Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 2:1
Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
Ch. Rom 2:1-16. Human sin, continued: Jews and Gentiles equal in guilt and peril: gradual approach to the Jewish question
1. Therefore ] It is difficult to state the precise bearing of this word; the exact premiss to which it refers. It is, perhaps, best explained by a brief statement of the apparent general connexion here.
St Paul has described the great fact of Human Sin. He has done so in terms which point specially to heathendom, but not exclusively. Two points, the universality of sin, and the universality of conscience (v. 18, 32), are plainly meant to be true of all men, idolaters or not. But now, in our present verse, he has it in view to expose specially the state of Jewish sinners; but to do this by leading gradually up to the convincing point, which is not reached till Rom 2:16. Really, but not explicitly, therefore, he here addresses the Jew, as included in the previous condemnation, but as thinking himself all the while the “judge” of heathen sinners. In words, he addresses any self-constituted “judge;” while in fact he specially, though still not exclusively, addresses the Jew. And he addresses him as “inexcusable,” because of his sin, and because of his conscience, a conscience in his case peculiarly enlightened.
The “ therefore ” thus points mainly to the words just previous; to the fact of a knowledge of God’s penal statute against sin, while yet sin is committed and abetted.
doest the same things ] The reference is doubtless to the passage from about Rom 1:26. External idolatry had vanished among the Jews since the captivity; but other forms of the subtle “worship of the creature” had taken its place; a gross immorality was far from rare; and sins of “strife, craft, and malignity,” were conspicuous.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Therefore – Dio. The force of this word here has been the subject of much discussion. The design of this and the following chapter is to show that the Jews were no less guilty that the Gentiles, and that they needed the benefit of the same salvation. This the apostle does by showing that they had greater light than the Gentiles; and yet that they did the same things. Still they were in the habit of accusing and condemning the Gentiles as wicked and abandoned; while they excused themselves on the ground that they possessed the Law and the oracles of God, and were his favorite people. The apostle here affirms that they were inexcusable in their sins, that they must be condemned in the sight of God, on the same ground on which they condemned the Gentiles; to wit, that they had light and yet committed wickedness. If the Gentiles were without excuse Rom 1:20 in their sins, much more would the Jew, who condemned them, be without excuse on the same ground. The word therefore, I suppose, refers not to any particular word in the previous chapter, or to any particular verse, but to the general considerations which were suggested by a view of the whole case. And its sense might be thus expressed. Since you Jews condemn the Gentiles for their sins, on the ground that they have the means of knowing their duty, therefore, you who are far more favored than they, are entirely without an excuse for the same things.
Thou art inexcusable – This does not mean that they were inexcusable for judging others; but that they had no excuse for their sins before God; or that they were under condemnation for their crimes, and needed the benefits of another plan of justification. As the Gentiles whom they judged were condemned, and were without excuse Rom 1:20, so were the Jews who condemned them without excuse on the same principle; and in a still greater degree.
O man – This address is general to any man who should do this. But it is plain, from the connection, that he means especially the Jews. The use of this word is an instance of the apostles skill in argument. If he had openly named the Jews here, it would have been likely to have excited opposition from them. He therefore approaches the subject gradually, affirms it of man in general, and then makes a particular application to the Jews. This he does not do, however, until he has advanced so far in the general principles of his argument that it would be impossible for them to evade his conclusions; and then he does it in the most tender, and kind, as well as convincing manner, Rom 2:17, etc.
Whosoever thou art that judgest – The word judgest ( krineis) here is used in the sense of condemning. It is not a word of equal strength with what is rendered condemnest ( katakrineis). It implies, however, that they were accustomed to express themselves freely and severely of the character and doom of the Gentiles. And from the New Testament, as well as from their own writings, there can be no doubt that such was the fact; that they regarded the entire Gentile world with abhorrence, considered them as shut out from the favor of God, and applied to them terms expressive of the utmost contempt. Compare Mat 15:27.
For wherein – For in the same thing. This implies that substantially the same crimes which were committed among the pagan were also committed among the Jews.
Thou judgest another – The meaning of this clearly is, for the same thing for which you condemn the pagan, you condemn yourselves.
Thou that judgest – You Jews who condemn other nations.
