees that they did not do as they taught (Matt. xxiii. 3), but pulled down with their lives what they built up with their preaching; for who will believe those who do not believe themselves? Examples will govern more than rules. The greatest obstructors of the success of the word are those whose bad lives contradict their good doctrine, who in the pulpit preach so well that it is a pity they should ever come out, and out of the pulpit live so ill that it is a pity they should ever come in. He specifies three particular sins that abound among the Jews:– (1.) Stealing. This is charged upon some that declared God’s statutes (Psa 50:16; Psa 50:18), When thou sawest a thief, then thou consentedst with him. The Pharisees are charged with devouring widows’ houses (Matt. xxiii. 14), and that is the worst of robberies. (2.) Adultery, v. 22. This is likewise charged upon that sinner (Ps. l. 18), Thou hast been partaker with adulterers. Many of the Jewish rabbin are said to have been notorious for this sin. (3.) Sacrilege-robbing in holy things, which were then by special laws dedicated and devoted to God; and this is charged upon those that professed to abhor idols. So the Jews did remarkably, after their captivity in Babylon; that furnace separated them for ever from the dross of their idolatry, but they dealt very treacherously in the worship of God. It was in the latter days of the Old-Testament church that they were charged with robbing God in tithes and offerings (Mal 3:8; Mal 3:9), converting that to their own use, and to the service of their lusts, which was, in a special manner, set apart for God. And this is almost equivalent to idolatry, though this sacrilege was cloaked with the abhorrence of idols. Those will be severely reckoned with another day who, while they condemn sin in others, do the same, or as bad, or worse, themselves.

      2. That they dishonoured God by their sin, Rom 2:23; Rom 2:24. While God and his law were an honour to them, which they boasted of and prided themselves in, they were a dishonour to God and his law, by giving occasion to those that were without to reflect upon their religion, as if that did countenance and allow of such things, which, as it is their sin who draw such inferences (for the faults of professors are not to be laid upon professions), so it is their sin who give occasion for those inferences, and will greatly aggravate their miscarriages. This was the condemnation in David’s case, that he had given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, 2 Sam. xii. 14. And the apostle here refers to the same charge against their forefathers: As it is written, v. 24. He does not mention the place, because he wrote this to those that were instructed in the law (in labouring to convince, it is some advantage to deal with those that have knowledge and are acquainted with the scripture), but he seems to point at Isa 52:5; Eze 36:22; Eze 36:23; 2Sa 12:14. It is a lamentation that those who were made to be to God for a name and for a praise should be to him a shame and dishonour. The great evil of the sins of professors is the dishonour done to God and religion by their profession. “Blasphemed through you; that is, you give the occasion for it, it is through your folly and carelessness. The reproaches you bring upon yourselves reflect upon your God, and religion is wounded through your sides.” A good caution to professors to walk circumspectly. See 1 Tim. vi. 1.

      III. He asserts the utter insufficiency of their profession to clear them from the guilt of these provocations (v. 25-29): Circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law; that is, obedient Jews shall not lose the reward of their obedience, but will gain this by their being Jews, that they have a clearer rule of obedience than the Gentiles have. God did not give the law nor appoint circumcision in vain. This must be referred to the state of the Jews before the ceremonial polity was abolished, otherwise circumcision to one that professed faith in Christ was forbidden, Gal. v. 1. But he is here speaking to the Jews, whose Judaism would benefit them, if they would but live up to the rules and laws of it; but if not “thy circumcision is made uncircumcision; that is, thy profession will do thee no good; thou wilt be no more justified than the uncircumcised Gentiles, but more condemned for sinning against greater light.” The uncircumcised are in scripture branded as unclean (Isa. lii. 1), as out of the covenant, (Eph 2:11; Eph 2:12) and wicked Jews will be dealt with as such. See Jer 9:25; Jer 9:26. Further to illustrate this,

      1. He shows that the uncircumcised Gentiles, if they live up to the light they have, stand upon the same level with the Jews; if they keep the righteousness of the law (v. 26), fulfil the law (v. 27); that is, by submitting sincerely to the conduct of natural light, perform the matter of the law. Some understand it as putting the case of a perfect obedience to the law: “If the Gentiles could perfectly keep the law, they would be justified by it as well as the Jews.” But it seems rather to be meant of such an obedience as some of the Gentiles did attain to. The case of Cornelius will clear it. Though he was a Gentile, and uncircumcised, yet, being a devout man, and one that feared God with all his house (Acts x. 2), he was accepted, v. 4. Doubtless, there were many such instances: and they were the uncircumcision, that kept the righteousness of the law; and of such he says, (1.) That they were accepted with God, as if they had been circumcised. Their uncircumcision was counted for circumcision. Circumcision was indeed to the Jews a commanded duty, but it was not to all the world a necessary condition of justification and salvation. (2.) That their obedience was a great aggravation of the disobedience of the Jews, who had the letter of the law, v. 27. Judge thee, that is, help to add to thy condemnation, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress. Observe, To carnal professors the law is but the letter; they read it as a bare writing, but are not ruled by it as a law. They did transgress, not only notwithstanding the letter and circumcision, but by it, that is, they thereby hardened themselves in sin. External privileges, if they do not do us good, do us hurt. The obedience of those that enjoy less means, and make a less profession, will help to condemn those that enjoy greater means, and make a greater profession, but do not live up to it.

      2. He describes the true circumcision, Rom 2:28; Rom 2:29. (1.) It is not that which is outward in the flesh and in the letter. This is not to drive us off from the observance of external institutions (they are good in their place), but from trusting to them and resting in them as sufficient to bring us to heaven, taking up with a name to live, without being alive indeed. He is not a Jew, that is, shall not be accepted of God as the seed of believing Abraham, nor owned as having answered the intention of the law. To be Abraham’s children is to do the works of Abraham, Joh 8:39; Joh 8:40. (2.) It is that which is inward, of the heart, and in the spirit. It is the heart that God looks at, the circumcising of the heart that renders us acceptable to him. See Deut. xxx. 6. This is the circumcision that is not made with hands,Col 2:11; Col 2:12. Casting away the body of sin. So it is in the spirit, in our spirit as the subject, and wrought by God’s Spirit as the author of it. (3.) The praise thereof, though it be not of men, who judge according to outward appearance, yet it is of God, that is, God himself will own and accept and crown this sincerity; for he seeth not as man seeth. Fair pretences and a plausible profession may deceive men: but God cannot be so deceived; he sees through shows to realities. This is alike true of Christianity. He is not a Christian that is one outwardly, nor is that baptism which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Christian that is one inwardly, and baptism is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter, whose praise is not of men but of God.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

Bearest the name (). Present passive indicative in condition of first class of , old word, to put a name upon (), only here in N.T. “Thou art surnamed Jew” (Lightfoot). Jew as opposed to Greek denoted nationality while Hebrew accented the idea of language.

Restest upon the law ( ). Late and rare double compound, in LXX and once in the Didache. In N.T. only here and Lu 10:6 which see. It means to lean upon, to refresh oneself back upon anything, here with locative case (). It is the picture of blind and mechanical reliance on the Mosaic law.

Gloriest in God ( ). Koine vernacular form for (, ) of as in verse Rom 2:23; 1Cor 4:7 and in Ro 11:18. The Jew gloried in God as a national asset and private prerogative (2Cor 10:15; Gal 6:13).

Approvest the things that are excellent ( ). Originally, “Thou testest the things that differ,” and then as a result comes the approval for the excellent things. As in Php 1:10 it is difficult to tell which stage of the process Paul has in mind.

Instructed out of the law ( ). Present passive participle of , a rare verb to instruct, though occurring in the papyri for legal instruction. See on Luke 1:4; 1Cor 14:19. The Jew’s “ethical discernment was the fruit of catechetical and synagogical instruction in the Old Testament” (Shedd).

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Behold [] . But the correct reading is eij de but if.

Thou art called [] . Rev., much better, bearest the name of, bringing out the value which attached to the name Jew, the theocratic title of honor. See on Hebrews, Act 6:1.

Restest in [] . Rev., better, upon, giving the force of ejpi in the verb. The radical conception of the verb ajnapauw is relief. See Mt 11:28. Thou restest with a blind trust in God as thy Father and protector exclusively.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

LAW-KNOWLEDGE CONDEMNED JEWS

1) Behold, thou art called a Jew, (ei de su loudaios eponomaze) But if thou art named or (identified as a Jew, surnamed a Jew, if you glory in the name and privilege, nationally as Jews and religiously as Israelites; The term Jews seems to have been a type of national and racial-not religious surname, Mat 2:2; Mar 7:3; Act 18:2; Rom 3:29.

2) And restest in the law, (kai epanapaue nomon) And restest on (the) law, take comfort and refuge in having the law, Rom 2:23; Joh 5:45; Joh 9:28-29. If you repose upon the dignity of having the revelation of God, why do you not live up to the light, he seems to be asking, Mar 7:3-9.

3) And makest thy boast of God, (kai kauchasai en theo) And boasteth in God, If he, is the object of your worship and you are the object of His Special Care (as you boast) of being the seed of Abraham, Mat 3:9; Mat 19:20; Joh 8:39-41; Joh 8:44; Rom 9:31-33.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

17. Behold, thou art named a Jew, etc. Some old copies read εἰ δὲ, though indeed; which, were it generally received, would meet my approbation; but as the greater part of the manuscripts is opposed to it, and the sense is not unsuitable, I retain the old reading, especially as it is only a small difference of one letter. (77)

Having now completed what he meant to say of the Gentiles, he returns to the Jews; and that he might, with greater force, beat down their great vanity, he allows them all those privileges, by which they were beyond measure transported and inflated: and then he shows how insufficient they were for the attainment of true glory, yea, how they turned to their reproach. Under the name Jew he includes all the privileges of the nation, which they vainly pretended were derived from the law and the prophets; and so he comprehends all the Israelites, all of whom were then, without any difference, called Jews.

But at what time this name first originated it is uncertain, except that it arose, no doubt, after the dispersion. (78) [ Josephus ] , in the eleventh book of his Antiquities, thinks that it was taken from Judas Maccabæus, under whose auspices the liberty and honor of the people, after having for some time fallen, and been almost buried, revived again. Though I allow this opinion to be probable, yet, if there be some to whom it is not satisfactory, I will offer them a conjecture of my own. It seems, indeed, very likely, that after having been degraded and scattered through so many disasters, they were not able to retain any certain distinction as to their tribes; for a census could not have been made at that time, nor did there exist a regular government, which was necessary to preserve an order of this kind; and they dwelt scattered and in disorder; and having been worn out by adversities, they were no doubt less attentive to the records of their kindred. But though you may not grant these things to me, yet it cannot be denied but that a danger of this kind was connected with such disturbed state of things. Whether, then, they meant to provide for the future, or to remedy an evil already received, they all, I think assumed the name of that tribe, in which the purity of religion remained the longest, and which, by a peculiar privilege, excelled all the rest, as from it the Redeemer was expected to come; for it was their refuge in all extremities, to console themselves with the expectation of the Messiah. However this may be, by the name of Jews they avowed themselves to be the heirs of the covenant which the Lord had made with Abraham and his seed.

And restest in the law, and gloriest in God, etc. He means not that they rested in attending to the law, as though they applied their minds to the keeping of it; but, on the contrary, he reproves them for not observing the end for which the law had been given; for they had no care for its observance, and were inflated on this account only, — because they were persuaded that the oracles of God belonged to them. In the same way they gloried in God, not as the Lord commands by his Prophet, — to humble ourselves, and to seek our glory in him alone, (Jer 9:24,) — but being without any knowledge of God’s goodness, they made him, of whom they were inwardly destitute, peculiarly their own, and assumed to be his people, for the purpose of vain ostentation before men. This, then, was not the glorying of the heart, but the boasting of the tongue.

(77) [ Griesbach ] has since found a majority of MSS. in favor of this reading, and has adopted it. But the difficulty is to find a corresponding clause. There is none, except what begins in Rom 2:21; εἰ δὲ and οὖν do not well respond, except we render the first, though indeed, and the other, yes or nevertheless somewhat in the sense of an adversative. It will admit this meaning in some passages. See Mat 12:12; Mat 26:64; Rom 10:14. — Ed.

(78) This is not quite correct. They were called Jews even before the captivity, and during the captivity, but most commonly and regularly after it. The words Jews, first occurs in 2Kg 16:6. See Est 4:3; Jer 38:19; Dan 3:8; Ezr 4:12; Neh 2:16. — Ed.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

CRITICAL NOTES

Rom. 2:18., being orally instructed.

Rom. 2:21.This verse may be illustrated out of the Jewish writings, for they say, He who teacheth others what he doth not himself is like a blind man who hath a candle in his hand to give light to others, whilst he himself doth walk in darkness. And again, How can a man say in the congregation, Do not steal, when he steals?

Rom. 2:22.A crime among the Jews. Talmud accuses some of the most celebrated Rabbis of the vice of sacrilege.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Rom. 2:17-24

The vain boaster.The Jews are nationally a separate people. It is astonishing how they have preserved their nationality through all the centuries. Though scattered through all lands, they have never assimilated. But the Jews are human, and the faults of humanity they often exemplify. Jews and Christians are brought together by their failings. Jews boasted of their titles, and were often indifferent to their characters. So it often is with Christians. The name and not the thing, the profession and not the practice, is the stumbling-block of the Christian as of the Jew. Therefore, when the Christian reads of the faults of the Jews, let him ask, Is not the record written of myself? am I resting in a mere name? Notice for our instruction, for our warning, and for our direction:

I. The claims of the boaster.What is man that he should boast? A drop in the ocean of being! One atom in the mass of matter! An ant on the molehills of time! The sport of the winds! Swept like a feather by the tempest! Crushed like a moth by the hand of natures forces! A creature of an hour to boast! An ephemeron to glory! A man whose light, knowledge, and services have all been bestowed to boast! It seems useless to heap up epithets, for the boaster is not easily killed. The Jew boasts:

1. Of God. David sings, My soul shall make her boast in the Lord. And this boasting was to be of such a character that the humble should hear thereof and be glad. Notice the differenceof God and in God: the proud boast of God, the humble in God. Let him that glorieth not glory of God as if He were an inferior, but glory in God as the superior.

2. Of superior knowledge. A man of light and of leadinga man of light and sweetness in his own esteem. We have men of light and of leading, whose leadership is found in the word go, and not in the word come. Doctors do not take their own medicines; preachers do not practise their own doctrine. This Jew has penetrated the inner mysteries, and knows the divine will. How many followers among Christians! With what repellent dogmatism many will speak and write of divine plans and purposes! This Jew approves of the things that are more excellent. He has fine tastes, and an elevated moral nature. Are not some of our Christians too fastidious? They soar in the region of abstractions, where the excellent things of their own fancies dwell, but neglect the common duties. They are instructed out of the law and competent to be teachers. The pulpit has lost its day and its power, is the modern cry. We are all taught, and want no prosy sermons.

3. Of wondrous gifts. He is a worker of miracles. He is not only a guide to the blind, but a restorer of sight. How great his pretensionsa light of them which are in darkness! Such recuperative power is in this light that, falling upon the sightless eyeballs, it will restore the power of vision. Wonderful Jew! We need thee in our blind moral world. Oh, believe it not! Christ, the Good Physician, can alone touch with restoring power the visual organ, and on the sightless eyeballs pour the gracious light of heaven. The Holy Spirit must work if the sons of darkness are to become the children of light. This Jew is not merely a teacher of babes, but boasts formative power. He develops the moral nature. He eliminates the evil and fosters the good. He might not be elected as a teacher in a board school, but if his abilities were equal to his pretensions he would be priceless as a modern educator. In our times we need instructors of the foolish as well as teachers of babes. We want the fourth R of religion added to the three Rs. Oh, if the Jew could do as well as he can boast, we would not join in persecuting and maligning and banishing him from our land!

II. The disparagement of the boaster.The Jew has suffered from the hands of Shakespeare. The Jew does not appear to advantage on the modern stage. But has the Jew ever had reason to complain more bitterly of the treatment he has received from men of other nationalities than he has of the treatment received from one of his own nation? What sublime irony, what biting sarcasm, what withering epithets are hurled against the Jew by the Jewish Paul! He shows the Jew the estimate he forms of himself, and then places in contrast the just estimate. Here is the great moral teacher and reformer, the son of light and of sweetness, the favourite of heaven, accused of things condemned both by Gods moral laws and mans civil codes, where man has any pretension to advanced civilisation. The accusation is not without some foundation, according to the testimony of history. The Jews were given to robbery. Are the modern Jews free? What about exorbitant usury? Are modern Christians free? What about the rage for gambling? What about our sweating system? What about our cotton corners, our commercial and literary syndicates? These men, if not preachers, are sometimes the great supporters of modern preachers. They occupy the chief seats at ecclesiastical feasts, not to speak of civil banquets, Lord Mayors banquets, etc. The sin of adultery had been increasing amongst the Jews just before Pauls days. Are we not mourning nowaday that in Christian England the race is not rising in purity? The Jews were given to sacrilege. They robbed temples. They kept back tithes and offerings. Sacrilege is a word banished from some ecclesiastical dictionaries. Some there are who ruthlessly touch sacred things with unholy hands. Thou that abhorrest idols, thou that teachest a man should not steal, thou that dost advocate the sacred rights of property, thou that dost hold hard by thine own investments, dost thou commit sacrilege, dost thou seek the spoliation of any Church, dost thou lend a helping hand to the reduction of the material power of any part of Christs kingdom? The question should be seriously pondered by us all, to whatever part of the Church of Christ we belong; so that, while we make our boast of the law, we may not through breaking the law dishonour God and cause His name to be blasphemed.

III. Learn that high profession and low practice is harmful.We know not how far-reaching is the evil influence of our inconsistency. We may exhort men to judge by principles, and not by persons. Still, one bad example may do more harm than a number of good sermons will confer spiritual benefit. How is the name of God blasphemed both at home and abroad! Let us pray and work that we may be able to live as we teach. Oh for the eloquent sermon of pure lives!

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Rom. 2:17-24

Self-exaltation of the Jew.A second flight of steps in the self-exaltation of the Jew. Having attained the position described in Rom. 2:18, he confidently aspires to something higher. While he can see all things clearly in the light of the law others are in darkness. And he is fully persuaded that he is a guide of those who wish to walk in the path of morality, but have not eyes to see the way. He can give the blind men not only guidance but sight. For he is a light of those in darkness. He will undertake the moral training of those who have not the wisdom which he has received from the law. He looks upon them as babes, and offers to be their teacher, for he has the law, in which knowledge and truth are presented in tangible shape to the mind of man. Instructor differs from teacher by including whatever belongs to moral training and direction. The form of an object differs from its essence as the outside from the inside. It is the sum-total of that by means of which the inward character presents itself to our senses, and thus makes itself known to us. It is that by which we distinguish one object from another. Whatever we can see, feel, or hear is the form of a material object. Whatever we can conceive is the form of a mental object. The revealed will of God is truth, because it exactly corresponds with an eternal reality; it is knowledge when grasped by the mind of man. It is pre-eminently the truth, for it sets forth the one great reality. It is when received into the mind pre-eminently the knowledge, for it claims to be the one chief object-matter of mans intelligence. Truth and knowledge represent the contents of the law in their relation to the great reality and to the mind of man. This man claims to be a teacher because by his acquaintance with the sacred books his mind grasps that which is the chief object-matter of intellectual effort and a correct delineation of the eternal realities. The same eternal reality and the same true matter of human knowledge has in a still higher degree assumed form and presented itself to the mind in the gospel.Beet.