Doest the same things – It is clearly implied here, that they were guilty of offences similar to those practiced by the Gentiles. It would not be a just principle of interpretation to press this declaration as implying that precisely the same offences, and to the same extent, were chargeable on them. Thus, they were not guilty, in the time of the apostle, of idolatry; but of the other crimes enumerated in the first chapter, the Jews might be guilty. The character of the nation, as given in the New Testament, is that they were an evil and adulterous generation (Mat 12:39; compare Joh 8:7); that they were a generation of vipers Mat 3:7; Mat 12:34; that; they were wicked Mat 12:45; that they were sinful Mar 8:38; that they were proud, haughty, hypocritical, etc.; Matt. 23. If such was the character of the Jewish nation in general, there is no improbability in supposing that they practiced most of the crimes specified in Rom. 1: On this verse we may remark,
- That people are prone to be severe judges of others.
(2)This is often, perhaps commonly, done when the accusers themselves are guilty of the same offences.
It often happens, too, that people are remarkably zealous in opposing those offences which they themselves secretly practice. A remarkable instance of this occurs in Joh 8:1, etc. Thus, David readily condemned the supposed act of injustice mentioned by Nathan; 2Sa 12:1-6. Thus, also kings and emperors have enacted severe laws against the very crimes which they have constantly committed themselves. Nero executed the laws of the Roman Empire against the very crimes which he was constantly committing; and it was a common practice for Roman masters to commit offences which they punished with death in their slaves. (See instances in Grotius on this place.)
(3) Remarkable zeal against sin may be no proof of innocence; compare Mat 7:3. The zeal of persecutors, and often of pretended reformers, may be far from proof that they are free from the very offences which they are condemning in others. It may all be the work of the hypocrite to conceal some base design; or of the man who seeks to show his hostility to one kind of sin, in order to be a salvo to his conscience for committing some other.
(4) The heart is deceitful. When we judge others we should make it a rule to examine ourselves on that very point. Such an examination might greatly mitigate the severity of our judgment; or might turn the whole of our indignation against ourselves.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Rom 2:1-16
Wherefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest.
Mans inexcusableness
I. Because–
1. He has a knowledge of his duty.
2. He was created with ability to perform it.
3. He knows the consequences of neglecting it.
4. He condemns others for doing what he does himself.
II. What ever be–
1. The nation to which he belongs.
2. The profession he makes.
3. The privileges he enjoys.
4. The position he occupies. (T. Robinson, D. D.)
Jews as bad as pagans
The tests of the Jews pretentious lay to hand in the facts of Jewish life. Did the morals of his countrymen fit them to stand before the righteous tribunal of Eternal Justice? Had they so kept their boasted law as to attain by it to practical righteousness? Let the observation of the Roman world reply. The appeal is a rough and ready one–fit for the occasion. In his own case, Pauls Hebrew life had been outwardly pure. Like a good many of his contemporaries, especially among the Palestinian schools, he could accuse himself of no patent vices. Here, however, he is writing to a community familiar with foreign Jews resident in a city where of all others the basest elements from every land flowed together to make one another worse; and he could appeal to the observation of the Roman Christians whether the Jews of Rome were not as bad in morals as any pagan–nay, whether the very name of Jew had not come to be on Gentile lips a word of opprobrium and reproach. A vagrant life, association with the servile population of great towns, an equivocal position in the eyes of Roman law, social exclusion, the necessity of living by their wits and amassing bullion instead of stable property, these causes were already at work creating that deteriorated type of Hebrew character which has long been fixed in Europe. From independent witnesses we know that the Jews were at that day the gipsy, the usurer, the fortune teller, the pander, and the slave agent of the Roman world; everywhere living on the vices of the heathen whom he despised; one of the most restless, turbulent, and despicable elements in that corrupt society. And this is what has come of Israels religious privileges and ancestral glories. This was the upshot of the national attempt to attain to the righteousness of God by the works of the law. An open rupture betwixt profession and performance, between religion and morals; on one side, a faith which was mocked by their life; on the other, a life which was condemned by their faith. For while in morals they were a byword even to the heathens, these same Jews were eaten up with religious self-importance, and looked down on heathens as outcasts and unclean. Arrogant and bigoted zeal for proselytysing went hand in hand, therefore, with personal profligacy. It was nothing to be a cheat or a procurer: it was everything to know the true God, and to be circumcised and to be instructed in the law. (J. Oswald Dykes, D. D.)
Censoriousness
I. Its prevalence.
II. Its folly.
III. Its inexcusableness. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
Unconscious hypocrisy
Hypocrisy is almost always unconscious: it draws the veil over its own evil deeds, while it condemns those of others, not intentionally, but because human nature is strangely gifted with the power of deceiving itself. It is popularly described as pretending to be one thing, and doing, thinking, or feeling another; in fact it is very different. Nobody really leads this sort of divided existence. A man does wrong, but he forgets it again; he sees the same fault in another, and condemns it; but no arrow of conscience reaches him, no law of association suggests to him that he has sinned too. Human character is weak and plastic, and soon reforms itself into a deceitful whole. Indignation may be honestly felt at others by men who do the same thing themselves; they may often be said to relieve their own conscience, perhaps even to strengthen the moral sentiments of mankind, by their expression of it. So that hypocrisy, though the worst of sins, is for the most part weakness and self-deception. The Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, regarded their own lives in a very different light from that in which our Lord has pictured them. Their hypocrisy, too, might be described as weakness and self-deception, only heightened and made more intense by the time and country in which they lived. It was the hypocrisy of an age and a state of society–blinder, perhaps, and more fatal in its consequences for this very reason, but less culpable in the individuals who were guilty of it. Those who said, We have a law, and by it He ought to die, were not without a zeal for God, though seeking to take away Him in whom only the law was fulfilled. But although experience of ourselves and others seems to show that hypocrisy is almost always unconscious, such is not the idea that we ordinarily attach to the word. The reason is–
1. That the strong contrast we observe between the seeming and the reality, between the acts and words of the hypocrite, lead us to speak as though the contrast were present and conscious to himself. We cannot follow the subtle mazes through which he leads himself; we see only the palpable outward effect.
2. The notion that hypocrisy is self-deception or weakness is inadequate to express our abhorrence of it.
3. Our use of language is adapted to the common opinions of mankind, and is incapable of expressing the finer shades of human nature. (Prof. Jowett.)
The self-righteous and the hypocrite tried and condemned by
I. Conscience (Rom 2:1-3).
II. The mercy of God (Rom 2:4).
III. Eternal justice (Rom 2:5-11). (J. Lyth, D. D.)
Judging others
I. This sin is to be avoided, because–
1. We are incapable of judging accurately.
2. We are not invested with the office of judge (Rom 14:4; Jam 4:12).
3. Judging others is generally the effect of uncharitableness; and–
4. Is expressly forbidden by Christ.
II. In order to avoid this sin–
1. Be slow to judge, and do not condemn without evidence.
2. While different motives are possible, do not ascribe an action to the worst.
3. When there is just ground for doubt, suspend your judgment.
4. When you are obliged to condemn, do it with regret.
5. Listen calmly to apology, and readily admit every explanation.
6. Confound not in one general censure all of a party or sect.
7. View mens actions in the sunshine of charity, not in the shade of moroseness. (T. Robinson, D. D.)
Judging others
By doing so a man–
I. Demonstrates his own guilt.
1. He knows the law.
2. He violates it.
II. Denies the justice of God.
1. Its equity.
2. Its severity.
III. Despises Gods mercy.
1. As if he needed it not.
2. He will not repent.
3. He treasures up wrath. (J. Lyth, D. D.)
The judges judged
I. To whom the expostulation is addressed. The disposition here reproved shows itself in–
1. Worldlings towards–
(1) Each other.
(2) Professing Christians.
2. Religious persons towards–
(1) Each other.
(2) The world.