Jewish depravity leads to Gentile degeneracy.The absurdity of his position is evident to all. With solemn earnestness Paul paints a still darker picture, the direct result of the mans inconsistency. Though the possession of the lawfills you with exultation you trample it under your feet, and thus bring contempt on Him who gave it. By choosing your nation to be His people God made you the guardians of His name and honour. That glorious and fearful name, which to know and to honour is life eternal, you have moved the heathen to mention with derision. They have seen and ridiculed the contrast of the words and works of their own teachers. (See Lucian, lxix. 19.) They see the same contrast in you. From your bold profession they suppose that you possess the favour of the God of Israel; and they treat with contempt a deity who as they think smiles on you. By your deep depravity, as your fathers by their far-off bondage, you have led the Gentiles to blaspheme. Observe that Pauls argument strikes with equal force against all conduct of Jews or Christians which is inconsistent with profession, and which thus brings dishonour to God.Beet.

The universality of the law.The natural law under which we are placed, according to the apostles view of it, is a knowledge and feeling of right and wrong, resulting from that reasonable nature which our Creator has given us. It is independent of any special revelation, and essentially inherent in the soul of man; and in as far as it goes it coincides, when duly enlightened, with the moral dictates of the revealed law of God. It may be and often is sadly perverted, so as to sanction actions of the deepest immorality; but when enlightened and duly applied, it enforces the duties of piety, justice, and benevolence, and many of the other virtues commanded in divine revelationthough, generally speaking, it enforces them only feebly and ineffectually, as appears by its imperfect influence on the conduct. Its authority extends to all nations, and it places those who have no more perfect rule, and who listen to and obey its impartial dictates, on the same footing, in respect of divine favour, with those who show the same respect and obedience to a divine revelation; for it proceeds from the same source with the written revelation of Gods will. It is intended by its Author to answer the same end to those who have no more precise rule; and consequently it would appear plainly incompatible with the absolute impartiality of the sovereign Judge if it had not the same effect in recommending to His favour those who conscientiously seek to obey its dictates. The reality and also the universal extent of this law are shown by the apostle from the heathen, who have no other law, doing under its guidance the things contained in the revealed will of God, from the sense of right and wrong written in their heart, and the testimony borne by their conscience to the obligation of doing good and abstaining from evil, and from their mutual reasonings when they either accuse one another of transgressing this law, or approve of those things that are in conformity to itall of which plainly imply the existence and obligation of this natural law. Nothing can be conceived more pointed than the apostles questions, or more unavoidable than the conclusion to which they lead; for how could the Jews believe that the law, which binds all other men to avoid sin, lays no such obligation on them, or flatter themselves that they might commit with safety those transgressions which they owned will subject all others who are guilty of them to the displeasure of God? Of this almost incredible self-delusion the folly is still further exposed in the twenty-third verse: Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God? This seems to be a general inference from the preceding interrogations. By acting in this manner thou who makest thy boast of the law, as a proof of Gods favour towards thee, dishonourest God by violating that law in which thou gloriest. Men may be said to dishonour God when they misapply the privileges which He has given them. Yet we do not think that the essential glory of the all-perfect Jehovah depends in any degree on mens conduct. But, according to our usual mode of conceiving human actions, it appears to reflect some dishonour on a man when he bestows favour on those who are altogether unworthy, and who, of consequence, make a wrong use of them. And this analogy we are apt, as in a multitude of other cases, to extend to the dispensations of the supreme Ruler.Ritchie.

Behold, thou art surnamed a Jew.After the returning of the Israelites from the Babylonish captivity they were all called Judi, Jews, because Judah was the principal and almost the only tribe then existing, and because to that tribe the others joined themselves. And as the Jews differed from all nations in point of religion, the name Jew and Israelite at length signified the profession of a religion. When therefore it is said, Behold, thou art surnamed a Jew, the meaning is, Thou art a worshipper of the true God, and enjoyest the benefit of a revelation of His will. In this and the following verses, if I mistake not, the apostle addressed the men of rank and learning among the Jews. It is no objection to that supposition that probably there were no doctors of the law nor Jewish scribes and priests at Rome when this letter was written; for as the apostle was reasoning against the whole body of the nation, his argument required that he should address the teachers of every denomination to whom the things written in this and the following verses best agree. Besides, as he had addressed the heathen legislators, philosophers, and priests in the first chapter for the purpose of showing them the bad improvement they had made of the knowledge they derived from the works of creation, it was natural for him in this to address the Jewish scribes, priests, and doctors, to show them how little they had profited by the knowledge which they had derived from revelation. Of the Jewish common people the apostle speaks (Rom. 3:20), where he proves that they also were extremely vicious.Macknight.

Thou that gloriest in the law through transgression of the law, dishonourest thou God?He next replies to the second prerogative, and shows their boasting in God and in the law vain from their own conductviz., their transgression of the third commandment; for by transgressing the whole law they brought disgrace upon the law and upon Godthat is, exposed at the same time both God and His law to be blasphemed by others, which was tantamount to blaspheming the name of God and violating the third commandment themselves. Hence the apostle supplies us with two notable things for the right understanding of the third commandment: first, that he who gives occasion to others to blaspheme is guilty of blasphemy himself; and secondly, that an occasion is given to the ungodly to blaspheme by the transgression of any one of the commandments, and consequently, whatever be the commandment transgressed, that the transgression of it is also a violation of the third commandment (see 2Sa. 12:14).Ferme and Melville.

Responsibility for light.The heathen have abused but one talent, the light of nature, but we thousandseven as many thousands as we have slighted the tenders of offered grace. What a fearful aggravation it puts upon our sin and misery! We must certainly be accountable to God at the great day, not only for all the light we have had, but for all we might have had in the gospel day, and especially for the light we have sinned under and rebelled against.Burkitt.

ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 2

Rom. 2:24. Christians injurious to Christianity.It is a melancholy fact that Christiansat least, professing Christiansare themselves the greatest obstacle to the spread of the gospel and the power of the gospel of Christ. Some time ago commissioners were sent over here from Japan to report on the condition of things herefor the Japanese were anxious to progress, and to adopt whatever was good in this countryand what was their report and advice? Adopt this and that in English trade and politics, but not the English religion. Ah! it was just this: the fruits of the professed religion were not such as to commend the religion itself. At least, the supposed fruits; for what the Japanese saw were not the fruits of the Christian religion at all. A Brahmin recently said to a Christian, I have found you out. You are not as good as your book. If you Christians were as good as your book, you would in five years conquer India for Christ. No wonder if the Chinese when they see us forcing opium upon them, and the Africans when they see us deluging them with rum, do not want the religion of the men who do this. Alas! in our own small spheres, how often have we been hinderers of the doctrine of our book? Have we not hindered it in our neighbourhood and family, and amongst those with whom we mingle in daily life? God give us more consistency for the future, and make the man and the book harmonise better together. People often say, Well, if Im not altogether what I ought to be, I am no ones enemy except my own. I may not be good, but at least I do no harm. No man, however, either liveth or dieth to himself. No sin was ever committed whose consequences rested on the head of the sinner alone. What would be thought of a passenger who should cut a hole in the ships side underneath his berth, and say, when expostulated with, that he was only his own enemy, and that he was injuring no one but himself?Quiver, Short Arrows.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Text

Rom. 2:17-24. But if thou bearest the name of a Jew, and restest upon the law, and gloriest in God, Rom. 2:18 and knowest his will, and approvest the things that are excellent, being instructed out of the law, Rom. 2:19 and art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them that are in darkness, Rom. 2:20 a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having in the law the form of knowledge and of the truth; Rom. 2:21 thou therefore that teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, does thou steal? Rom. 2:22 thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou rob temples? Rom. 2:23 thou who gloriest in the law, through thy transgression of the law dishonorest thou God? Rom. 2:24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you, even as it is written.

REALIZING ROMANS, Rom. 2:17-24

71.

Is there any real significance in the name Jew other than the fact that it distinguishes them from the Gentiles?

72.

In what sense were the Jews resting upon the law? To what purpose or intent?

73.

Make a list of the characteristics of the Jews here given by Paul. There are eleven of them; see if you can find them all.

74.

Was there one of these qualities that was not true or desirable?

75.

In what sense were the Jews glorying in God? Explain the expression.

76.

What is the difference, if any, of knowing His will and approving the things that are excellent?

77.

Tie up the expression being instructed out of the law with the two preceding phrases; i.e., show the relationship.

78.

Did God ever intend for the Jewish nation to be a guide to the blind?

79.

Show the tremendous significance of revelation as expressed in these words.

80.

Is it true that all who are now without revelation are blindin the dark, ignorant, and foolish?

81.

Can you see any application to present-day church members?

82.

In what sense had the Jew failed to teach himself?

83.

What definition of teaching does this verse (Rom. 2:21) give?

84.

Do you believe these Jews were actually committing adultery and at the same time teaching others not to?

85.

Why would a Jew rob a temple of idols? Would it be to worship them?

86.

Note in Rom. 2:23 that transgression of the law is more serious than the transgression of a divine will. It has judgment implications.

87.

Can God be dishonored?

88.

What is the meaning of blasphemed as here used?

Paraphrase

Rom. 2:17-24. What improvement have ye Jews made of revelation? Behold, thou hast the honorable appellation of a Jew, and restest in the law as a complete rule of duty and boastest in God as the object of thy worship;

Rom. 2:18 And knowest what God requires, and approvest the things that are excellent, being instructed by the law, which is a revelation from God, and a much surer rule than philosophy;

Rom. 2:19 And boastest that thou thyself art a guide in matters of religion to the Gentiles, who, notwithstanding their philosophy, are blind, and a light to all who are in the darkness of heathenism;

Rom. 2:20 A reprover of the foolish, a teacher of persons as destitute of spiritual ideas as babes:those titles thou assumest, because thou hast a just representation of religious knowledge and truth in the scriptures.

Rom. 2:21 Is thy behaviour suitable to those high pretensions? Thou then who teaches the Gentiles, why teachest thou not thyself? Thou who preachest to them, Do not steal,dost thou steal?

Rom. 2:22 Thou enlightened Jewish doctor, who sayest to the Gentiles, Do not commit adultery,dost thou commit adultery? Thou who abhorrest idols, dost thou rob temples of the tithes destined for the support of the worship of God? as if impiety were criminal in heathens, but pardonable in thee.

Rom. 2:23 Thou who boastest of revelation, dost thou, by breaking the precepts of revelation, dishonor God who bestowed it on thee? (See Rom. 2:4)

Rom. 2:24 I do not charge you Jews with these crimes rashly: For, as it was written to your fathers, so I write to you, the name of God is evil spoken of among the Gentiles through your wickedness, who call yourselves his people.

Summary

The Jew made great pretensions to superior knowledge; yet he acted as though he himself needed to be taught. He was inconsistent in his conduct. He preached not to do this, but did it. He taught not to do that, but did it. He boasted in the law, yet broke it. He abhorred idols; yet robbed temples of them to serve them. He affected great reverence for God; yet dishonored him by breaking his law. He even brought his name into disrepute among surrounding nations.

Comment

The Jewish readers of this letter have no doubt by this time come to see the personal application of what has been said, so the open statement of verse seventeen, directed as it is to the Jew, would be no great surprise. The 142 words of this remarkable sentence contain an undeniable expos of Jewish sins which demonstrate the need in their lives for the gospel of Christ. Notice the apparently complimentary touch of these words along with the masked sarcasm which finally bursts forth into open denunciation of undeniable sins. Hear Paul speak to the heart of these Jews: (Rom. 2:17-20)

First, he spoke of their high standing.

a.

Bore the proud name of a Jew. (Proud because it meant praise Gen. 29:35.)

b.

Rested upon the law.

c.

Glorified in God.

d.

Knew His will.

43.

How does the universal need of the gospel help to answer question one?

44.

How does the basis of judgment help to answer the question?

45.

In what manner is the guilt of the Jew (chap, 2) and Gentile (chap. 1) made known?

46.

Why wouldnt the Jew be surprised to hear his name mentioned as in Rom. 2:17?

47.

What form does the 142-word sentence of the Jewish expos take? Why?

48.

Why was the name Jew a proud name?

49.

Who was blind, in darkness, a babe, foolish?

e.

Were able to discriminate in a very close way as to right and wrong because of their instruction in the law.

f.

A confident guide to the blind Gentile.

g.

A light to those in darkness.

h.

An instructor of the foolish.

i.

A teacher of those who were so destitute of spiritual knowledge as to be counted as babes.

j.

All these things were theirs because they had the law and in it the knowledge and truth which made such a standing possible (Rom. 2:17-20).

He then condemned their hypocrisy. To the question now asked by Paul there could be but one answer. Here is the question, which contains the crux of the whole matter: Thou therefore that teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? (Rom. 2:21 a)

a.

What about your teaching on stealing? How does it compare with your actions?

b.

And your prohibitions against adulteryare you practicing the very thing you prohibit?

c.

How you do abhor idols! But is it you who are entering temples of these idols to steal the very objects you abhor?

d.

Summing up the matter, you present a strange paradox. You glory in the law of God and then by your transgressions of the law you dishonor Him who originated the law.

e.

It is as in the days of your fathersthe name of Jehovah is sneered at among the Gentiles because of you (Rom. 2:21 b – Rom. 2:24). (Rom. 2:17-24)

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(17) Behold.An interesting case of a corrupt reading which has found its way into the Authorised version. For behold, a decisive consensus of the best MSS. has but if. The corruption was very obvious and easy. Adopting but if, the answering clause of the sentence is to be found in the question, Teachest thou not thyself? Rom. 2:21. The connecting particle therefore at the beginning of the same verse is merely resumptive, or, as it is technically called, epanaleptic.

Turning to the Jew, the Apostle breaks out into indignant and vehement apostrophe, If you have the name of Jew, and repose upon the Law, and make your boast in God, and do all these other thingswhy then, while you profess to teach others, do you not teach yourself? A fine specimen of the natural eloquence which the Apostle derives from intense feeling. The different features of the picture crowd into his mind to point the contrast between what the Jew claimed to be and what he was.

Restest in.Reposest or reliest upon a law. A passive confidence in something external. In the Law the Jew saw the Magna Charta which gave him his assurance of salvation (Meyer).

Makest thy boast of Godi.e., of a peculiar and exclusive claim to His favour. (Comp. Deu. 4:7; Psa. 147:19-20.)

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

(a.) The Jew, under the law, breaking the law, Rom 2:17-29 .

With great skill the apostle prefaces his attack by calling over the roll of the Jew’s titles to honour, 17-20; but he exalts him only to plunge him down more deeply, 21-24.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

17. Behold This is a spirited and direct address, as is the first appeal to the moralized Gentile in Rom 2:1. But the best authorities decide that the true reading is, “But if than art called a Jew.” The consequent corresponding to this if is nowhere affirmatively stated, but is conveyed in the necessary reply of the questions following.

Restest in Reposest or reliest upon.

Boast of God The very word Jew had assumed a religious signification, implying a believer in the one Supreme God, a monotheist in noble distinction from the polytheists. To his own view it was a divine appellation.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

2. Condition of the Jewish Race, Rom 2:17 to Rom 3:20 .

The case of the Jew (17-24) with the written law is essentially parallel with that of the Gentile with the unwritten law, 12-15. Yet the apostle treats with a more careful deference. By a series of interrogations, more delicate yet more forcible than affirmations, he exhibits the wide discrepancies between their boasting of the law and their persistent breaking it. Gradually and carefully he approaches the conclusion that the case of the Jew is no better at best than that of the Gentile.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

The Jew And The Law Of God.

‘But if you bear the name of a Jew, and rest on the law, and glory (boast) in God, and know his will, and approve the things which are excellent, being instructed out of the law, and are confident that you yourself are a guide of the blind, a light of those who are in darkness, a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having in the law the form of knowledge and of the truth,’

Here we have an impressive list of claims. The Jew claimed that:

He bore the name of ‘a Jew’, which meant ‘praise’ (Gen 29:35). He thus saw himself as praised by God (Gen 49:8), and as one of the covenant people. By the time of Jesus ‘Jew’ had come to signify any Israelite.

He rested on the Law.  His confidence lay in the fact of his possession of a God-given Law which shaped his opinions and guided his thoughts. Thus he considered that whilst he might not always succeed in observing it, the very fact that he was committed to it (in theory at least) would be sufficient.

He gloried (or ‘boasted’) in God.  He delighted in his knowledge of the one, true God in Whom he gloried or ‘boasted’, this in contrast with a world which worshipped idols. He not only gloried in his heart, he boasted about his God in front of others. For this idea compare Jer 9:24, ‘but let him who glories glory in this, that he understands and knows Me, that I am the LORD Who exercises covenant love, judgment (justice) and righteousness in the earth, for in these things I delight.’ Of course they missed Jeremiah’s point which was that what they should glory in was a God Who delighted in love, justice and righteousness for ALL. He exercised them ‘in the earth’. Thus they would repeat Deu 6:5-6 every day, thinking that it made them special, and without even considering how far short they came of fulfilling it. They rather saw it as separating them off as God’s special people. What they overlooked was that Jeremiah was talking about boasting in a God Who exercised ‘in the earth’, not only covenant love, but also justice and righteousness, the concerns that Paul has in mind. He treated the whole world the same.

He knew His will.  Through the Law he considered that he knew what the will of God was, in contrast with the philosophising and feeling in the dark of the Gentiles. His knowledge of God’s will came from the Scriptures. Again he felt that this made him special. Yet he never considered that the Scriptures revealed that what God willed was for him to be wholly obedient to that will of God, and threatened curses if he was not (Deu 27:26).

He approved things which were excellent, or alternately ‘the things which differ’. The same phrase occurs in Php 1:10, of the Philippian Christians, and was a result of their ‘knowledge and discernment’. Thus the Jew believed that the Law gave him the right perspective on God and the world so that he approved of what was most excellent, even if he did not quite live up to it. His intentions were good, even if he did not carry them out.

He was instructed out of the Law.  He prided himself on the fact that his beliefs and his way of life rested on the God-given Law that he possessed, which was read out at the synagogue each week. This was how he knew God’s will and knew what was excellent. And he learned it from experts.

He was confident that he was a guide of the blind, a light to those in darkness, a corrector of the foolish, and a teacher of babes.  As a result of his knowledge of the Law he saw himself as a guide to the blind (compareJoh 9:41), a light to those who were in darkness (to Jews the Gentiles were in darkness, which was why the Servant of YHWH would be a light to the Gentiles – Isa 42:6; Isa 49:6), a corrector of the foolish (who themselves worshipped idols – Rom 1:22), and a teacher of babes (their responsibility to teach their children was a prime concern of the Law, e.g. Exo 12:26-27; Deu 11:19, but here the ‘babes’ were probably Gentiles looked at with some disdain).

He had in the Law the very form of knowledge and of the truth.  Whereas others wavered and argued and debated, and had no certainty, he knew that in the Law he had ‘the very form of knowledge and of the truth’, a structured revelation from God. He had it detailed in writing. It gave him a certainty which the world lacked. The problem was that he only selected the parts that suited him.

It will be noted from this that there is no mention of any recognition on their part of a need to be obedient. It was all about their opportunity to have knowledge. They considered that that knowledge would somehow result in their being excused in the day of Judgment. Paul will, however, point out their error. Knowledge of what was good was an excellent thing, but if it was not followed up with obedience then it became a heavy weight around the neck.

We can, however, see from this why the Jews had such false confidence in their position. Nor would Paul have denied much of this, although he clearly saw them as drawing the wrong conclusions from it. Indeed he was ready to concede the superiority of the Law to anything that the Gentiles possessed (they were after all the Christian Scriptures). But what he argued was that this put the Jews in a position of greater responsibility to actually obey the Law, rather than a lesser one, and what he was very much against was the idea that their privileges made them untouchable by judgment. He would have argued that to be enlightened was good, but only if it then resulted in living according to that enlightenment, something which the Jews did not do. Otherwise their knowledge could only condemn them for not responding to the light that they had. He will go on now to bring this out.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Special Case Of The Jew. Paul Is Answering The Question – ‘Does Not His Knowledge Of The Law And The Understanding That Goes With It, Along With The Fact That He Is Circumcised Into God’s Covenant, Put The Jew In A Special Position In God’s Eyes?’ (2:17-29).

The next hurdle that Paul had to do face was the claim of every Jew that, as a Jew he was privileged to have the Law and to be a teacher of men, and to have been circumcised into God’s covenant. Thus he saw himself as somehow superior and as special to God. He considered therefore that God would treat him on a different plane to that on which He treated others. The Jews would have agreed wholeheartedly that unless they became proselytes to Judaism all  Gentiles  came under God’s judgment. But every Jew considered that it was a very different case with regard to himself. He saw himself as one of God’s favourites. He was after all a member of God’s treasured possession, of God’s holy nation and kingdom of priests (Exo 19:5-6). He was child of Abraham to whose descendants God had promised special favours (compare Mat 3:9). He had been given the Law. He had been circumcised into God’s covenant. How then could God treat him as though he was merely on a par with the Gentiles? So Paul now addresses the Jew directly, and he commences by listing out his claims.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Jew Makes His Boast in God In Rom 2:17-20 Paul rehearses the multitude of boasts that the Jews make in their religious heritage. However, the following passage will reveal that all such boasting is in vain has he exposes their hearts (Rom 2:21-24).

Rom 2:20 Comments The Mosaic Law embodies the truth, serving as a testimony to true righteousness. However, Paul is about to explain that all Jews have fallen short of living by this standard of truth, necessitating justified before God by faith in Him and not by their works.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

God’s Call through the Mosaic Law: Testimony to Man’s Actions In Rom 1:18-32 Paul reveals man’s depravity and rejection of God. He then broadens his definition of depravity in Rom 2:1-16 by addressing those who condemn evil and consider themselves moral and good by showing their sinful nature. Now in Rom 2:17 to Rom 3:20 Paul further broadens his definition of man’s depravity to include the Jew. Throughout this lengthy passage of Rom 1:18 to Rom 3:20 Paul is attempting to explain how man’s sinful nature serves as a testimony of God’s righteousness in inflicting His wrath upon mankind from heaven (Rom 1:18), which is the underlying theme of this passage of Scripture.

In Rom 2:17 to Rom 3:20 Paul turns to the Jews who justify themselves in the Law, which reveals man’s actions. Paul offers a more lengthy discussion about the depravity of the Jew than the Gentiles because they had been given the oracles of God and had been used under the old covenant to reveal God’s standard of justification to the world.The Jews, who observe the disgusting behavior of the heathen take comfort in their traditions and conservative lifestyles. Yet, they too are condemned by the very Law they serve. Paul first rehearses the multitude of boasts that the Jews make in their religious heritage (Rom 1:17-20). He then reveals that all such boasting is in vain as he exposes their hearts (Rom 2:21-24). He explains that true circumcision is that of the heart, and not of the flesh (Rom 2:25-29). He next explains to them the advantages of being a Jew (Rom 3:1-8). Paul then quotes from the Law (primarily Psalms and Isaiah) to reveal how God’s wrath has been placed upon them also. Paul uses the Law to reveal how everyone is in a state of sin, even the Jew. He directly addresses the Jews as he uses the Law to convict them of their sins (1Ti 1:8).

1Ti 1:8, “But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;”

Although the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God (Rom 3:1-8), these oracles only declare that all have sinned (Rom 3:9-20). He explains that all men, Jews and Gentiles, are under sin (Rom 3:9). They have a wicked heart (Rom 3:10-12), and speak wicked words from their minds (Rom 3:13-14), and commit deeds of wickedness with their bodies (Rom 3:15-17), because they have no fear of God in their hearts (Rom 3:18). The Law has simply served to reveal man’s sinful nature rather than justify him (Rom 3:19-20).

Outline – Here is a proposed outline:

1. The Jew Makes His Boast in God Rom 2:17-20

2. The Jew as a Sinner Rom 2:21-24

3. True Circumcision Rom 2:25-29

4. The Advantage of the Jews: God’s Oracles Rom 3:1-8

5. The Law has Declared Both Jews and Gentiles as Sinner Rom 3:9-20

A Summary of Paul’s Experience in Debating with the Jews – Rom 2:17 is a key verse to chapters 2 and 3 of Romans in that Paul presents argument of his Jewish opponents in a rhetorical manner and answers them. Paul had spent years in the Jewish synagogues debating with them on these points. It explains that the Jews were trusting in the Law and boasting in God. Paul’s conclusion to this attitude of the Jews is found in Rom 2:29. Paul says that being a Jew is of the heart and not in the circumcision of the flesh.

Rom 2:17, “Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,”

Rom 2:29, “But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The guilt of the Jews:

v. 17. Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the Law, and makest thy boast of God,

v. 18. and knowest His will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the Law;

v. 19. and art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness,

v. 20. an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the Law.

v. 21. Thou, therefore, which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? Thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?

v. 22. Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? Thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?

v. 23. Thou that makest thy boast of the Law, through breaking the Law dishonorest thou God?

v. 24. For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.

Here the apostle addresses himself directly to the Jews, whom he had evidently had in mind principally in the entire passage; he speaks to them as a nation. Instead of “behold” we read “but if,” the entire passage showing the intense excitement under which the apostle was laboring: If a person is called a Jew, if he takes pride in applying this name to himself as a distinction above other nations, and rests upon, places his confidence upon, the Law, upon the entire Mosaic system, and makes his boast of God. These were real prerogatives of the Jews, for to them the true, living God had revealed Himself; to them He had given, not only the moral, but also the ceremonial law, and everything that the word embraced in its widest sense. And the Jews believed that these external advantages made their position safe under all circumstances. And they had also other advantages which resulted from their possession of the Law. They knew the will of God, the absolute will, since they had been instructed from the Law, and therefore they were able to make the proper distinction between right and wrong, between good and bad; they could approve the more excellent, decide what was consistent with the will of God. Every Jew also felt confident that he in his own person could be a leader of blind people, of heathen as well as of those that lacked the information possessed by the children of Israel, and thus a light of them that were in darkness. Furthermore, he trusted in himself that he could be an educator of those that lacked proper understanding and judgment, a teacher of young people, since he, with all his fellows in the Jewish nation, had the embodiment of knowledge and of truth in the Law. The Jews, in the Law of Moses, had the full and adequate expression of the divine will, while the natural law, written in the hearts of men, has become almost illegible on account of sin. And the Jews were more than conscious of their favored position, falsely arguing, however, that they held it on account of their own excellencies and therefore developing the typical form of Pharisaism as they showed it in the time of Jesus and the apostles.

Paul now, having established so much, continues in the form of a rhetorical question: Teaching now another, thyself teachest thou not? The possession of the written Law enabled the Jews to be the teachers of others; but their entire conduct was in glaring contrast to the demands of the Law. They themselves were in most decided need of true teaching on the basis of the Law. Preaching not to steal, thyself stealest? Stealing includes all the injustices, all the forms of cheating, of which the Jews became guilty in their commercial enterprises. Saying not to commit adultery, committest thou adultery? Laxness in the observance of matrimonial chastity had ever been a characteristic of the Jewish people. Detesting idols, dost thou become a temple-robber? The Jews showed the greatest horror of heathen idols and professed holy zeal for the Lord Jehovah, but they themselves had an irreverent disregard of God and holy things and withheld from God His due, a robbery and profanation which the prophet denounces in no uncertain terms, Mal 3:8. Thou that makest thy boast in the Law, through the transgression of the Law dishonorest thou God? A threefold accusation the apostle brings against the Jews: sin against their own bodies, harming their neighbor, and showing lack of reverence toward God. And the guilt of the Jews is even greater than that of the heathen, since they adorned their godlessness and unrighteousness with the Word and name of God. For the name of God was blasphemed on their account among the Gentiles, as it is written. St. Paul here has reference to Isa 52:5, adopting the Greek version for his purpose. The Gentiles, seeing such gross transgressions of the Law taking place among the Jews, very naturally drew the conclusion that the God of the Jews Himself taught them this behavior, that it agreed with the religion as it had been revealed to them. That is the severest form of guilt which involves a direct dishonoring and profaning of God. Note: The arraignment of Paul applies also to all hypocrites among the Christians, people that bear the Christian name and boast of the pure doctrine of the divine Word, but incidentally are guilty of dishonesty in business, of sins of unchastity, of irreverence toward God, of withholding their contributions toward the kingdom of God, etc.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Rom 2:17. Behold, &c. If the unbelieving Jew was at all disposed to admit evidence and conviction, the Apostle has said enough to awaken his conscience in the preceding part of this chapter; and therefore here he throws off the cover, and openly argues with him in the most plain and nervous manner, that his superior knowledge, privileges, and professions served only to aggravate his condemnation; and that, in fact, he, who, under all his greater advantages, transgressed the law of God, stood condemned by the honest Gentile, who, to the best of his knowledge, obeyed it. In Rom 2:17-20. St. Paul makes use of the titles which the Jews assumed to themselves, from the advantages they had of light and knowledge above the Gentiles, to shew them how inexcusable they were in judging the Gentiles, (who were, even in their own account, so much beneath them in knowledge,) for doing those things, of which they themselves were also guilty. St. Paul says emphatically, thou art called a Jew; for such a Jew as described in the following verses, he insists, was a Jew only in name, not in reality; and so he concludes, Rom 2:28-29. The Greek words , , , are used by none of the New Testament writers except St. Paul and St. James; by the latter thrice, by the former above fifty times. They are favourite terms with St. Paul, probably because of their very expressive and extensive signification. We render them by boasting, glorying, rejoicing, joy; but glorying best suits all the places where they are found. Now glorying, as it gives the sense of those words, denotes being pleased with, and acquiescing in the object wherein we glory, as it is supposed to be an object of joy and delight, of hope and dependence; as being praise-worthy, and reflecting an honour upon us: and such an object may be either in ourselves, or in other things or persons. I. In ourselves; 1 with regard to dependence, Jer 9:23.2 with regard to honour, Jdg 7:2. 1Co 1:29. Eph 2:9; Ephesians 2. In other things or persons; 1 with regard to joy, Psa 5:11. Php 2:16.2 with regard to hope, Pro 11:7 in the LXX.3 with regard to dependence, Psa 49:6. Php 3:3-4.4 with regard to what is praise-worthy, 2Co 5:12. 5 with regard to honour, Jer 13:11. 2Co 1:14. These several senses the words above mentioned will admit; but commonly more senses than one are implied, and sometimes all the several significations are included in the force of the word: so here, and makest thy boast, or rather, and gloriest in God; that is to say, “You rejoice in him as the object of your hope and dependence;you praise, or speak well of him; you account it your honour that he is your God, and that you worship him, &c.” So Rom 2:23 ch. Rom 5:2; Rom 3:11, &c. See Locke and Mintert.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Rom 2:17-20 contain the protasis, whose tenor of censure (called in question without ground by Th. Schott and Hofmann) reveals itself at first gently, but afterwards, Rom 2:19 f., with greater force.

] if thou art named “Jew .” This was the theocratic title of honour opposed to heathenism ( , see Philo, Alleg. I. p. 55 B, de plant. No, p. 233 A). Comp Rev 2:9 . So much the less therefore is . to be here understood of a surname (Bengel). Full effect is given to the compound in classic writers also by the notion of name-giving, imposing the name . See Plat. Crat. p. 397 E, p. 406 A; Phaedr . p. 238 A al [683] ; Xen. Oec. 6, 17; Thuc. ii. 29, 3; Polyb. i. 29, 2; comp Gen 4:17 ; Gen 4:25 f. Van Hengel arbitrarily imports the idea: pro veteri nomine (Israelitarum) novum substituens .

] acquiescis, thou reliest (Mic 3:11 ; 1Ma 8:12 ; see Wetstein) on the law , comp Joh 5:45 , as if the possession and knowledge of it were to thee the guarantee of salvation. The rest, of not being obliged first of all to seek what God’s will is (Hofmann), cannot be meant; since such a seeking cannot be separated from the possession of the law, but is on the contrary directed to that very law (see Rom 2:18 ). But in the law the Jew saw the magna charta of his assurance of salvation . He relied upon it.

] As being the exclusive Father and Protector of the nation. Comp Gen 17:7 ; Isa 45:25 ; Jer 31:33 . Observe the climax of the three points in Rom 2:17 . The with . (2Co 10:15 ; Gal 6:13 ), a verb which in Greek authors is joined with or or the accusative, denotes that, wherein the . rests , according to the analogy of , (Bernhardy, p. 211; Khner, II. 1, p. 403).

Rom 2:18 , ] . Whose will it was, that was to be obeyed on the part of man, was obvious of itself. Comp on Act 5:41 .

.] Thou approvest the excellent . Respecting the lexical correctness of this rendering comp on Phi 1:10 . Its correctness in accordance with the connection is plain from the climactic relation, in which the two elements of Rom 2:18 must stand to each other. “Thou knowest the will of God and approvest (theoretically) the excellent” therewith Paul has conceded to the Jews all possible theory of the ethical, up to the limit of practice . Others, taking as to prove , explain as meaning that which is different; and this either (comp Heb 5:14 ) of the distinction between right and wrong (Theodoret, Theophylact, Estius, Grotius and others, including Reiche, Rckert, Tholuck, Fritzsche, Krehl, Philippi, van Hengel, Th. Schott), or that which is different from the will of God, i.e. what is wrong, sinful (Clericus, Glckler, Mehring, Hofmann; compare Beza). But, after , how tame and destructive of the climax is either explanation! The Vulgate rightly renders: “probas utiliora.” Compare Luther, Erasmus, Castalio, Bengel, Flatt, Ewald.

. . ] Being instructed out of the law (through the public reading and exposition of it in the synagogues, comp , Rom 2:13 ), namely as to the will of God, and as to that which is excellent.

Rom 2:19-20 now describe, with a reference not to be mistaken (in opposition to Th. Schott and Hofmann) to the Jewish presumption and disposition to proselytize (Mat 23:15 ), the influence which the Jews, in virtue of their theoretic insight, fancied that they exercised over the Gentiles . The accumulated asyndetic designations of the same thing lend lively force to the description. They are not to be regarded with Reiche as reminiscences from the Gospels (Mat 15:14 ; Luk 20:32 ; Luk 2:32 ); for apart from the fact that at least no canonical Gospel had at that time been written, the figurative expressions themselves which are here used were very current among the Jews and elsewhere. See, e.g. Wetstein on Mat 15:14 . Observe, further, that Paul does not continue here with the conjunctive , but with the adjunctive , because what follows contains the conduct determined by and dependent on the elements of Rom 2:18 , and not something independent . Comp Ellendt, Lex. Soph . II. p. 790.

. . . [692] ] that thou thyself for thy part , in virtue of this aptitude received from the law, etc. , accompanied by the accusative with the infinitive, occurs only here in the N. T., and rarely in Greek authors (Aesch. Sept. 444).

. . [693] ] trainer of the foolish, teacher of those in nonage . Comp Plat. Pol. x. p. 598 C: .

. . . . .] the form of knowledge and of the truth . In the doctrines and precepts of the law religious knowledge and divine truth, both in the objective sense, attain the conformation and exhibition (Ewald: “embodiment”) proper to them, i.e. corresponding to their nature (hence .), so that we possess in the law those lineaments which, taken collectively, compose the (Hesychius) of knowledge and truth and thus bring them to adequate intellectual cognizance. Truth and knowledge have become in the law (Plut. Num 8 , Mor. p. 428 F), or (Plut. Mor. p. 735 A). Paul adds this . . . . . . as an illustrative definition ( ut qui habeas , etc.) to all the points previously adduced; and in doing so he places himself entirely at the Jewish point of view (comp Wis 14:31 ff.), and speaks according to their mode of conception; hence the view which takes . here as the mere appearance (2Ti 3:5 ), in contrast to the reality, is quite erroneous (in opposition to in Theophylact, Oecumenius, Pareus, Olshausen). Even Paul himself could not possibly find in the law merely the appearance of truth (Rom 3:21 ; Rom 3:31 ). On compare Theophrastus, h. pl. iii. 7, 4, and in Plut. Mor. p. 1023 C.

[683] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.

[692] . . . .

[693] . . . .

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

Rom 2:17-24 . The logical connection of this “oratio splendida ac vehemens” (Estius), introduced once more in lively apostrophe, [679] with what precedes is to be taken thus: Paul has expressed in Rom 2:13-16 the rule of judgment, that not the hearers but the doers of the law shall in the judgment be justified. He wishes now vividly to bring home the fact, that the conduct of the Jews, with all their conceit as to the possession and knowledge of the law, is in sharp contradiction to that standard of judgment. The and the emphatic are to be explained from the conception of the contrast , which the conduct of the Jews showed, to the proposition that only the doers . As to the construction of Rom 2:17-23 , the common assumption of an anakoluthon, by which Paul in Rom 2:21 abandons the plan of the discourse started with , and introduces another turn by means of (see Winer, p. 529 [E. T. 712], Buttmann, p. 331) is quite unnecessary. The discourse, on the contrary, is formed with regular and logically accurate connection as protasis (Rom 2:17-20 ) and apodosis, namely thus: But if thou art called a Jew, and supportest thyself on the law , etc., down to Rom 2:20 , dost thou (interrogative apodosis, Rom 2:21-22 ), who accordingly ( , in accordance with what is specified in Rom 2:17-20 ) teachest others, not teach thyself? Stealest thou, who preachest against stealing? Committest thou adultery, who forbiddest adultery? Plunderest thou temples, who abhorrest idols? These questions present the contrast to the contents of the protasis as in the highest degree surprising, as something that one is at a loss how to characterise and then follows in Rom 2:23 , with trenchant precision, the explanation and decision regarding them in the categorical utterance: Thou, who boastest thyself of the law, dishonourest God by the transgression, of the law , a result which is then in Rom 2:24 further confirmed by a testimony from the O. T. Rom 2:23 also might indeed (as commonly explained) be taken as a question; but, when taken as declaratory , the discourse presents a form far more finished, weighty and severe. Paul himself, by abandoning the participial expression uniformly employed four times previously, seems to indicate the cessation of the course hitherto pursued. According to this exposition of the connection, in which it must not be overlooked that the force of the in Rom 2:21 is limited solely to the relation of the and the following participles to what has been said before , [680] we must reject the view of Benecke, Glckler, and Hofmann that the apodosis only begins with Rom 2:23 , but in Rom 2:21 f. there is a continuation of the hypothetical protasis an idea which cannot be tolerated, especially at the beginning of the new form of discourse (the antithetical), without repetition of the . Paul would have written . . [681] (compare Baeumlein, Partik . p. 178). Th. Schott erroneously finds in and the apodosis, which is then explained.