II. The address itself. Concerning uncharitable persons it shows–
1. How vain their hopes.
2. How aggravated their guilt.
3. How fearful their prospects.
Application:
1. Do not occupy yourselves too much about others, but rather take heed to yourselves.
2. Above all things seek to know your need of a Saviour. (C. Simeon, M. A.)
The final judgment foreshadowed
It had been clearly established against the Gentiles that they were inexcusable, and that there could be no hope of their escape but on the ground of the salvation revealed in the gospel. But of such salvation the Jew stood in equal need. Only to convince him of it a different process was required. Confident that he should escape the just punishment of sin, it was necessary to convince him that the grounds of his expectation were false. He is, therefore, reminded–
I. That, in pronouncing judgment upon the sins of others, he was but foreshadowing his own doom, for that the judgment of God is always according to truth. It is true that Pauls reasoning would be equally conclusive against Jew or Gentile, but there is no intimation that the latter meted out condemnation only to others; or that he flattered himself that, while they were justly punished, he should escape. But the fond thought of many a Jew was that his interest with the Eternal Judge was too intimate, powerful, and well assured to render it possible that he should be punished as other sinners (Mat 3:9; Joh 8:33-44). Now the apostle would have him understand that such a hope was vain. No external connection with the kingdom of God; no attention to the requirements of religious ritual can possibly avail to deliver any man from wrath if it does not avail to save him from his sins (Isa 1:11-20). Neither circumcision nor baptism, neither the sacrifices of Judaism nor even the precious blood of Christ, will screen a man from wrath who does not honestly consent to abandon his sinful practices.
II. That the riches of Gods goodness were intended to lead him to repentance, and that, therefore, his continued sinfulness would but serve to enhance his guilt.
1. In specifying the riches of Gods goodness, etc., the apostle refers to those aboundings of grace which pertained specially to the Jews. The words of Moses indicate at once their character and purpose (Deu 4:5-8). The Mosaic institutions, the Abrahamic covenant, the whole of the Old Testament, and the disciplinary dealing of God with the nation, had but this one object, That they should fear the Lord, etc. (Deu 10:12). To this end mercy was promised them upon repentance; and, for the like purpose, all gracious instruction, aid, defence, and supply were assured to them. But should they, notwithstanding all this, refuse to repent and to become a holy people, then they should be overtaken by wrath.
2. The purpose and tendency of the goodness of God was to lead them to repentance. But it required the concurrence of their own wills, which, however, they would not render. Their hearts were hard and impenitent. They valued their religious institutions only so far as they supposed that, through their magic influence, the consequences of their sins should never overtake them. Moses had clearly foreseen this abuse of Gods goodness, and had strongly warned the people against it (Deu 29:18-20). Yet, notwithstanding this, the people, from generation to generation, did bless themselves in their hearts, saying, Peace! peace! when there was no peace (Jer 23:16-17). Therefore was sent to them the scathing rebuke (Isa 6:9-10).
III. That the day for the revelation of wrath is fixed and that the decisions shall then be in accordance with the strictest equity. This day is not one of probation, in which, along with a revelation of wrath, there is also a revelation of mercy; but one in which, probation being concluded, its lasting results will be disclosed. It is stated–
1. That the judgments of that day shall proceed upon character and works alone. Such is the uniform and consistent doctrine of Scripture. The question of questions will be not to what nation or Church the man belonged; not, Was he duly circumcised or baptized? This, too, was the teaching of the Old Testament (Ecc 8:12-13; Ecc 12:14; Pro 11:18; Pro 11:21; Psa 1:5-6) and of Christ Himself (Mat 7:21). If a man despise the goodness of God, and continue in his sins to the end of life, then all his sins, with all their evil influence upon his own character, must go with him to the judgment, and he must bear the punishment of all. But if, softened by the riches of that goodness, he yields to the gracious influence, then, by virtue of the Atonement, his iniquity shall be taken away (Eze 18:21-22; Mat 18:3).
2. That the rule of judgment shall be administered without respect of persons. That which is pronounced wicked in a heathen will be pronounced equally wicked in a Jew or a Christian. Nay, more so (Luk 12:47-48). Therefore, as many as have sinned without law, shall also perish without law, etc.
3. That the judgment of that day will be so far from opening up a way of escape for the Jew that it will disclose for his portion a how-much-sorer punishment. And this according to the solemn warning of the Judge Himself (Mat 11:21-24). His sin is greatest who has sinned against the fullest light and the richest grace. Therefore there must be provided a deeper hell of tribulation and anguish for the obdurate Jew than for the impenitent Gentile; but the deepest must needs, on the same principle, be reserved for those who have sinned away the day of Christian light and salvation.