[679] To the Jews , not to the Jewish- Christians . Respecting the composition and character of the Roman congregation nothing can be inferred from this rhetorical form of expression. Comp. Th. Schott, p. 188 f.

[680] This is the well-known epanaleptic , gathering up and resuming what had been said previously. Regarding the frequency of its use also in Greek writers to introduce the apodosis, especially after a lengthened protasis, see Hartung, Partikell . II. p. 22 f.; Klotz, ad Devar. p. 718. Comp. Bengel on ver. 17.

[681] . . . .

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

Fourth Section.The aggravated corruption of the Jew in his false zeal for the law (a side-piece to the corruption of the Gentile in his idolatrous worship of symbols). The fanatical and wicked method of the Jews in administering the law with legal pride, and in corrupting it by false application and treacheryan occasion for the blasphemy of Gods name among the Gentiles.

Rom 2:17-24

17Behold,27 [But if] thou art called [named, denominated, ] a Jew, and restest in [upon] the law,28 and makest thy boast of God [boastest in God], 18And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent [provest, or, discernest the things that differ],29 being instructed out of the law; 19And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which 20[those who] are in darkness, An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast [having] the form [the representation, model, pattern, ] of knowledge and of the truth in the law. [,] 21Thou therefore which [Thou, then, who] teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? 22Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege [literally, robbery of temples]?30 23Thou that makest thy boast of [in] the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God? [through the transgression of the law thou dishonourest God.]31 24For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written [Isa 52:5; Eze 36:20].

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

The connection with the foregoing is explained by Tholuck [p. 110] thus: The Jew was already humbled by the proof that the Gentile was also in possession of the law. But it is further charged upon him that his possession of the law has become a dishonor to Him who gave it to him. We have seen already that the connection consists in a sharp antithesis: a Gentile who is a Jew at heart; a Jew who, according to the spirit of the law, is the most wanton Gentile. [Estius justly calls the following apostrophe, oratio splendida ac vehemens.]

Rom 2:17. But if thou art named a Jew. There seems to be an anacoluthon in the following verses, which it was probably intended to remove by the reading . Tholuck: The apodosis appears to be wanting to the protasis, Rom 2:17-20. But we may explain without an anacoluthon (Meyer): But if thou art called a Jew, &c. thou therefore (, Rom 2:21, in consequence of what has been said, who teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? We would find an easier solution, if we could read the verbs and as conjunctives for the formation of a hypothetical protasis; the following indicatives would then constitute the apodosis. But the is wanting to the . [See Textual Note1.]Named. Jew was the designation of the Hebrew according to his religion; therefore the theocratic name of honor, which is also contained in the etymology of the word itself.32 is translated cognominaris by the Vulgate and Bengel. [Wordsworth: , thou hast a title in addition to () that which other men possess.P. S.] But the compound verb is also used in the sense of the Simple , and the name was not a surname, although it might become a surname for the false Jew. Tholuck [Meyer, Philippi, Hodge; comp. LXX. Gen 4:17; Gen 4:25-26, and the classical quotations of Meyer in loc.P. S.].And restest. Intimation of Jewish pride. Strictly: Thou liest on it for rest. Thus the Jew abused his privilege; Psa 147:19-20.Israel perverted into a false trust its ideal destination for the nations, according to Isa 42:6-7, and other passages; and it so caricatured the single elements (which are designated in the following verses) of this destination, that the most glaring moral contradiction took place in its character.Thou makest thy boast33 in God, as thy [exclusive] guardian God; Isa 45:25; Jer 31:33. [To boast or glory in God, or in Christ (Gal 6:14), is right, if it proceeds from a sense of our weakness and unworthiness, and a corresponding sense of the goodness of God, as our sure refuge and strength; but it is wrong if it arises from religious bigotry and conceit, which would monopolize the favor of God to the exclusion of others. Calvin: Hc igitur non cordis gloriatio, sed lingu jactantia fuit. The false Jewish boasting in God amounted to a boasting in the flesh, against which we are warned, Gal 6:13; 2Co 10:15; Php 3:3. , form a rising climax.P. S.]

Rom 2:18. And knowest his will [ is emphatic.P. S.] That is, His will as the inward part of the law; Eph 3:18, &c.; or rather, the absolute will which has become manifest in the law.And discernest the things that differ [ ]. Three explanations of this expression: 1. The difference between right and wrong (Theodoret, Theophylact, Grotius, &c., Tholuck, Philippi, and others); 2. what is at variance with the will of God, sinful (Clericus, Glckler); 3. thou-approvest the excellent (Vulgate: probas utiliora, Bengel, Meyer [Hodge]). According to the meaning of (to be prominent; to be distinguished; to excel), and (the distinctions; the excellent), these different explanations are equally allowable; and the connection must therefore determine which is the best one. But the explanation: thou approvest the excellent, is not strong enough; although Meyer sees in it the completion of a climax.34 The Jew was, as ,35 the distinguishing, the sharply deciding between what was allowed and disallowed; he was skilled in the , Heb 5:14; the [a term frequently used by Philo]. This explanation passes over into a fourth: , the controversies (De Dieu, Wolf).Being instructed. After his fashion he lives in the law, , not . [Being instructed, not only catechetically in youth, but didactically and continually by the reading and exposition of the Scriptures in the synagogue on the Sabbath day.P. S.]

Rom 2:19. And art confident. He should be every thing that follows, according to Old Testament intimations; see Isa 42:6-7, and other passages. So much less is there a reason why Reiche should find here reminiscences from the Gospels (Mat 15:14; Luk 20:32). The corruption of Judaism consisted throughout in perverting the Old Testament attributes of the people, and of its future, into the literal and the carnal. From this arose also its proselytism (Mat 23:15), which is here described.Guide of the blind. The Jew called the Gentiles blind; , in Isa 60:2, means, therefore, the Gentiles; and , in Isa 49:6, means the Jews; , the proselytes (see Tholuck).

Rom 2:20. Form (pattern) of knowledge. classically, ; Hesychius: . [In the New Testament it occurs only once more2Ti 2:5where it is opposed to , and means the mere outward form or appearance. Here, on the contrary, it is the real representation or expression, exemplar, effigies Grotius: forma qu rem exprimit.P. S.] According to Meyer, the doctrines and commandments of the law itself are the form of knowledge and truth. We are nearer right when we remember the didactic impression of the Old Testament revelation of the law in the rabbinical tradition from which the Talmud subsequently arose; for the Apostle speaks of a , which should be indirectly . . cumenius and Olshausen, without cause, think of the typical character of the Old Testament; others (with Theophylact) of the mere phantom of truth. The question is concerning an object of which the Jew boasts. His . is indeed the gloomy antitype of the personal incarnation of the truth in Christ, as in Sir 24:25 (23) we read of the becoming a book in the Thora. All these are now the characteristics of the Jews pretensions. There now follow the proofs of the contradiction in which he stands to himself.

Ver 21. Thou, then, that teachest another. [The virtual apodosis of Rom 2:17. The several clauses are more lively and forcible if read interrogatively, so as to challenge the Jew to deny the charge, if he dare.P. S.] The analogy of the following charges to the Apostles judgment on the Gentiles lies herein: the Jews, by their pride of the law and by their legal orthodoxy, were led into the way of ruin, just as, the Gentiles had been by their intellectual conceit indulging in symbols and myths. The first charge is general: Teachest thou not thyself? Psa 50:16. After this, three specific charges follow in strong gradation. Meyer: The following infinitives [ , ] do not include in themselves the idea of or , but are explained by the idea of command which is implied in the finite verbs [viz., , The verba jubendi here are and .P. S.] In the charge of stealing, there was undoubtedly special reference to the passionate and treacherous method of transacting business adopted by the Jews (Jam 4:2-13); in the charge of adultery, to the, loose practice or divorces (Mat 19:8-9; Jam 4:4).[. The Talmud charges adultery upon some of the most celebrated Rabbins, as Akiba, Meir, Eleasar.P. S.] The strongest charge is the third:

Rom 2:22. Thou that abhorrest idols, &c. , from , to excite disgust by a loathsome odor. In the religious sense, to abhor. The Jew called the idols (1Ma 6:7; 2Ki 23:13, ). Explanations: 1. By plundering the temples of idols (Chrysostom, Theophylact, and many others; Meyer, Philippi [Alford, Conybeare and Howson] ). Tholuck: The law, in Deu 7:25, forbids the appropriation of the gold and silver ornaments of the images of gods; and in the paraphrase of this prohibition in Josephus (Antiq. iv. 8, 10), express reference is made to the robbing of heathen temples. Act 19:36-37, shows that the Jews had the name of committing such an offence. [The objection to this view is that the Jew, attaching no sacredness to the temples of idols, regarded the despoiling of heathen temples as no sacrilege, but simply as robbery, which might be justified under certain circumstances.P. S.]. 2. in the figurative sense: profanatio majestatis divin (Calvin, Luther, Bengel, Kllner).36 3. Embezzlement of taxes [tithes and offerings] for their own temple (Pelagius, Grotius [Ewald, Wordsworth, and others; comp. Mal 1:8; Mal 1:12; Mal 1:14; Mal 3:8-10]). To the charge of robbing heathen temples, the idea of pollutionwhich this robbery carries with itmay also be added, as is done by Meyer. But it seems strange that the Apostle should have established, on isolated occurrences of such robbery, so general and fearful a charge. As in the charges: Thou stealest, thou committest adultery, he had not merely in mind occasional great transgressions, but also the universal exhibitions of Jewish avarice and concupiscence, so we must also here accept a more general and spiritual significance of his accusation. We must indeed suppose here transgressions that were an occasion of offence to the Gentiles; and Luther goes much too far in spiritualizing the charge: Thou art a robber of God; for it is Gods honor that all those who rely on good works would take from Him. But the worst outrage on the temple, according to Joh 2:19, consisted in the crucifixion of Christ (comp. Jam 5:6). It was therefore as a sign of judgment that the temple in Jerusalem itself was desecrated by the Jews in every possible way before its destruction. In a wider sense, the transgression of the Jews consisted in their causing, by their, fanaticism, not only the downfall of the temple, but in frivolously abusing and insulting the sanctuaries of Gentiles, and, where occasion offered, in converting their treasures into spoils and articles of commerce.

Rom 2:23. Thou that makest thy boast in the law. Since this judgment is the result of the foregoing question, Meyer has good reason for reading this verse not as a question, but as a categorical impeachment. This is supported by the in Rom 2:24.

Rom 2:24. For the name of God. That is, the Gentiles judged the religion of the Jews by the scandalous conduct of the Jews themselves, and thus were led to blaspheme their God, Jehovah. The Jews boasted of the law (which, Bar 4:3, is termed ), and reflected disgrace on the lawgiver. For the Jews, the Apostle here seals again his declaration, by concluding with a quotation from the Old TestamentIsa 52:5 : My name continually every day is blasphemed [in the Septuagint: ]. Comp. Eze 36:23 : I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. The Apostle now passes over from his indirect representation of the corruption in Judaism, which he had given from a general point of view, Rom 2:10-16, to paint its life-picture from experience. In Rom 3:10-19, he proves that the Old Testament had already testified to the corruption of the Jewish people. But this, description of the actual corruption must be distinguished from the sketch of the original transgression, Rom 5:12 ff., and from the development in part of the judgment of hard-heartedness, chaps. 9 and 10.

2. The description of the corruption in Judaism presents only legalistic features, as the account of Gentile corruption presents Antinomian features. In the former case, the disfiguration of religion proceeded from legal conceit, while in the latter it arose from the conceit of wisdom; the root of pride is therefore common to both lines of corruption. The self-contradiction of the Gentiles was developed thus: he, the pretended wise man, becomes a fool by disfiguring his symbolical religion of nature; with all his self-glory, he becomes a worshipper of the creature, and loses the dignity of his human body; with all his deification of nature, he sinks thereby into abominable unnaturalness; with all his efforts for vigor of life and enthusiasm, he sinks more and more into the degradation of wicked characters; and finally, with all his better knowledge, he ornaments and varnishes sin theoretically and sthetically. The self-contradiction of the Jew, on the other hand, developed itself thus: he, the pretended teacher of the nations, becomes an Antinomian blasphemer, by the perversion of his religion of revelation and law, while he teaches others, and not himself, and, by a succession of transgressions of the law, goes so far as to profane sacred things, by abusing and robbing the temples (see Mat 21:13). To the profanation of the temple was added that of the high-priesthood, which reached its climax in Caiaphas. Likewise the ministry of the Jew was thoroughly profaned by proselytism and falsification of the law, and his religiousness was converted into a cloak for hypocrisy.

3. The fanatic grows ever more profane by the consistency of his course of conducta despiser of the substantial possessions of religion. Church history furnishes numerous examples, how fanatics of the churchly as well as unchurchly type become at last, out of pretended saints, profaners and robbers of the temple.
4. Priests and preachers have certainly corrupted religion as often as philosophers have corrupted wisdom, politicians the State, jurists the law, &c.
5. The dogmatic and legalistic spirit of the Middle Ages, too, which, in a better form, was really a teacher of the blind, has finally gone so far as to present the greatest variety of religious and moral hindrances to modern Gentiles. It is not without serious significance, therefore, that the Epistle to the Romans contains this very section.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The false zeal for the law practised by the Jews as occasion for blaspheming the name of God by the Gentiles: so far as, 1. such false zeal knows Gods will; but, 2. wantonly transgresses it (Rom 2:17-24).The mere name of Christianity goes no further than the name of Judaism (Rom 2:17-24).Do not depend upon your orthodoxy, if you do not act right by faith (Rom 2:17-24).Notwithstanding brilliant knowledge, one is a bad teacher if he does not do what he knows (Rom 2:17-24).Blasphemy of the name of God (Rom 2:24).Gods name has already been often blasphemed among the heathen (and Mohammedans) because of Christians. Proof: 1. From the outrages of persons professing Christianity in the Middle Ages (Charlemagne, and the Saxons, the Brethren of the Sword, the Spaniards in America, &c.); 2. from the abuses in trade in the present time (the slave trade, opium trade, sandal-wood trade).

Starke: When one does any thing which has ever so good appearance, it is sin if it does not come from faith (Rom 2:18).Theological learning is by no means enough for a teacher, when he is not taught in the school of the Holy Spirit (Rom 2:20).That teacher cannot be an example of good works who can only say of himself: Judge according to my words, and not according to my deeds (Rom 2:21).Boasting and vain-glorythe manner, alas, of many Christians! (Rom 2:23.)Cramer: The titles and names of honor that we may possess should be to us a continual reminder to conduct ourselves in harmony with such titles (Rom 2:17).Nova Bibl. Tub.: Oh, how many external privileges a soul can have! Communion in the true Church, knowledge of God and His word, of His will and His works, the best instruction, a skilful sense of the difference between good and evil; and yet, in spite of all this, it can be at fault, and quite removed from the inner fellowship with God (Rom 2:17).Look, teacher! You must commence with yourself; you must, first be your own teacher, guide, and chastiser; first preach to your own self, first break your own will, and perform what you preach. But to desire to guide, discipline, and control others, and yet steal and commit adultery yourself, &c.that will enter in judgment against you. Oh, how great is this corruption! (Rom 2:20.)Quesnel: Oh, how rare a thing it is to be learned without being proud! (Rom 2:19).

Heubner: There is a false and a true boasting on the part of a believer in revelation. He does it falsely when he imagines, 1. that he thereby makes himself more acceptable to God; 2. that merely having and knowing are sufficient, without practice; 3. when, at the same time, he despises others. He boasts properly when, 1. he gives God all the glory; 2. makes use of the revealed truth; 3. does not despise others (Rom 2:17).It is a great grace when God gives a tender conscience (Rom 2:18).To know the right, is in the power of every Christian; and sin does not consist in ignorance or misunderstanding, but has its root in the will (Rom 2:19).Melancholy contradiction between knowledge and deeds (Rom 2:21-23).The honor of Christianity is dependent upon us.A holy life is the final vindication of faith (Rom 2:24).

Besser: Legalists, who would be righteous by their works, deprive the law of its spiritual clearness (Rom 2:17).

Lange: The internal self-contradiction between knowledge and disposition extends to external life: 1. As self-contradiction between word and deed; 2. between the vocation and the discharge of it; 3. between destination to the welfare of the world, and degeneration, on the contrary, to the misery of the world.The teacher of the law in olden times, and the (religious) teacher of the law in recent daysthe offence of modern Gentiles.

[Burkitt: Rom 2:17-20. Learn: 1. That persons are very prone to be proud of church privileges, glorying in the letter of the law, but not conformed to its spirituality either in heart or life; and 2. that gifts, duties and supposed graces, are the stay and staff which hypocrites lean on. The duties which Christ has appointed, are the trust and rest of the hypocrite; but Christ Himself is the trust and rest of the upright.

Rom 2:21-24. 1. It is much easier to instruct and teach others, than to be instructed ourselves; 2. it is both sinful and shameful to teach others the right way, and to go in the wrong ourselves. While this is a double fault in a private person, it is inexcusable in the teacher; 3. the name of God suffers by none so much as by those who preach and press the duties of Christianity upon others, but do not practise them themselves. The sins of teachers are teaching sins. Lord, let all that administer unto Thee in holy things consider that they have not only their own sins to account for, but also the sins of their people, if committed by their profligate example.Matthew Henry: The greatest obstructors of the success of the Word, are those whose bad lives contradict their good doctrine; who in the pulpit preach so well, that it is a pity they should ever come out; and out of the pulpit live so ill, that it is a pity they should ever come in.Doddridge: We pity the Gentiles, and we have reason to do it; for they are lamentably blind and dissolute: but let us take heed lest those appearances of virtue which are to be found among some of them condemn us, who, with the letter of the law and the gospel, and with the solemn tokens of a covenant relation to God, transgress His precepts, and violate our engagements to Him, so turning the means of goodness and happiness into the occasion of more aggravated guilt and misery.Clarke: Rom 2:17. It is the highest honor to be called to know Gods name, and be employed in His service.Hodge (condensed): The sins of the professing people of God are peculiarly offensive to Him, and injurious to our fellow-men.The sins and refuges of men are alike in all ages.Were it ever so certain that the church to which we belong is the true, apostolic, universal Church, it remains no less certain, that without holiness no man shall see the Lord.Barnes: It matters little what a mans speculative opinions may be; his practice may do far more to disgrace religion, than his profession does to honor it.J. F. H.]

Footnotes:

[27]Rom 2:17.[Instead of the text. rec., , behold, which is not sufficiently sustained, read , but if, with . A. B. D*. K., Griesbach, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Bloomfield, Alford, and nearly all the recent commentators. The reading is either a mistake, or a change for the purpose of avoiding the anacoluthon, which, however, is more apparent than real. The apodosis must he supplied (why dost thou not act accordingly, or, how great is thy responsibility), or it may be found in Rom 2:21, by simply omitting the , which is often epanaleptic, resuming the thread of the sentence. So Meyer, who regards Rom 2:17-28 as the protasis, and 21, 22 as the apodosis.P. S.]