4. The results of the judgment, shall be to the righteous eternal life, i.e., an immortality of supremely blessed existence. To the impenitent and disobedient it shall be a revelation of indignation and wrath, producing tribulation and anguish. And as the award shall be final, so too the results shall be ever-enduring (Dan 12:2; Mat 25:46; Mar 9:43-48; 2Th 1:9). One way there is, but only one, by which sinful men may escape from the terrors of that great day–the way of repentance. Obviously that way of escape was open to the Jew even before the advent of Christ (Eze 18:30), and was assumed by Paul to be available for the sinful Jew still, and also for the sinful Gentile (Rom 2:26-29). (W. Tyson.)
Judgment–human and Divine
I. Human judgment is pronounced by inconsistent men. The men who judge, often those who judge most sternly, are themselves guilty. David and Nathan. The accusers and the woman taken in adultery. In the light of the Sermon on the Mount we are all inconsistent.
II. Divine judgment is pronounced by a perfectly righteous Being. We notice–
1. The standard by which God judges–truth.
2. The spirit in which God judges. His judgment is–
(1) Long suffering;
(2) Impartial;
(3) Thorough.
3. The character of the Divine Judge is–
(1) An inspiration to those who seek well-doing.
(2) A terror to those who obey unrighteousness. (U. R. Thomas.)
The judgment of God
It is easy for us to see sin in others, and to join in general confessions of sin, in which we seem to include ourselves. But it is very bard to acknowledge it penitently before God. There is, in every mans heart, a subtle element of self-flattery, which leads him to extenuate or deny his own offences, while yet he is very forward to condemn the iniquities of his neighbours. When Haldane read to DAubigne a chapter from this Epistle concerning the natural corruption of man, he said, Now I do, indeed, see it in the Bible. Yes, replied Haldane, but do you see it in your heart?–a home thrust which awakened a sense of sin, and led to his conversion. Thus Paul proceeds here to bring home to every mans conscience the terrible charge advanced against the world at large in the latter part of chap. 1. He knew that many who, while acknowledging the general correctness of his statements, would make an exception of themselves. None would be more ready to do this than the Jews. The apostle therefore approaches them warily, beginning with appeals of a more general character, and then coming gradually down to a direct application of his argument to every self-righteous descendant of Abraham. Let us notice–
I. Those who exempt and excuse themselves from the general charge of the worlds abounding wickedness.
1. The Greeks, or Gentiles. Among these were many who could condemn their neighbours most severely, while yet they openly commended themselves. Even Socrates could practise in secret gross sensualities which he inveighed against in public. There were men who were by nature less savage or less treacherous than their fellows; but there were vices of disposition, such as envy, malice, and revenge, in which they freely, if not vauntingly, participated. Then there were men of refinement whose only difference from the licentious mob was in the superior delicacy of their pleasures, the higher artfulness of their hypocrisies, the closer secrecy of their excesses. And have not we also many classes of character, the exact counterpart of those just described–those who have not yet been found out, or are careful to avoid all coarse and flagrant forms of vice; but are selfish, covetous, proud, or vindictive? And are not these dispositions as certainly the manifestations of a corrupt heart as many fouler sins from which they fastidiously shrink? Therefore are they without excuse, for in judging others they condemn themselves.
2. The Jews. Their common delusion was to fancy themselves free from condemnation, merely because they possessed the oracles of God and enjoyed special tokens of the Divine regard. They thus missed the very object of the kindness extended toward them. It was meant to lead them to repentance; but they used it to build up their pride and confirm their obduracy. And have they not also their representatives in the Christian pale? There are many amongst us who pride themselves on their religious advantages without ever improving them to their own salvation. Are you, then, better than the heathen, because you possess the Bible, rest on the Sunday, and attend the sanctuary? Is it enough that you hear the law, without obeying it? The enjoyment of these advantages only heightens your obligation, adds to your responsibility, and may make you at last tenfold more the child of hell than the pagans you despise. He that knoweth his masters will, and doeth it not, shall be beaten with many stripes.
II. The final judgment of the world by Jesus Christ.
1. This is a peculiarly gospel disclosure. True, there were premonitions of it amongst the heathen, as there were pre-intimations of it in the Old Testament; but still it was left to Christ and His apostles to develop the doctrine. Here we learn that a day is determined on by God to be devoted to that exclusive business. We need not conceive of a day consisting of twenty-four hours, but rather of a vast period–just as we call the term of gospel grace the day of salvation, or of immortal ages as the day of eternity. Over the affairs of that day shall the Son of Man preside in person. Before His bar all nations must be arraigned. We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, and answer for the things done in the body.