[28]Rom 2:17.[ , without the article, . A. B.D1.The later MSS. and the text. rec. insert before , because it here clearly applies to the written law of Moses as representing the whole Mosaic system, the civil and religious polity of the Jews. has here as in Rom 2:14 the force of a proper name. Alford: The article is omitted, because the law is not here distributedit is not the law itself in its entirety which is meant, but the fact of having or of knowing the law:the strict way of expressing it would perhaps be, in the fact of possessing a law, which, condensed into our less accurate English, would be in one word, in the law: viz., which thou possessest.P. S.]

[29]Rom 2:18.[On the different interpretations of , see the Exeg. Notes. Lange (with Tholuck, Fritzsche, Reiche, Rckert, Philippi, Alford) translates: Du beurtheilest die widerstreitenden Dinge. Tholuck: Du pifst das Unterschiedene. Tyndale: Hast experience of good and bad. Conybeare and Howson: Givest judgment upon good or evil. Robert Young, too literally: Dost approve the distinctions. But the versions of Cranmer, Geneva, James, Rheims, and Am. Bible Union agree substantially with the Latin Vulg.: Probas utiliora. So also Meyer, who translates: Du billigst das Vorzgliche. Wordsworth: Thou discernest the things that are more excellent. The same phrase occurs, Php 1:10, where the E. V. renders it in the same way. Grammatically, both interpretations are correct, and hence the connection must decide. means first to examine, to try. to prove (1Co 3:13; 1Pe 1:7); and then, as the result of examination and trial, to discern, to distinguish, and to approve (1Co 16:3; Rom 14:22). is: (1) To differ; (2) to differ to advantage, to excel. Hence : (1) The difference between right and wrong, good and bad; (2) the excellent things, utilia.P. S.]

[30]Rom 2:22.[Alford translates: Thou who abhorrest idols, dost thou rob their temples To maintain the contrast, he refers (with Chrysostom, Meyer, Tholuck, and others) to the robbing of idol temples (); but this was no sacrilege in the eyes of the Jew; and hence others refer it to the temple of God in Jerusalem. See Exeg. Notes.P. S.]

[31]Rom 2:23.[Lange and Meyer take this verse as a categorical charge, resulting from the preceding questions which the Jew could not deny. This view is supported by the following . , in the six other passages of the N. T. where it occurs, is uniformly translated transgression in the E. V.P. S.]

[32][ is the verbal noun from the future hophal of , to praise, and means praised, sc. Jah, God (Gottlob); see Frst, Dict., sub , vol. 1:491; Gen 29:35 (where Leah, after the birth of Judah, says: Now will I praise the Lord: therefore she called his name Judah); Gen 49:8; Rev 2:9. To be a Jew in this proper sense was to belong to the covenant people of God selected for His praise.P. S.]

[33][ (also in 1Co 4:7), like , Rom 11:18, (for ). Mat 5:36, , Luk 16:25, is the original uncontracted form for . in use with the poets and later prose-writers, see Winer, Gram., p. 73, 7th ed. The signifies the sphere in which the boasting moves, or the object of boasting, as .P. S.]

[34][So does Hodge: To approve of what is right, is a higher attainment than merely to discriminate between good and evil. But there is a difference between an instinctive and an intelligent approval of what is right. The latter is the result of reflection and discrimination, resting on superior knowledge, which was the peculiar advantage of the Jew having the touchstone of the written law and the continual instruction of the Scriptures. What immediately follows agrees better with the interpretation of Lange. Comp. Textual Note3.P. S.]

[35][, to distinguish, clearly to discern, also to separate. From this the term Pharisee Perishin, the Aramaic form of the Hebrew Parushim, separated) is derived.P. S.]

[36][So Hodge: The essence of idolatry was profanation of God; of this the Jews were in a high degree guilty. They had made His house a den of thieves.P. S.]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

DISCOURSE: 1826
INCONSISTENT CHRISTIANS REMONSTRATED WITH

Rom 2:17-23. Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, and knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law; and art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law. Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?

IT is generally acknowledged, that the heart of man is deceitful: but the extent of its deceitfulness is very little known. It is not in things of minor importance only that its delusive operations are felt, but in things of everlasting concern, where, it might be supposed, we should be most on our guard against them. It deceives us in things relating to God, who, however we may deceive ourselves, can never be deceived by us: it leads us to substitute a profession of religion for the actual experience of it in our souls; and to rest in a form of godliness, whilst we are wholly inattentive to its power. This species of self-deceit obtained to an awful degree amongst the Jews, with whom St. Paul expostulates on account of it in a way of keen remonstrance. They could not be persuaded that they were in any danger, because they were descended from Abraham; but St. Paul shews them, that their descent from him would avail them nothing, whilst their conduct was so contrary to their professions; but that rather their hypocrisy proved them to be as much in need of a Saviour, as the most ignorant of the Gentile world could be.
Such being the general scope of the passage, we will consider more particularly,

I.

The remonstrance itself

Certainly the state of the Jews called for severe reproof
[They were highly privileged beyond the rest of mankind. They had a revelation from heaven, whereby they were instructed in the mind and will of God [Note: Deu 4:8.], and enabled both to discern things that differed, and to approve the things that were more excellent [Note: may be translated in either way.]. Moreover, as Gods peculiar people, they could call Jehovah their God.

But these privileges they grievously abused. We condemn not their resting in the law, or their making their boast of God, provided they had really endeavoured to serve God acceptably, and to yield a willing obedience to his law: but it was the external privilege that they gloried in, and not the spiritual advantages derived from it: they were proud of the distinction, but not desirous of the spiritual benefits connected with it. Because of the superior light they enjoyed, they despised all the rest of the world, as blind, ignorant, benighted: and they assumed to themselves vain-glorious titles, as guides of the blind, lights of those who were in darkness, instructors of the foolish, and teachers of babes: they had a summary of their duties in a short compendious form, a form of knowledge and of the truth in the law, by means of which they were enabled to appear very wise to the unenlightened heathen; but, whilst they thought themselves so highly qualified to teach others, they taught not themselves: on the contrary, they were notoriously guilty of those very crimes which they reprobated amongst the Gentile world. They proclaimed with great authority the commandments, Thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not commit adultery; but they were as much addicted to these crimes as the heathen themselves; and though since their return from Babylon they professed an abhorrence of idolatry, and in that respect excelled the heathen, they sacrilegiously robbed God not only of his tithes and offerings, but of all that honour and obedience which they acknowledged to be his due. In a word, by their gross hypocrisy, and their diversified abominations, they caused Jehovah himself to be blasphemed and abhorred amongst the heathen who were round about them [Note: Isa 52:5. Eze 36:21-23.].

Of what avail could external privileges be to such hypocrites as these?]
Would to God there were not equal cause for reproof to those also who name the name of Christ
[Great as were the advantages of the Jews, they were not to be compared with those which are enjoyed by the Christian world. We have not the law only, but the Gospel also, in which are discovered to us all the wonders of redeeming love. And we, in consequence of this distinction, look down with pity on the benighted heathen, who are bowing down to stocks and stones, and seeking to propitiate their deities by services most painful, most nugatory, most debasing. On the Christian name also we value ourselves, as if that name could save us: and because we have been admitted by baptism into the external bond of the Christian covenant, we conclude ourselves of course partakers also of its inward blessings. Ah! fatal delusion! We stand amazed at this error, when exhibited to us by the Jews; but behold it not, when exemplified in ourselves.

But our lives testify against us, as no less hypocritical than the Jews themselves. Were we really a holy people to the Lord, we might well make our boast of the Saviour, and rest in his Gospel as an undoubted source of everlasting blessedness. But whilst we boast of our superiority to the heathen in point of light and knowledge, we are on a perfect level with them in our allowed violations of every moral duty. We say to heathens, Thou shall not steal, thou shall not commit adultery: but where were ever fornication and adultery practised with more unblushing effrontery, than amongst those who name the name of Christ? Where was dishonesty more universal in every branch of trade, than amongst those who call themselves Christians? Who have ever carried dishonesty to such a pitch as the professed followers of Christ? Who have been men-stealers? Who have stirred up wars from year to year, on purpose to facilitate their projects of enslaving their fellow-creatures? Ah! tell it not in Gath. The very name of Christ stinks in the nostrils of millions, who have been the victims of our rapacity. Me no Christian, is, in the mind of an African, a severer reproach to us than any other that language can express. And, at this day, there is an anniversary held in the island of Japan for the purpose of trampling on the cross, which the Jesuits of former days have made an object of universal abhorrence.]

Happy should we be, if this reproof were to be confined to merely nominal Christians!
[Amongst religious professors, who have the Gospel fully and faithfully administered to them, there are many whose superior light and information serves only to puff them up with false confidence and vain conceit. They look down with affected pity on those whose views of divine truth are not so clear as their own; whilst yet, in respect of truth, and honour, and integrity, they are far inferior to the persons whom they despise. It is common for such persons to set up for teachers, whilst they themselves need to be taught some of the first and fundamental rules of Christian duty. That professors of religion are too indiscriminately, and too severely, judged, is certain: but it is no less certain, that there is too much reason for complaint given by many, who, under a cloak of religion, veil, or attempt to veil, the grossest hypocrisy. Deceit, and lying, and covetousness, and fraud, and petulance, and idleness, and many other evils, are not unfrequently found predominant features in persons professing godliness; insomuch that the very profession of piety is brought by them into general disrepute, till, by a long probation, a man shall have established his character for integrity and truth. The dishonour they reflect on God, and the injury they do to the Gospel of Christ, which is evil spoken of through them, is more than words can express: but against such persons no remonstrance can be too pointed, no censure can be too severe.]
To view the remonstrance in its true light, we must further consider,

II.

The argument confirmed by it

The general argument is, to convince the Jews of sin: but more particularly it was the Apostles design to shew,

1.

The emptiness of a merely nominal religion

[The Jews valued themselves on their descent from Abraham, and on their external relation to God as his peculiar people. We in like manner value ourselves on being Christians and Protestants: and we, purely on this ground, entertain as little doubt of our salvation, as the Jews did of theirs. But St. Paul tells the Jews, that the uncircumcised Gentiles, who walked according to the light they enjoyed, would fare better in the eternal world than the disobedient Jews, notwithstanding all their boasted privileges [Note: ver. 27.]. And, no doubt, many heathens are in an incomparably better state than the great mass of the Christians, who in their life and conversation disgrace the truth which they profess. We must go further still, and say, that many, who have walked humbly and conscientiously before God, will, notwithstanding the comparative darkness of their views, rise up in judgment against those, who, with their clearer views, and more confident professions of faith in Christ, have walked unworthy of their heavenly calling. Yes; many that, according to human estimation, are last, shall be first; and many that in their own conceit are first, shall be last.]

2.

The criminality of an inconsistent profession

[A profession of love to God and his law only involves us in deeper guilt, if it be not accompanied with a suitable conversation. Much as God hates wickedness in general, there is nothing so odious in his sight as hypocrisy. Against none did our blessed Lord denounce such woes as against hypocrites; Woe unto you hypocrites! and to take our portion with the hypocrites is to have the severest lot of all in the eternal world. Think then, ye who call yourselves Christians, what a portion awaits you, if, whilst you name the name of Christ, you depart not from iniquity. Say not, that ye do not make any profession of religion; for your very calling of yourselves Christians, is a public avowal, that Christ is your Redeemer, and your Lord. What if ye were warned that you should be refused the rites of Christian burial? would you deem that no insult? Yet it is only on the presumption that you are Christians indeed, that your bodies are committed to the grave in faith and hope. You do then, and you cannot but, make a profession of faith in Christ, and of obedience to his revealed will: and, if you will not walk as becometh the Gospel of Christ, your circumcision shall become uncircumcision, your baptism no baptism, and your end terrible, in proportion to the advantages you have abused.
But to a still greater extent is this true respecting those, who, whilst they make their boast of the Gospel, dishonour God by their unholy lives, or unsanctified dispositions. To what purpose are their public professions, or social exercises? To what purpose are all their boasted experiences of alternate elevation and depression, of fear or confidence, of sorrow or of joy? They may profess as they will that they know God; but, if in their conduct they deny him, they deceive their own souls, and their religion is vain. Extremely awful is that declaration of God to the Church of Smyrna, I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan [Note: Rev 2:9.]. And it is to be feared, that such synagogues are yet to be found in our land, under the semblance of Christian Churches and religious societies. But whatever they may think of their professions, God accounts them blasphemy, and those who make them will be dealt with by him as hypocrites and blasphemers. We would not speak of this, but with weeping [Note: Php 3:18-19.]; nevertheless we must declare it, because it is the very truth of God [Note: Hos 8:2-3.].]

3.

The universal need of a Saviour

[All, both Jews and Gentiles, are under sin, and therefore need an interest in the Saviour. Yea, the best of men must perish, if they be not washed in the Redeemers blood. For who is there, that has not occasion to humble himself for his manifold infirmities? Who is there that has acted in all things up to his profession? Who could stand, if God should enter into judgment with him? Yea, if God should lay judgment to the line and righteousness to the plummet, who could answer him for any one act or thought of his whole life? Know then, that we are all in this respect on a level: we must all put our hand on our mouth, and our mouth in the dust, crying, Unclean, unclean; we must all desire with St. Paul to be found in Christ, not having our own righteousness, but the righteousness which is of God by faith in Christ.]

Exhortation

We call on all then, as they value their immortal souls,

1.

To embrace the Gospel

[Do not attempt to substitute any thing of your own in the place of it. Your privileges, your professions, your experiences, your attainments; you must consider them all but as loss and dung in comparison of Christ. Let it not appear a hard thing to renounce them all in point of dependence; but submit willingly and thankfully to the righteousness of God. It is strange that the acceptance of a free salvation should require any submission at all: but our proud hearts are averse to stoop to such an humiliating way of coming unto God. But be content to have nothing in yourselves, and all in Christ: then shall you be glorified in him, and he in you, to all eternity.]

2.

To adorn the Gospel

[It is no small measure of holiness that becomes those who believe in Christ. They should endeavour to shine as lights in a dark world [Note: Php 2:15. Mat 7:13-16.]; to walk worthy of their high calling; yea, worthy also of him that hath called them to his kingdom and glory. They should seek to be holy as He is holy, and perfect as He is perfect. Doubtless those who preach to others should, like the shepherds of old, go before their flocks in every thing that is excellent and praiseworthy: they should be examples, not to the world only, but to believers also, in word, in conversation, in charity, in faith, in love, in purity [Note: 1Ti 4:12.]. They should be able to say to others, Whatsoever ye have seen and heard in me, do; and the God of peace shall be with you. Would to God that he who now is endeavouring to teach you, may himself learn, and exemplify, these lessons more than he has ever yet done! But the duty of holiness pertains equally to all. O be persuaded to press after the highest attainments in it, and so to make your light shine before men, that all who behold you may be constrained to glorify God in your behalf.]

Fuente: Charles Simeon’s Horae Homileticae (Old and New Testaments)

Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, (18) And knowest will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law; (19) And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, (20) An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law. (21) Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? (22) Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? (23) Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonorest thou God? (24) For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written. (25) For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. (26) Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? (27) And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfill the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? (28) For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: (29) But he a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter; whose praise not of men, but of God.

next proceeds to charge upon the Jews the total neglect of all the precepts enjoined them. And he doth it in a way of question, which, as it waits not for an answer, (because in fact it needed none, being self-evident, and unanswerable,) becomes a more decided method, than so many positive assertions. And the Apostle having fully shewn, that the Jews, while priding themselves upon their laws, were defective in the observance of everyone of them: while pretending to instruct the ignorant, were themselves wholly ignorant, and in the blindness of unregeneracy; while apparently approving the things that were more excellent, were acting in direct contradiction to them; he draws a conclusion, that in an instance so palpable, nothing could be more glaring, than that the stood on the same footing with the and both became alike guilty before God. Yea, closeth this part of his charge with intimating, that from the greater inattention which the observed to the law, as a rule of life, to what the unenlightened in many instances had followed, in the law of nature; the deficiency of the one, was less pardonable than the and the worse effects in the world in consequence took place. God (saith . Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, (18) And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law; (19) And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, (20) An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law. (21) Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? (22) Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? (23) Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonorest thou God? (24) For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written. (25) For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. (26) Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? (27) And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfill the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? (28) For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: (29) But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

The Apostle having thus, in a general way, very fully established the main point he had in view, in proving the impossibility of justification before God, either by the law of nature, or by the law given by Moses; now proceeds to make a particular address to the people, he all along had in contemplation, and calls upon the Jew, to form his own judgment. There is a very great beauty, both in the argument itself he makes use of, and in the manner of his using it; which cannot fail, under the Lord, to have a sensible effect on every mind taught of God.

The Apostle first grants everything that could be desired, in respect to the privileges and advantages of the Jews, above all nations of the earth. They had, as Paul elsewhere tells the Church, those great things done for them, which no people under heaven but themselves possessed. To them pertained the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants) and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises: Whose were the fathers, and of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came; who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen, Rom 9:4-5 . A nation so distinguished, so marked with divine favors, might well be expected to have been distinguished also in everything which should have marked a corresponding conduct. And ages before Paul, their great law-giver Moses, had both shewn them their advantages, and what should have followed. See Deu 4:5-9 . But their history, furnished a woeful account of the reverse of all right conduct. And, from that period to the days of Paul, nothing, more or less, but daring rebellion, uniformly filled in the pages of their national character. The Apostle briefly takes notice of their advantages as a people; and makes this the foundation of his appeal therefrom. Behold! (saith he,) thou art called a Jew, and resteth in the law, and makest thy boast of God. And the Apostle goeth on, to fall in with all of what the children of Abraham, after the flesh, boasted of, in order the more strikingly to prove his grand point, in their self-condemnation.

Paul next proceeds to charge upon the Jews the total neglect of all the precepts enjoined them. And he doth it in a way of question, which, as it waits not for an answer, (because in fact it needed none, being self-evident, and unanswerable,) becomes a more decided method, than so many positive assertions. And the Apostle having fully shewn, that the Jews, while priding themselves upon their laws, were defective in the observance of everyone of them: while pretending to instruct the ignorant, were themselves wholly ignorant, and in the blindness of unregeneracy; while apparently approving the things that were more excellent, were acting in direct contradiction to them; he draws a conclusion, that in an instance so palpable, nothing could be more glaring, than that the stood on the same footing with the and both became alike guilty before God. Yea, closeth this part of his charge with intimating, that from the greater inattention which the observed to the law, as a rule of life, to what the unenlightened in many instances had followed, in the law of nature; the deficiency of the one, was less pardonable than the and the worse effects in the world in consequence took place. God (saith).

next proceeds to charge upon the Jews the total neglect of all the precepts enjoined them. And he doth it in a way of question, which, as it waits not for an answer, (because in fact it needed none, being self-evident, and unanswerable,) becomes a more decided method, than so many positive assertions. And the Apostle having fully shewn, that the Jews, while priding themselves upon their laws, were defective in the observance of everyone of them: while pretending to instruct the ignorant, were themselves wholly ignorant, and in the blindness of unregeneracy; while apparently approving the things that were more excellent, were acting in direct contradiction to them; he draws a conclusion, that in an instance so palpable, nothing could be more glaring, than that the Jew stood on the same footing with the Gentile, and both became alike guilty before God. Yea, Paul closeth this part of his charge with intimating, that from the greater inattention which the Jew observed to the law, as a rule of life, to what the unenlightened Heathen in many instances had followed, in the law of nature; the deficiency of the one, was less pardonable than the other: and the worse effects in the world in consequence took place. For the name of God (saith Paul) is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, Isa 52:5 .

The third step the Apostle advances in, throws to the ground all that the Jew could lay hold of, in his vain pretensions to the divine favor, in shewing, that the rite of circumcision, in its highest extent, was simply nothing more than an outward sign of an inward effect. It consisted, not in anything carnal, but spiritual. Not in a mere mark in the flesh, but the impression of grace in the heart. In short, it pointed to Christ, being a seal of the covenant, and Christ himself the Covenant! And therefore, nothing could be argued in point of privileges, from circumcision; because in fact those privileges were all in Christ, to whom that rite referred. And consequently, a carnal Jew had not the smallest claim in the privileges of a spiritual Christian. Hence, from this plain and undeniable statement, the Apostle fairly, and fully concludes, that the Jew, no more than the Gentile, could find justification by the deeds of the law, before God. Reader! do not fail to remark, with what unanswerable force of argument the Apostle follows up the great and important doctrine, which he had entered upon, in the preceding Chapter; and to what a sure, however humiliating conclusion, he hath already advanced, when by such a clear train of evidences, the truth is fully seen; that the whole world, both Jew and Gentile, are manifestly proved guilty before God, Rom 3:19 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

XII

THE UNIVERSAL NECESSITY OF SALVATION (CONCLUDED)

Rom 2:17-4:25

I revert to Rom 2:6-9 , referring to judgment: “Who will render to every man according to his works: to them that by patience in well-doing seek glory and honor and incorruption, eternal life: but unto them that are factious, and obey not the truth, but obey unrighteousness, shall be wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish upon every soul of man that worketh evil.” That discussion of the judgment is the judgment of law without gospel consideration. Otherwise it contradicts the whole plan of salvation set forth in the letter, for it makes patient continuance in well-doing the basis of salvation.

Another point in Rom 2 is that under the law, being a Jew outwardly could not save a man. The real Jew is one inwardly and has circumcision of the heart. He must be regenerated, and the publication of the grace plan all along ran side by side with that law plan, even in the Old Testament.

God never had but one plan of salvation from the beginning.

That leads to this question, If, being naturally a Jew and circumcised according to the Jewish law, and keeping externally the ritual law did not save him, as Rom 3 opens what advantage then hath the Jew? The answer to that is that to the Jews were committed the oracles of God, and they had a better chance of getting acquainted with the true plan of salvation. Then what if some of these Jews were without faith? That does not destroy that advantage; they had the privilege and some availed themselves of it. Does that not make the grace of God of none effect? In other words, if God is glorified by the condemnation of unbelievers, how then shall the man be held responsible? His answer is, “God forbid,” for if that were true how could God judge the world? That supposition destroys the character of God in his judgment capacity. If God were the author of sin and constrained men by an extraneous power to sin, he could not be a judge. All who hold the Calvinistic interpretation of grace must give fair weight to that statement. Whenever God does judge a man, his judgment will be absolutely fair.

Once when a party of preachers were discussing election and predestination I asked the question, “Do you believe in election and predestination?” The answer was, “Yes.” “Are you ever hindered by what you believe about election in preaching a universal gospel? If you have any embarrassment there it shows that you have in some way a wrong view of the doctrine of election and predestination.” A young preacher of my county went to the wall on that thing. It made him practically quit preaching, because he said that he had no gospel except for the sheep. I showed him how, in emphasizing one truth according to his construction of that truth, he was emphatically denying another truth of God. That brings up another question: If the loss of the sinner accrues to the glory of God, why should he be judged as a sinner? A supposition is made. Under that view would it not be well to say, “Let us do evil that good may come?” There were some slanderous reports that such was Paul’s teaching. He utterly disavows such teaching or that any fair construction of what he preached tended that way.

We come now to his conclusion of the necessity of the gospel plan of salvation. He bases it upon the fact that under the law of nature, providence, and conscience, under the law of Sinai, under any form of law, the whole world is guilty. There is none righteous, no, not one; There is none that understandeth. There is none that seeketh after God; They have all turned aside, they are together become unprofitable.

So apart from the gospel plan of salvation there is universal condemnation.

We come to his next conclusion (Rom 3:13-18 ) that man’s depravity is total. Total refers to all the parts, and not to degrees. He enumerates the parts to show the totality. That doesn’t mean that every man is as wicked in degree as he can be, but that every part is so depraved that without the gospel plan of salvation he cannot be saved: Their throat is an open sepulchre; With their tongues they have used deceit; The poison of asps is under their lips; Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness; Their feet are swift to shed blood; Destruction and misery are in their ways; And the way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before their eyes.

With mankind universally guilty, and every member totally depraved, we get another conclusion that whatever things the law says, it says to those under the law. No matter whether the law of conscience, the law of nature, or the moral law of Moses, those under the law must be judged by the law. That being so, he sums up his conclusion thus: “By the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight.”

That brings us to consider the gospel plan of salvation (Rom 3:21-8:39 ) and covers six points justification, redemption, adoption, regeneration, sanctification, and glorification. For the present we will discuss that part called justification. He commences by stating that while there is no righteousness by the law, there is a righteousness apart from the law, and this way of salvation apart from the law is witnessed by the law itself and by the prophets, and that this righteousness is presented to both Jew and Gentile without any distinction, and that always has been the way from the beginning of the world to the present time. If God has seemed to discriminate in favor of the Jews, he looked toward the Gentiles through the Jews, and if he now seems partial to the Gentiles against the Jews, he is looking toward the restoration of the Jews. This righteousness is presented to all men on the same terms faith and this righteousness presented by faith is of grace. Man doesn’t merit it, either Jew or Gentile it is free.

It is the hardest thing in the world to convince a sinner that salvation comes from no merit of his, and that faith is simply the hand that receives. Throughout all the length of the great chain of salvation it is presented without discrimination of race, color, sex, or previous condition of servitude. We come now to the ground of it. That ground is redemption through Christ. To redeem means to buy back. It implies that the one was sold and lost. It must be a buying back, and it would not be of grace if we did the buying back. It is a redemption through Jesus Christ. He is the Redeemer the one who buys back. The meritorious ground consists in his expiation reaching us through his mediation. He stands between the sinner and God and touches both. The first part of his mediation is the payment of that purchase price. He could not, in paying the purchase price, stand for God unless God set him forth as a propitiation. He could not touch man unless he himself, in one sense, was a man, and voluntarily took the position. The effectiveness of the propitiation depends upon the faith of the one to receive Jesus. That covers all past sins. When we accept Jesus we are acquitted forever, never again coming into condemnation. I said that that “covers past sins.” We must understand this. Christ’s death avails meritoriously once for all for all the sins of a man, past, present, and future. But in the methods of grace there is a difference in application between sins before justification and sins after justification. The ground is one, before and after. But the Holy Spirit applies differently. When we accept Jesus by faith as he is offered in the gospel, we at once and forever enter into justification, redemption of soul, and adoption into God’s family, and are regenerated. We are no longer aliens and enemies, but children and friends of God. God’s grace therefore deals with us as children. Our sins thereafter are the sins of children. We reach forgiveness of them through the intercessions of our High Priest and the pleadings of our Advocate. (See Heb 9:25-26 ; Heb 7:25 ; 1Jn 2:1 .) We may be conscious of complete peace when justified (Rom 5:1 ), but our consciences condemn us for sins after justification, and peace comes for these offenses through confession, through faith, through intercession, through the application of the same cleansing blood by the Holy Spirit. So in us regeneration is once for all) but this good work commenced in us is continued through sanctification with its continual application of the merits of Christ’s death. Therefore our theme says, “From faith to faith.” Not only justified by faith, but living by faith after justification through every step of sanctification. We don’t introduce any new meritorious ground. That is sufficient for all, but it is applied differently. Justification takes place in heaven. It is God that justifies. The ground of the justification is the expiation of Christ. The means by which we receive the justification is the Holy Spirit’s part of regeneration which is called cleansing. Regeneration consists of two elements, at least cleansing and renewing. But the very moment that one believes in Christ the Holy Spirit applies the blood of Christ to his heart and he is cleansed from the defilement of sin. At the same time the Holy Spirit does another thing. He renews the mind. He changes that carnal mind which is enmity toward God. Few preachers ever explain thoroughly that passage in Ezekiel: “Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you and you shall be clean. I will take away your stony heart and give you a heart of flesh.” There is the cleansing and the renewing. Jesus says, “Born of water and Spirit.” There are no articles in the Greek. It is one birth. In Titus we find the same idea: He saved us “by the washing of regeneration,” the first idea’ and “the renewing of the Holy Spirit,” the second idea.

This method of justification enables God to remain just in justifying a guilty man. If we could not find a plan by which God’s justice would remain, then we could find no plan of justification. How do we understand that to be done upon this principle of substitution? J. M. Pendleton in his discussion of this subject based upon a passage in the letter to .Philemon, explains it. Paul says, “If thou hast aught against Onesimus, put it on my account.” Now Philemon can be just in the remission of the debt of Onesimus, because he has provided for the payment of that debt through Paul; so Christ promised to come and pay our debt and the payment is reckoned to the man that accepts Christ, thus showing how remission of sins in the case of Old Testament saints precedes the actual payment, or expiation, by Christ. God charged Abraham’s debts to Christ, and Christ promised to pay them when he should come into the world. Abraham was acquitted right then. So far as God was concerned, the debt was not expiated until Christ actually came and died. In our case, expiation precedes the faith in it. He expiated my sins on the cross before I was born. There came a time when the plan of salvation by that expiation was presented to me, and I received it, and then remission took place.

This plan of salvation by faith not only justifies God, but absolutely excludes any boasting upon the part of the man. If the man had paid the debt himself he could claim to be the cause of this justification. But since he did not contribute one iota to the payment of the debt, there is no possible ground for him to boast. This plan brings out God’s impartial relation both to Jew and Gentile, since both are admitted upon equal terms.

We come to an objection that has been raised. If God acquits the man without his having paid the penalty of the law, does not that make the law void? His answer is an emphatic denial. It not only does not make the law void, but it establishes the law. How? The law is honored in that the Substitute obeys it and dies in suffering its penalties. Further by the fact that this plan takes this man saved by grace and gives him, through regeneration, a mind to obey the law, though it may be done imperfectly, and then through sanctification enables him to obey the law perfectly. It fulfils all of its penal sanctions through the one who redeems and through the Holy Spirit’s work in the one that is redeemed. When I get to heaven I will be a perfect keeper of the law in mind and in act. We can easily see the distinction between a mere pardon of human courts, which is really contrary to law, and a pardon which magnifies and makes the law honorable. It was on this line that I once preached a sermon on the relation of faith to morals, showing that the only way on earth to practice morality is through the gospel of Christ. So we see that God can be just and the justifier of the ungodly.

Salvation that comes up to the point of justification will, ”through the same plan, be continued on to the judgment day. In his argument to prove that God’s plan of salvation has always been the same) Paul illustrates it by the two most striking Old Testament cases that would appeal to the Jewish mind, one of which is the case of Abraham’s conversion which is recorded in Gen 15 . Up to that time Abraham was not a saved man, though he was a called man and had some general belief in God. At that time he was justified, and he was justified by faith, and righteousness was imputed to him; it was not his own. That was before he was circumcised, and it deprived him of all merit, and made him the father of all who could come after him in the spiritual line. He proves this by the promise to Abraham and his seed, and shows that that seed refers, not to his carnal descendants, but to the spiritual descendant, Jesus Christ. Then he goes on to show that as Isaac, through whom the descent flowed, was born, not in a natural manner, but after a supernatural manner, so we are born after a supernatural manner. He then takes up the further idea that that was the only way in the world to make the promises sure to all the seed.

Take the thief on the cross. He had no time to get down and reform his life. He was a dying sinner, and some plan of salvation must be devised which would be as quick as lightning in its operation. Suppose a man is on a plank in the deep and about to be washed away into the watery depths. He cannot go back and correct the evils that he has done and justify himself by restitution. If salvation is to be sure to him, it must work in a minute. That is a great characteristic of it. David was their favorite king. His songs constituted their ritual in the Temple of worship. He testifies precisely the same thing: “Blessed is the man whose sin is covered,” that is, through propitiation. Blessed is the man to whom God imputeth no transgression. He takes these two witnesses and establishes his case. He shows that the results of justification are present peace, joy, and glory, thus commencing, “Being therefore justified by faith, let us have peace with God.”

QUESTIONS

1. What Judgment is referred to in Rom 2:6 , and what the proof?

2. Who was the real Jew?

3. What advantage had the Jew?

4. Did all Jews avail themselves of this advantage?

5. Does that not make the grace of God of none effect, and why?

6. Does the doctrine of election hinder the preaching of a universal gospel, and why?

7. If the loss of the sinner accrues to the glory of God, why should he be judged as a sinner?

8. What is Paul’s conclusion as to the necessity of the gospel plan of salvation, and upon what does he base it?

9. What Paul’s conclusion as to man’s depravity, what is the meaning of total depravity, and how is it set forth in this passage?

10. What his conclusion as to the law?

11. What then his summary of the whole matter?

12. What is the theme of Rom 3:21-8:39 , and what six phases of the subject are thus treated?

13. Is there a righteousness by the law, what the relation of the law to righteousness, and to whom is this righteousness offered?

14. How do you explain God’s partiality toward the Jews first and then toward the Gentiles?

15. What are the terms of this righteousness, and what its source?

16. What is this phase of salvation called, and what is the ground of it?

17. What is redemption, and what does it imply?

18. What is the meritorious ground of our justification, and upon what does the effectiveness of it depend?

19. What is the difference in the application to sins before justification and to sins after justification?

20. What is justification, where does it take place, what accompanies it in the sinner, how, what its elements and how illustrated in both the Old and the New Testaments?

21. How does this method of justification by faith enable God to remain just and at the same time justify a guilty man?

22. What is J. M. Pendleton’s illustration of this principle?

23. What bearing hag this on the case of Old Testament saints?

24. How does this plan of salvation exclude boasting?

25. What objection is raised to this method of justification, and what the answer to it?

26. How is the law honored in this method of justification?

27. What is the distinction between a mere pardon of human courts and this method of pardon?

28. How does Paul prove that the plan of salvation has always been the same?

29. How does Paul show that that was the only way to make the promises sure to all the seed?

30. What is the testimony of David on this point, and what its special force in this case?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

17 Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,

Ver. 17. Restest in the law ] So spending thy time in a still dream, but thou shalt have sick waking, then when God shall send out summons for such sleepers. Men dream their Midianitish dreams, and tell them for law or gospel to their neighbours, Jdg 7:13 .

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

17 24. ] The pride of the Jews in their law and their God contrasted with their disobedience to God and the law .

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

17. ] This has been in the later MSS. changed into , apparently to avoid the anacoluthon, or perhaps merely by mistake originally. The anacoluthon, however, is more apparent than real. It is only produced by the resumption of the thread of the sentence with , Rom 2:21 . Omit (in the sense) only that word, and all proceeds regularly ‘ But if thou art denominated a Jew, and &c., thou that teachest thy neighbour, dost thou not teach thyself?’ &c. The carries on the apostrophe from Rom 2:5 , since when it has been broken off by reference to the great day of retribution and its rule of judgment; the identifies the person addressed here as the same indicated by the and there, and by in Rom 2:1 . Thus the Apostle by degrees sets in his place as a Jew the somewhat indefinite object of his remonstrances hitherto, and reasons with him as such.

. ] No stress on -, art named , ‘denominated,’ ‘hast the name put on thee;’ see reff.

. ] Used of false trust , see reff.

The of the rec. has been inserted in the later MSS. before , because it here clearly applied to the ‘law of Moses,’ and the absence of the article gave offence. It is omitted, because ‘the law’ is not here distributed it is not the law itself in its entirety , which is meant, but the fact of having or of knowing the law : the strict way of expressing it would perhaps be, ‘in the fact of possessing a law,’ which condensed into our less accurate English, would be in one word, in the law : viz. ‘which thou possessest.’

. . ] viz. ‘as thy Covenant God :’ ‘as being peculiarly thine.’

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Rom 2:17 . : bearest the name of “Jew”. The in the compound verb does not denote addition, but direction: is not conceived as a surname, but a name which has been imposed. Of course it is implied in the context that the name is an honourable one. It is not found in the LXX, and in other places where Paul wishes to indicate the same distinction, and the same pride in it, he says (Rom 9:4 , 2Co 11:22 ). The terms must have had a tendency to coalesce in import, though is national, and religious; for the religion was national. : grammatically is law; really, it is the Mosaic law. The Jew said, We have a law, and the mere possession of it gave him confidence. Cf. Mic 3:11 , . : boastest in God, as the covenant God of the Jews, who are His peculiar people. = : the longer form is the usual one in the .

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Rom 2:17-24

17But if you bear the name “Jew” and rely upon the Law and boast in God, 18and know His will and approve the things that are essential, being instructed out of the Law, 19and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, 20a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of the immature, having in the Law the embodiment of knowledge and of the truth, 21you, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that one shall not steal, do you steal? 22You who say that one should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23You who boast in the Law, through your breaking the Law, do you dishonor God? 24For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,” just as it is written.

Rom 2:17 “if” This is a first class conditional sentence which is assumed to be true from the author’s point of view or for his literary purposes. This condition extends to Rom 2:20 but has no conclusion, therefore, TEV translates them as assumed affirmations which Jesus would make. The Jews were trusting in their lineage, traditions, and performance to provide salvation (cf. Mat 3:9; Joh 8:33; Joh 8:37; Joh 8:39).

“boast in God” Many Jews were relying on (1) their racial lineage to Abraham and (2) their personal performance of the Mosaic Law as the means of being accepted by God. However, their self-righteous legalism separated them from God (cf. Mat 5:20; Galatians 3). What tragic irony!

Paul develops the idea of boasting in 1 Corinthians. Paul faced an arrogant Israel and an arrogant Greek intellectualism. The bottom line is no flesh will glory before God.

SPECIAL TOPIC: BOASTING

Rom 2:18 “approve” This is the Greek verb dokimaz in its present active indicative form. See Special Topic on Testing following.

SPECIAL TOPIC: GREEK TERMS FOR TESTING AND THEIR CONNOTATIONS

“the Law” Rom 2:17 ff. deal with the Jewish people, therefore, the term “the Law” must refer in this context to the Mosaic Law. This is confirmed by Rom 2:25 which deals with circumcision.

Rom 2:18-20 The Jewish leaders believed their way (their sect of Judaism) was the right way, the only way to God. They were confident that they were the true teachers about religious matters (cf. Mat 15:14). Privilege brings responsibility (cf. Luk 12:48).

Notice the parallel phrases related to their confidence (cf. Mat 15:14; Mat 23:16; Mat 23:24; Luk 6:39).

1. a guide to the blind, Rom 2:19

2. a light to those in darkness, Rom 2:19

3. a corrector of the foolish, Rom 2:20

4. a teacher of the immature, Rom 2:20

5. having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and of the truth, Rom 2:20

Rom 2:21-24 If one trusts in personal obedience, then that obedience must be complete (cf. Mat 5:20; Mat 5:48; Gal 3:10, which is a quote from Deu 27:26, and Jas 2:10). This is an impossibility for fallen mankind. Paul asks poses rhetorical questions to his Jewish readers/hearers in Rom 2:21-23.