2. Mark its impartiality. There is no respect of persons with God. No mans case will be prejudiced by his circumstances, and no man will find favour because of the accidents of birth and position. We can conceive of no motives of favouritism in the mind of God. And certainly it will be impossible either to corrupt the Judge with bribes, to pervert Him by flattery, or to overcome Him with threats. The wise will not be saved by his wisdom, nor the strong by his strength, nor the rich by his riches, nor the noble by his rank; youth and beauty will be as powerless as decrepitude and age.
3. Its strict equity. Each must receive according to his deeds, whether good or evil. What, then, is the moral amenability of the extra-Christian world? What the possibility of its salvation? (verses 12-15.) The heathen world was not left wholly without a knowledge of right and wrong. Also, in highly civilised countries, wise men had been raised up who had carefully sought out the rule of virtue, and thus established many correct principles of moral guidance, which gained the consent of their fellow citizens, and might have served to lead them far on in the path of righteousness. If the light of Christianity is that of the sun, the light of Judaism that of the moon, the rest had at least the light of many stars. The same state of things is still found among unchristian peoples. They have both religious feelings and moral convictions. Thus is the foundation laid for a future judgment, extending to all. All have within or amongst them a law, through the operation of which they are held amenable to their Creator, and are preparing to stand before His judgment bar. And thus may they perish without the law, although, in such a case, their guilt will be less and their doom more endurable than that of men who sin amid all the illumination of Scriptural truth. And so also it is possible for some to be saved, if, with honest purpose, they follow up the light they possess and sincerely seek to please God. Thus may it come to pass that from every heathen land redeemed souls may come and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of God. Any way, the judgment of the great King will be according to truth and justice. To whom much has been given, from him much will be expected; and only little from him whose advantages have been few.
4. The principle of judgment will be a strict regard to the actions of men. Universally, throughout the Bible, is this doctrine affirmed (Ecc 12:14; Mat 25:1-46; 2Co 5:10; Rev 20:13). Yet none will be saved by their works as works, but only as evidential of a right and honest state of will and feeling; a state produced, in all cases, by the influence of the Holy Ghost through such light of truth as may be enjoyed. This principle will not invalidate, but only the more elucidate and confirm, the fundamental arrangement of grace that the just shall live by faith.
5. The grand bearings of the final judgment upon the destiny of men (verses 6-10). Two awards, and only two, will result from the proceedings of the great judgment day. The good will be thenceforward and for evermore separated from the evil; the former will enter into a state of absolute enjoyment and peace, while the latter will be consigned to an abode of unmitigated wretchedness and infamy. (T. G. Horton.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CHAPTER II.
The apostle shows that the Jew, who condemns the Gentiles, and
considers them utterly unworthy of the blessings of the Gospel,
is inexcusable, because he is guilty of the same crimes; and
therefore shalt not escape the righteous judgment of God, 1-3.
It is an awful thing to despise the goodness and long-suffering
of God, which lead to repentance, 4, 5.
God, the impartial judge, will render to every man according to
his works, 6-11.
The Jews and the Gentiles will be judged according to their
respective advantages and disadvantages, 12, 13.
In some cases, the Gentiles, who had no law, have shown a better
disposition than the Jews, 14-16.
The Jews, by their unfaithfulness, have been a stumbling-block
to the Gentiles, 17-24.
Jewish rites and ceremonies of no advantage, unless productive
of change of heart and conduct, 25.
The Gentiles, who attend to the small light which they have
received from God, are in a better state than the unfaithful
Jews, with all their superior privileges, 26, 27.
What constitutes a real Jew in the sight of God, 28, 29.
NOTES ON CHAP. II.
Dr. Taylor makes the following sensible observations at the commencement of this chapter.
“The representation of the moral state of the heathen world, in the foregoing chapter, is a demonstration of the necessity of the Gospel for the reformation and salvation of man. And how rich is the favour wherewith God has visited the world! To have destroyed a race of apostate rebels, who had abused their understandings