Rom 2:22 It is difficult to know to what Paul was referring in Rom 2:22-23. Since the description does not fit most Jews of Paul’s day it is possible that these sins are used in a spiritual sense similar to how Jesus interpreted the Law in Mat 5:20-48. George Ladd in A Theology of the New Testament, says “Paul must be referring to robbing God of the honor due him, spiritual adultery, and profaning the devotion due God alone by exalting themselves as judge and lord over their fellow creatures.” p. 505.

Rom 2:22 “abhor idols” The turning away from something because of stench is the root meaning of this term.

“do you rob temples” It is uncertain historically to what this referred but it was somehow related to idolatry.

Rom 2:23 “boast” See SPECIAL TOPIC: BOASTING at Rom 2:17.

Rom 2:24 This is a quote from Isa 52:5 in the Septuagint. God’s blessing of Israel for covenant keeping (cf. Deuteronomy 27-28) was meant to be a witness to the world. However, Israel never kept the covenant, therefore, the world saw only the judgment of God (cf. Eze 36:22-32). Israel was to be a kingdom of priests (cf. Exo 19:5-6), to bring all the world to faith in YHWH (cf. Gen 12:3; Eph 2:11 to Eph 3:13). See Special Topic: YHWH’s ETERNAL REDEMPTIVE PLAN at Rom 1:5.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

Behold. Greek. ide. The texts read “But if”.

restest in = restest upon. Greek. epanapauomai. Only here and Luk 10:6.

the. The texts omit.

makest, &c. = gloriest, as Rom 5:3, and 1Co 1:29, 1Co 1:31. Greek. kauchaomai. Only in Paul’s Epistles (thirty-six times) and in Jam 1:9; Jam 4:16.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

17-24.] The pride of the Jews in their law and their God contrasted with their disobedience to God and the law.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Rom 2:17. , but if) If-comp. when, Rom 2:14-has some resemblance to an Anaphora,[30] with the exception that , when, having reference to the Gentiles, asserts more; , if, used with respect to the Jews, concedes less. After if, , therefore [Rom 2:21], follows, like , but, (ch. Rom 6:5)[31] and , truly Act 11:17.[32]-Comp. Mat 25:27. Moreover, the , therefore, in a subsequent verse (Rom 2:21), brings to a conclusion the somewhat long protasis, which begins with , if.-, a Jew) This, the highest point of Jewish boasting (a farther description of it being interposed at Rom 2:17-20, and its refutation being added, Rom 2:21-24), is itself refuted at the 25th and following verses. Moreover, the description of his boasting consists of twice five clauses, of which the first five, from thou restest (Rom 2:17), to, out of the law (Rom 2:18), show what the Jew assumes to himself; the rest, as many in number as the former, thou art confident (Rom 2:19), to, in the law (Rom 2:20), show, what more the Jew, from this circumstance, arrogates to himself, in reference to others. On both sides [in both series], the first clause of one corresponds to the first of the other, the second to the second, and so on in succession; and as the fifth clause in the former series, instructed, Rom 2:18, so the fifth in the latter, having, Rom 2:20 [the form of knowledge] denotes a cause: because thou art instructed, [answering to] because thou hast.-) in the middle voice: thou callest thyself by this name, and delightest to be so called.-) thou restest in that, which threatens to put thee in a strait; thou hast in the law a schoolmaster, instead of a father [as you fancy the law to be].- , in the law) Paul purposely [knowingly] makes frequent use of this name.- , in God), as though He were One, who is peculiarly thy God.

[30] See Appendix.

[31] ABC read there. Gfg Vulg. read , simul.

[32] EGe Rec. Text, Theb. Vers. read , who truly was I, etc. ABCd Vulg. omit .-ED.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Rom 2:17

Rom 2:17

But if thou bearest the name of a Jew,-He describes in this and the following verses the self-confident and boastful condition of the Jews. They were now the representatives of the stock of Abraham. All the families of Jacob had been swallowed up in that of Judah. [In their estimation the name Jew carried with it a high and peculiar distinction. Paul, being himself a Jew, knew well the sense in which the Jew used it, and could, therefore, speak advisedly. It was the national name in which the greatest pride was felt, and the verbal badge which marked them better than others. How much they presumed upon this name we learn from Gal 2:15; Php 3:5; Rev 2:9.]

and restest upon the law,-They were content to rest upon the mere fact that they had the law. [A description of their condition is strikingly given in the following: The heads thereof judge for reward, and the priests thereof teach for hire, and the prophets thereof divine for money: yet they lean upon Jehovah, and say, Is not Jehovah in the midst of us? no evil shall come upon us. (Mic 3:11). The law to which reference was made is that given by Moses. In their estimation, its bare bestowment on them proved them to be the favored of God above all others. Confident of this favor, they had no fear. But the law was not a thing to be simply had; it was a thing to be obeyed. In this lay their safety.]

and gloriest in God,-They boasted that they were the favored of God after the flesh, as if he were their guardian. [To boast in God or in Christ is right (Gal 6:14), if it proceeds from a sense of weakness and unworthiness, and a corresponding sense of the goodness of God as our sure refuge and strength; but where the boast is only a boast arising from bigotry and conceit, it is a sham on which God frowns.]

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

thou art: Rom 2:28, Rom 2:29, Rom 9:4-7, Psa 135:4, Isa 48:1, Isa 48:2, Mat 3:9, Mat 8:11, Mat 8:12, Joh 8:33, 2Co 11:22, Gal 2:15, Eph 2:11, Phi 3:3-7, Rev 2:9, Rev 3:1, Rev 3:9

restest: Rom 2:23, Rom 9:4, Rom 9:32, Jer 7:4-10, Zep 3:11, Luk 10:28, Joh 5:45, Joh 7:19, Joh 9:28, Joh 9:29

makest: Isa 45:25, Isa 48:2, Mic 3:11, Joh 8:41

Reciprocal: Ezr 9:1 – doing according Job 24:13 – rebel Psa 19:8 – enlightening Psa 44:8 – In God Psa 50:16 – What Psa 76:1 – In Judah Isa 42:19 – Who is blind Isa 65:5 – Stand Jer 2:8 – and they that Jer 7:9 – steal Jer 8:8 – We Mat 6:23 – If Mat 21:30 – I go Joh 8:54 – ye say Rom 1:30 – boasters Rom 3:27 – Where Rom 5:11 – but we Rom 7:1 – them that Gal 6:13 – keep Jam 3:14 – glory Jam 4:17 – General Rev 3:17 – knowest

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

:17

Rom 2:17. This and the following three verses set forth the claims (which were true) of the Jew. He could boast (glory) because God had given the law to his nation.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Rom 2:17. But if. The addition of a single letter in the Greek gives this sense, which is without doubt the correct one. The construction is modified by the change; Rom 2:17-20 form the conditional part of the sentence, and Rom 2:21-24 the conclusion (apodosis) in the form of successive questions (but see on Rom 2:23). If is, of course, rhetorical; there could be no doubt as to the position and feelings of the Jew.

Thou. Emphatic, as the original indicates.

Bearest the name of. Art called, is incorrect, art named is not so exact as the full paraphrase we give.

A Jew. The name of Judah had a religious sense, and the title Jew was regarded as highly honorable. The title Christian may also become a mere title.

Bestest upon the law. The article is omitted, but the Mosaic law is, of course, meant

Boastest in God. The verb may be rendered boast or, glory. The former word suggests a false glorying, arising from bigotry and conceit, and this is the sense here; but glory would preserve the correspondence with the passage where the word retains its good sense.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Section 2. (Rom 2:17-29; Rom 3:1-20.)

Accusation of the Jew by the law in which he confides.

The apostle turns now, therefore, to the Jew, to show that he too comes under the universal sentence. The one who has sinned without law perishes without law; the one who has sinned under law is judged by the law: will the law then be favorable to him? will he be able to stand while the other is condemned? Here the apostle shows, what the Lord had before declared to them, that the very one who accused the Jews was that Moses in whom they trusted. They knew Cod’s will indeed, only the more defiantly to set it aside: for as the people of God His Name was blasphemed among the Gentiles through their misconduct. In comparison with them, circumcision and uncircumcision must often be accounted the reverse, if the heart were what God valued. After guarding which from the abuse that might be made of such an assertion, Paul goes on to produce the very sentence against them of the law they claimed as theirs; which proved indeed the whole world under sin. Moreover, this was not the failure of the law, but its entire success in what it came to do: for by the law was to be the recognition of sin.

1. The Jew with his knowledge of the will of God did no better than the moralist among the Gentiles. Very far from being outwardly a rebel, he yet completely misunderstood his own condition, and therefore the character of that law on which he “rested,” -where no true rest was possible. So too in God he gloried, as One who had made the Jew the depositary of all the light and knowledge in the world. God and His law were owned by him, but not in subjection of heart to render Him the obedience due, but as contributing to the loftiness of his position in comparison with all other men. The Gentiles were but for him the blind, walking in darkness, foolish as undeveloped babes. The Jew was the full treasury of all that the Gentile lacked. In fact, he had the form of knowledge and of the truth as the law gave it; but the breath of life was absent from the form: in morals he contradicted his own teaching, glorying in law and transgressing it, so that the light he held but the more clearly showed his misdeeds, and dishonored the name of his God among the Gentiles, as He Himself by His prophets had declared (Isa 52:5).

2. What was the necessary result in His estimate who could not be content with the mere outside of things, but looks upon the heart? Was circumcision of no use because of the dishonor put upon it? No, but that could not be counted such which was united with the transgression of that which it pledged one to keep. And the uncircumcised person keeping the commandments of the law would before Him be counted as circumcised. Israel, in fact, never contained all the sheep of the Lord’s flock, as we know; and the apostle will presently remind us that Abraham himself was an example of the faith that might be in one uncircumcised. How indeed would the obedience of the uncircumcised condemn the man who, having both the letter of the law and circumcision also, yet violated the law! Plainly then, one must place what is internal and spiritual before what is external in the flesh. The true circumcision is spiritual and of the heart, and constitutes the true Jew, whose “praise”* is found with Him who sees the heart.

{*”Judah” means “praise”; and this is, no doubt, an allusion to it.}

3. All this to us seems simplicity itself; but it was not so simple to those whom it seemed to strip of all their special, divinely-bestowed privileges. The apostle therefore here notes the objections that might be raised to it -objections which purported to be founded on God’s own character: for if there were indeed, as this appeared to say, no superiority in the position of the Jew, what then did all that He had done for them amount to? for why had God separated him from the nations, and guarded this separation in so many ways? The apostle asks therefore the question on his own part, What is the superiority of the Jew? and what is the advantage of circumcision? Truly a strange question, which would argue how little, save material for self-importance, the questioner had found in it. But Paul answers with his whole soul that there was “much everyway”; but he mentions emphatically one chief advantage that the Jews had, and that was a trust committed to them, and not for their own sake only, -“the oracles of God,” His own words uttered by a human mouth-piece. The mass of men had wandered off into those various forms of idolatry which were continually tempting Israel also, and from which nothing but divine power and goodness preserved them too. Thus the divine Word, if it were to be preserved for the blessing of men, must be kept apart from these destructive influences, there whence its virtue might flow out around, and yet it might be secured from the prevalent corruption. Israel was in the place where these oracles were heard: how could any one ask, Where was the profit?

Faith, alas, did not prevail among the professing people of God: it was a matter of public history that it did not. But what then? Would that make of no effect the faith that was found? Would God be untrue to those who counted on Him, because of the lack of faith in others? Such questions scarcely merit answer. No; “let God be true, if every man were to be accounted false;” for so David wrote of his own sin, that God was only justified by it in His words, and man, so prone to judge Him, would be overcome by Him in judgment. In fact God permits sin to appear in this way to bring men low, and make them own His righteousness in whatsoever He may bring upon them.

But this only starts another question: if our unrighteousness so commends the righteousness of God, does this then make Him unable to execute judgment for that which has glorified Him? Nay, surely; for if that were so, since He makes all sins to glorify Him, restraining that which will not, no judgment could be executed on the world at all. Nay, if this were so, the principle would be just, of which Christians through their magnifying of grace were slanderously accused, that they might then do evil, so that good might come; but the just judgment of God would be in fact on those who could adopt so terrible a lie as truth. It is merely noticed here to show the folly and wickedness of what would involve such a consequence as this.

4. The apostle returns to the comparison of the Jew with the Gentile: could the Jew boast of any moral superiority to the Gentile? No, for the charge against both alike was that all were under sin. For this their own Scriptures, written under a dispensation of law, and addressed to those under it, were in unmistakable evidence. In them what the law could not do was seen; and the passages quoted give a survey, as wide as minute, of the facts of the case. The first passage, from the fourteenth psalm is connected with the statement that “the Lord looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand and seek God.” The result is what the apostle quotes: “They are all gone aside; they are together become unprofitable: there is none that doeth good.” The previous words plainly are an adaptation from those which speak of the search itself, changed to a declaration of the result; “there is none righteous” being again an equivalent for “there is none that doeth good,” which is repeated later. In other quotations the apostle gives the detail of a corruption manifesting itself in every point. Throat, lips, mouth, feet, are all the instruments of various wickedness. In the whole path are ruin and misery; -nowhere peace: before their eyes there is no fear of God. What a picture of man in nature and practice! Of course it is not meant that in every one of the children of men there is an exact similarity; or that they will necessarily be all found in any one: and God has many ways of restraint, so that what is in any of us should not all come out; but this is the race to which we belong, and any of these marks are sufficient to make plain our lineage. It is not of the Jew simply that such passages speak; it is among the children of men that the Lord is looking and making investigation, and one cannot plead that he is no child of man. The law which he has got has no plea to make in his favor, but the very contrary. It is to the people under law that all this is said; and in the Psalms and the Prophets the voice of the law is still heard, and what things so-ever the law saith it saith to them that are under the law: for this very purpose also, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be guilty before God. If the Jew, after all that God has done for him, can yet plead no righteousness that will avail before the Judge of men, then all the world is surely guilty.

A poor end, you may say, to all this long education upon God’s part, -all this painstaking discipline, -all these interventions and miracles! Yes, as the apostle says elsewhere, it is all a ministration of death and of condemnation (2Co 3:7; 2Co 3:9). But poor as the result may seem, it is to issue in that which will display the riches of God’s grace to all eternity. The truth as to man’s condition must come out, and he must be made to realize and accept it. Guilty and with his mouth stopped before Him, he will then find what God can be for him in so desperate an extremity. The law has not failed in its purpose when it has brought him to this: that “by works of law shall no flesh be justified before Him: for by law is the recognition of sin.”

Alas, in all this, man is completely at issue with God. All natural religion so called is the attempt in some way, with various modifications, to make good one’s righteousness in whole or in part, before Him. Justification by works, by moralities or by ritual observances, is all that the mind of man is able to conceive as of efficacy to accomplish a salvation which God has wrought out and offers freely to him. This struggle on man’s part, ignorant of the righteousness of God, to establish his own righteousness is the history of the 4000 years preceding Christ’s coming, and the secret of the long delay. With the recognition of sin as the law is competent to declare it to him, the struggle is over, the old covenant has done its work, and we are ready for the gospel of “the glory of God, which is in the face of Jesus Christ,” and not of Moses (2Co 4:6).

Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary

Here the apostle proceeds in his former argument; namely, to prove, That the Jews could no more rationally expect to be justified before God by the law of Moses, than the Gentiles by the law of nature; the apostle allows them all their privileges which they so much donated upon, boasted of, and gloried in; but withal assures them, that these, all these, yea, more than these, were insufficient to justify them before God.

As if the apostle had said, “Thou bearest thyself mightily upon this, that thou art called a Jew; that is a professor of the true religion, and a worshipper of the true God: Thou restest in the law: that is, either in the divineness and perfection of it, or in thy external obedience to it, and in the outward performances of it: Thou makest thy boast of God, as a God in covenant with thee above all the nations of the earth; and thou knowest his will, having his word and law in thy hands, the oracles of God committed to thee, and the writings of Moses and the prophets alone found with thee: And approvest things that are most excellent, being instructed out of the law; that is, thou thinkest that thou hast such a degree of knowledge of God’s word and will, that thou canst clearly discern between sin and duty, and compare one duty with another, preferring that which is most excellent: And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them that are in darkness; that is, thou hast a strong conceit that such are the measures of thy knowledge, that thou art able to be a guide to the blind Gentiles, who sit in darkness, and to be a teacher of babes; that is, such as have little or no knowledge in the matters of religion, conceiting, That thou hast the form and knowledge of the truth in the law; that is, such a method and measure of divine knowledge, as may enable thee to instruct others, whether Gentiles or Jews, which never reached to thy attainments.” These external privileges the presumptuous Jew rested upon, and thought them sufficient to salvation, though he lived loosely, and his practice gave his profession the lie.

Hence learn, 1. That persons are exceeding prone to be proud of, and puffed up with, church-privileges, glorying in the letter of the law, whilst, neither in heart nor life, they are conformed to the spirituality of the law.

Learn, 2. That gifts, duties, and supposed graces, are the stay and staff which hypocrites rest upon, and repose their trust and confidence in: Thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law; that is, in the outward profession of the law, or in an external obedience to the law; the apostle speaks of this their resting in the law, not barely by way of narration, but by way of reproof, telling us not only what they did, but how ill they did in so doing.

The duties which Christ has appointed, are the trust and rest of the hypocrites; but Christ himself is the rest and trust of the upright; they desire to be ever acting graces, above duty; much in it in point of performance, much above it in regard of dependence.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Rom 2:17-20. Behold Here he applies the matter he had discussed in the preceding verses more closely to the Jews, and proves, that, notwithstanding all their pretences and privileges, they were transgressors of the law, and so could not be justified by works, any more than the Gentiles. And here therefore he refutes the highest point of Jewish glorying, after a further description of it, interposed Rom 2:17-20, and refuted Rom 2:21-24. The description consists of twice five articles; of which the former five, Rom 2:17-18, show what he boasts of in himself; the other five, (Rom 2:19-20,) what he glories in with respect to others. The first particular of the former five answers to the first of the latter; the second to the second, and so on. Thou art called a Jew A professor of the true religion, and a worshipper of the true God. Dr. Macknight is of opinion that in this and the following verses, the apostle intended to address chiefly the men of rank and learning among the Jews; a supposition to which he thinks it is no objection that probably there were no doctors of the law, nor Jewish scribes and priests at Rome, when this letter was written; because, as the apostle was reasoning against the whole body of the nation, his argument required that he should address the teachers of every denomination, to whom the things written in this and the following verses best agree. Besides, as he had addressed the heathen legislators, philosophers, and priests, in the first chapter, for the purpose of showing them the bad use they had made of the knowledge they derived from the works of creation, it was natural for him in this to address the Jewish scribes, priests, and doctors, to show them how little they had profited by the knowledge which they had derived from revelation. Of the Jewish common people the apostle speaks, Rom 3:20, &c., where he proves that they also were extremely vicious. And restest in the law Dependest on it alone, and on the having of it, for justification and salvation, though it can only condemn thee. And makest thy boast of God As thy God; as belonging only to you Jews, and being yours in a peculiar manner; the founder of your commonwealth; your lawgiver, protector, and Saviour. And knowest his will By special revelation, and more fully than the Gentiles. And approvest the things that are more excellent Hast attained to a considerable degree of understanding in the law, so as to place a proper value upon things according to their worth, and to distinguish between things lawful and unlawful. The original words, , may be rendered, and triest, or, approvest on trial, the things that differ. Being instructed, &c. Or, as Beza interprets , Being educated, or instructed from thy childhood, out of the law, 2Ti 3:15. And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind Vainly presumest that thou hast knowledge enough to teach others. The Jewish doctors, in contempt of the Gentiles, were wont to speak of them as blind in darkness ignorant babes and boasted of themselves as guides, to whose direction the Gentiles, in matters of religion, ought implicitly to submit. This boasting of the Jews the apostle introduced here, to show that their sins were greatly aggravated by the revelation of which they boasted. Who hast the form of knowledge A system, body, or model of that knowledge, which is scattered up and down in the law, and of the truths which are there delivered. For the original word, , seems to bear this meaning: and the apostle may be considered as comparing the law to a looking-glass, which exhibits exact images of things, as the Apostle James likewise does, Jas 1:25. This implies that they not only considered themselves as having a sketch, or the outlines, of the truth contained in the law, but the most accurate knowledge of it. And this they counted sufficient to save them, though they lived in a loose and ungodly manner.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

The second part of the chapter, Rom 2:17-29, contains the application of the principles laid down in the first. After expressing himself in a general and more or less abstract way, Paul addresses himself directly to the person whom he had in view from Rom 2:1, and finally designates him by name. Yet he still proceeds with the utmost caution; for he knows that he is giving a shock to inveterate prejudices, prejudices which he long shared himself. The way is slowly paved for the conclusion which he wishes to reach; hence the length of the following sentence, which contains as it were the preamble of the judgment to be pronounced.

Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)

But if thou bearest the name of a Jew, and restest upon the law, and gloriest in God,

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

17. The Jew in Pauls day stood precisely where all of the fallen churches do to-day. They were Gods normal people till they rejected Christ. So all the churches are right so long as they are true to the Holy Ghost, who is none other than the spiritual Christ on earth (Joh 14:16).

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

Rom 2:17-29. Now Paul accosts the Jew, reproving his pride of law, made void by disloyalty.

Rom 2:17-20. His pretensions (But if thou bearest the name of Jew, etc.), provoke the questions of Rom 2:21-24 : the commandments he inculcates on others, he so violates that God is dishonoured, and His name is blasphemed among the Gentiles. The blasphemy of Isa 52:5 was occasioned by the insolence of Gentile oppressors; this by the hypocrisy of Israel.

Rom 2:25-29. How worthless the outward possession of the Law, and the physical mark of circumcision, without the corresponding inner reality: law-keeping uncircumcision is virtually circumcision, and vice versa; heart-obedience, not external status, wins Gods praise. For Jew or Gentile, doing right, not lauding nor vaunting it, avails with God at the Judgment (Rom 2:1-16) and approves itself now (Rom 2:17-29).The words of Rom 2:22 b, Thou that loathest the idols, etc., probably allude to some recent notorious sacrilege. [Cf. the underlying insinuation in Act 19:37.A. J. G.].

Rom 2:12-16 and Rom 2:25-29 exhibit Paul emancipated from Jewish prejudice; he penetrates through conventional forms to the moral realities. The first part of his indictment, bearing upon flagrant sin, terminated at Rom 1:32; its second part, bearing upon sin disguised by moral professions, occupies ch. 2.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

Verse 17

The apostle having introduced, in a gentle and cautious manner, the principles which show the impossibility that there can be any saving efficacy in a mere ecclesiastical position, now proceeds to give these principles a more direct application to the ideas of the Jews.–Called a Jew; a designation considered by themselves as highly honorable. In modern times, very different associations have become connected with the name.–In the law; in the Mosaic law.–Boast of God; boast of the favor of God.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

2:17 {8} Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,

(8) He proves by the testimony of David, and the other prophets, that God bestows greatest benefits upon the Jews, in giving them also the law, but that they are the most unthankful and unkind of all men.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

2. The guilt of the Jews 2:17-29

Even though the Jews had the advantages of the Mosaic Law and circumcision, their arrogance and fruitlessness offset these advantages. Divinely revealed religion is no substitute for trust and obedience toward God. Rom 2:17-29 are similar to Rom 1:18-32. In Rom 2:17-29, Paul showed that Jews are guilty before God just as he formerly proved all humanity guilty. In both sections he pointed out that man knew the truth but rejected it and consequently became guilty of idolatry, sensuality, and immorality.

"In the previous section Paul addressed his Jewish readers in a relatively restrained manner. But here the mood changed. Once again he employed the diatribe style that he used in the opening verses of chap. 2. His tone became quite severe as he laid out before them the absolute necessity of bringing their conduct into line with their profession. From this point on to the end of the second major division (Rom 3:20), we hear Paul the preacher convincing his listeners of their need for a different kind of righteousness. Although in another letter he claimed that his preaching was not eloquent (1Co 2:1-5), it is hard to deny that here in Romans we are dealing with the dynamic rhetoric of an evangelist bent on persuasion." [Note: Mounce, pp. 97-98.]

"Paul here claims for the Jew nothing more than what the Jews of his day were claiming for themselves; every item on the list in Rom 2:17-20 is paralleled in Jewish literature of the time." [Note: Moo, p. 159.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Paul had been speaking of Jews, included in the larger category of "good people," in Rom 2:1-16, but now he identified them by name. The Jews were very self-righteous. Paul explained the basis of their boasting in these verses.

The name "Jew" contrasts with "Greek" and calls attention to nationality. [Note: Sanday and Headlam, p. 64.] The Jews gloried in being members of God’s chosen nation (cf. Exo 19:5-6). They relied on the Mosaic Law because God Himself had given it to Moses on Mt. Sinai. They boasted in their knowledge of God that they obtained through that covenant. They had a relatively precise understanding of what is more and less important to God (cf. Php 1:10). They looked down on non-Jews as those whom they guided even though, as Paul pointed out earlier, the Gentiles have some light and law themselves.

"The Jew believed that everyone was destined for judgment except himself. It would not be any special goodness which kept him immune from the wrath of God, but simply the fact that he was a Jew." [Note: Barclay, p. 35.]

In these verses Paul first referred to God’s gifts to the Jews (Rom 2:17) and then to the superior capabilities these gifts conferred on them (Rom 2:18). Finally he mentioned the role the Jews somewhat pretentiously gloried in playing. God had called them to enlighten the Gentiles with these gifts and capabilities (Rom 2:19-20). [Note: Godet, p. 127.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Chapter 7

JEWISH RESPONSIBILITY AND GUILT

Rom 2:17-29

“THE Jew, first, and also the Greek”; this has been the burthen of the Apostles thought thus far upon the whole. He has had the Jew for some while in his chief thought, but he has recurred again and again in passing to the Gentile. Now he faces the Pharisee explicitly and on open ground, before he passes from this long exposure of human sin to the revelation of the glorious Remedy.

But if you, you emphatically, the reader or hearer now in view, you who perhaps have excused yourself from considering your own case by this last mention of the responsibility of the non-Jewish world: if you bear the name of Jew, whether or no you possess the corresponding spiritual reality; and repose yourself upon the Law, as if the possession of that awful revelation of duty was your protection, not your sentence; and glory in God, as if He were your private property, the decoration of your national position, whereas the knowledge of Him is given you in trust for the world; and know the Will, His Will, the Will supreme; and put the touchstone to things which differ, like a casuist skilled in moral problems, schooled out of the Law, under continuous training (so the Greek present participle bids us explain) by principles and precepts which the Law supplies; – (if) you are sure that you, yourself, whoever else, are a leader of blind men, a light of those who are in the dark, an educator of the thoughtless, a teacher of beginners, possessing, in the Law, the outline, the system, of real knowledge and truth (the outline indeed, but not the power and life related to it):-if this is your estimate of your position and capacities, I turn it upon yourself. Think, and answer-You therefore, your neighbours teacher, do you not teach yourself? You, who proclaim, Thou shalt not steal, do you steal? You, who say, Thou shalt not commit adultery, do you commit it? You, who abominate the idols, affecting to loathe their, very neighbourhood, do you plunder temples, entering the polluted precints readily enough for purposes at least equally polluting? You who glory in the Law, as the palladium of your race, do you, by your violation of the Law, disgrace your God? “For the name of our God is, because of you, railed at among the heathen,” as it stands written, in Ezekiels message {Eze 36:20} to the ungodly Israel of the ancient Dispersion-a message true of the Dispersion of the later day.

We need not overstrain the emphasis of the Apostles stern invective. Not every non-Christian Jew of the first century, certainly, was an adulterer, a thief, a plunderer. When a few years later {Act 28:17} St. Paul gathered round him the Jews of Rome, and spent a long day in discussing the prophecies with them, he appealed to them with a noble frankness which in some sense evidently expected a response in kind. But it is certain that the Jews of the Roman Dispersion bore a poor general character for truth and honour. And anywise St. Paul knew well that there is a deeply natural connection between unhallowed religious bigotry and that innermost failure of self-control which leaves man only too open to the worst temptations. Whatever feeds gross personal pride promotes a swift and deadly decay of moral fibre. Did this man pride himself on Abrahams blood, and his own Rabbinic lore and skill, and scorn both the Gentile “sinner” and the am-haaretz, “the people of the land,” the rank and file of his own race? Then he was the very man to be led helpless by the Tempter. As a fact, there are maxims of the later Rabbinism, which represent beyond reasonable doubt the spirit if not the letter of the worst watchwords of “the circumcision” of St. Pauls time: “Circumcision is equivalent to all the commandments of the Law”; “To live in Palestine is equal to the Commandments”; “He that hath his abode in Palestine is sure of life eternal.” The man who could even for an hour entertain such a creed was ready (however deep below his consciousness the readiness lay) for anything-under fitting circumstances of temptation.

So it is now, very far beyond the limits of the Jewish Dispersion of our time. Now as then, and for the Christian “outwardly” as for the Jew “outwardly,” there is no surer path to spiritual degeneracy than spiritual pride. What are the watchwords which have succeeded to those of the Rabbinists who encountered St. Paul? Are they words, or thoughts, of self-applause because of the historic orthodoxy of your creed? Because of the Scriptural purity of your theory of salvation? Because of the illustrious annals of your national Church, older than the nation which it has so largely welded and developed? Because of the patient courage, under contempt and exclusion, of the community which some call your denomination, your sect, but which is to you indeed your Church? Because of your loyalty to order? Because of your loyalty to liberty? Take heed! The best, corrupted, becomes inevitably the worst. In religion, there is only one altogether safe “glorying.” It is-when the man can say from the soul, with open eyes, and therefore with a deeply humbled heart, “God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, whereby the world is crucified unto me and I unto the world”. {Gal 6:14} All other “glorying is not good.” Be thankful for every genuine privilege. But for Christs sake, and for your own souls sake, do not, even in the inmost secret of your soul, “value yourself” upon them. It is disease, it is disaster, to do so.

And shall not we of the Christian Dispersion take home also what Ezekiel and St. Paul say about the blasphemies, the miserable railings at our God, caused by the sins of those who bear His Name? Who does not know that, in every region of heathendom, the missionarys plea for Christ is always best listened to where the pagan, or the Mussulman, has not before his eyes the Christianity of “treaty ports,” and other places where European life is to be seen lived without restraint? The stumbling block may be the drunken sailor, or the unchaste merchant, or civilian, or soldier, or traveller. Or it may be just the man who, belonging to a race reputed Christian, merely ignores the Christians holy Book, and Day, and House, and avoids all semblance of fellowship with his countrymen who have come to live beside him that they may preach Christ where He is not known. Or it may be the government, reputed Christian, which, amidst all its noble benefits to the vast races it holds in sway, allows them to know, to think, at least to suspect, that there are cases where it cares more for revenue than for righteousness. In all these cases the Christian Dispersion gives occasion for railing at the Christians God: and the reckoning will be a grave matter “in that Day.”

But shall the Christians of the Christendom at home stand exempt from the charge? Ah! let us who name the blessed Name with even the least emphasis of faith, and loyalty, dwelling amongst the masses who only passively, so to speak, are Christian, who “profess nothing,” though they are, or are supposed to be, baptised-let us, amidst “the world” which understands not a little of what we ought to be, and watches us so keenly, and so legitimately-let us take home this message, sent first to the old inconsistent Israel. Do we, professing godliness, show the mind of Christ in our secular intercourse? Do we, on the whole, give the average “world” cause to expect that “a Christian,” as such, is a man to trust in business, in friendship? Is the conviction quietly forced upon them that a Christians temper, and tongue, are not as other mens? That the Christian minister habitually lives high above self-seeking? That the Christian tradesman faithfully remembers his customers just interests, and is true in all his dealings? That the Christian servant, and the Christian master, are alike exceptionally mindful of each others rights, and facile about their own? That the Christians time, and his money, are to a remarkable degree applied to the good of others, for Christs sake? This is what the members of the Christian Society, in the inner sense of the word Christian, are expected to be in what we all understand by “the world.” If they are so, God be thanked. If they are not so-who shall weigh the guilt? Who shall adequately estimate the dishonour so done to the blessed Name? And “the Day” is coming.

But he has more to say about the position of the Jew. He would not even seem to forget the greatness of the God-given privilege of Israel; and he will use that privilege once more as a cry to conscience.

For circumcision indeed profits you, if you carry law into practice; in that case circumcision is for you Gods seal upon Gods own promises to the true sons of Abrahams blood and faith. Are you indeed a practiser of the holy Code whose summary and essence is love to God and love to man? Can you look your Lord in the face and say-not, “I have satisfied all Thy demands; pay me that Thou owest,” but, “Thou knowest that I love Thee, and therefore oh how I love Thy law”? Then you are indeed a child of the covenant, through His grace; and the seal of the covenant speaks to you the certainties of its blessing. But if you are a transgressor of law, your circumcision is turned uncircumcision; the divine seal is to you nothing, for you are not the rightful holder of the deed of covenant which it seals. If therefore the uncircumcision, the Gentile world, in some individual instance, carefully keeps the ordinances of the Law, reverently remembers the love owed to God and to man, shall not his uncircumcision, the uncircumcision of the man supposed, be counted as if circumcision? Shall he not be treated as a lawful recipient of covenant blessings even though the seal upon the document of promise is, not at all by his fault, missing? And thus shall not this hereditary uncircumcision, this Gentile born and bred, fulfilling the law of love and duty, judge you, who by means of letter and circumcision are-laws transgressor, using as you practically do use the terms, the letter, of the covenant, and the rite which is its seal, as means to violate its inmost import, and claiming, in the pride of privilege, blessings promised only to self-forgetting love? For not the (Jew) in the visible sphere is a Jew; nor is circumcision in the visible sphere, in the flesh, circumcision. No, but the Jew in the hidden sphere; and circumcision of heart, in Spirit, not letter; circumcision in the sense of a work on the soul, wrought by Gods Spirit, not in that of a legal claim supposed to rest upon a routine of prescribed observances. His praise, the praise of such a Jew, the Jew in this hidden sense, thus circumcised in heart, does not come from men, but does come from God. Men may, and very likely will, give Him anything but praise; they will not like him the better for his deep divergence from their standard, and from their spirit. But the Lord knows him, and loves him, and prepares for him His own welcome; “Well done, good and faithful.”

Here is a passage, far-reaching, like the paragraphs which have gone before it. Its immediate bearing needs only brief comment, certainly brief explanation. We need do little more than wonder at the moral miracle of words like these written by one who, a few years before, was spending the whole energy of his mighty will upon the defence of ultra-Judaism. The miracle resides not only in the vastness of the mans change of view, but in the manner of it. It is not only that he denounces Pharisaism, but he denounces it in a tone entirely free from its spirit, which he might easily have carried into the opposite camp. What he meets it with is the assertion of truths as pure and peaceable as they are eternal; the truths of the supreme and ultimate importance of the right attitude of mans heart towards God, and of the inexorable connection between such an attitude and a life of unselfish love towards man. Here is one great instance of that large spiritual phenomenon, the transfiguration of the first followers of the Lord Jesus from what they had been to what under His risen power they became. We see in them men whose convictions and hopes have undergone an incalculable revolution; yet it is a revolution which disorders nothing. Rather, it has taken fanaticism forever out of their thoughts and purposes. It has softened their whole souls towards man, as well as drawn them into an unimagined intimacy with God. It has taught them to live above the world; yet it has brought them into the most practical and affectionate relations with every claim upon them in the world around them. “Your life is hid with Christ in God”; “Honour all men”; “He that loveth not, knoweth not God.”

But the significance of this particular passage is indeed far-reaching, permanent, universal. As before, so here, the Apostle warns us (not only the Jew of that distant day) against the fatal but easy error of perverting privilege into pride, forgetting that every gift of God is “a talent” with which the man is to trade for his Lord, and for his Lord alone. But also, more explicitly here, he warns us against that subtle tendency of mans heart to substitute, in religion, the outward for the inward, the mechanical for the spiritual, the symbol for the thing. Who can read this passage without reflections on the privileges, and on the seals of membership, of the Christian Church? Who may not take from it a warning not to put in the wrong place the sacred gifts, as sacred as they can be, because divine, of Order, and of Sacrament? Here is a great Hebrew doctor dealing with that primary Sacrament of the Elder Church of which such high and urgent things are said in the Hebrew Scriptures; a rite of which even mediaeval theologians have asserted that it was the Sacrament of the same grace as that which is the grace of Baptism now. But when he has to consider the case of one who has received the physical ordinance apart from the right attitude of soul, he speaks of the ordinance in terms which a hasty reader might think slighting. He does not slight it. He says it “profits,” and he is going soon to say more to that purpose. For him it is nothing less than Gods own Seal on Gods own Word, assuring the individual, as with a literal touch divine, that all is true for him, as he claims grace in humble faith. But then he contemplates the case of one who, by no contempt but by force of circumstance, has. never received the holy seal, yet believes, and loves, and obeys. And he lays it down that the Lord of the Covenant will honour that mans, humble claim as surely as if he brought the covenant document ready sealed in his hand. Not that even for him the seal, if it may be had, will be nothing; it will assuredly be divine still, and will be sought as Gods own gift, His seal ex post facto. But the principle remains that the ritual seal and the spiritual reality are separable; and that the greater thing, the thing of absolute and ultimate necessity between the soul and God, is the spiritual reality; and that where that is present there God accepts.

It was the temptation of Israel of old to put Circumcision in the place of faith, love, and holiness, instead of in its right place, as the divine imperial seal upon the covenant of grace, the covenant to be claimed and used by faith. It is the temptation of some Christians now to put the sacred order of the Church, and particularly its divine Sacraments, the holy Bath and the holy Meal, in the place of spiritual regeneration, and spiritual communion, rather than in their right place as divine imperial seals, on the covenant which guarantees both to faith. For us, as for our elder brethren, this paragraph of the great argument is therefore altogether to the purpose. “Faith is greater than water,” says even Peter Lombard, the Magister of the mediaeval Schools. So it is. And the thought is in perfect unison with St. Pauls principle of reasoning here. Let it be ours to reverence, to prize, to use the ordinances of our Master, with a devotion such as we might seem sure we should feel if we saw Him dip His hand in the Font, or stretch it out to break the Bread, and hallow it, and give it, at the Table. But let us be quite certain, for our own souls warning, that it is true all the while-in the sense of this passage-that “he is not a Christian which is one outwardly, neither is that Baptism, or Communion, which is outward; but he is a Christian which is one inwardly, and Baptism and Communion are those of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter.”

Sacred indeed are the God-given externals of Christian order and ordinance. But there are degrees of greatness in the world of sacred things. And the moral work of God direct upon the soul of man is greater than His sacramental work done through mans body.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary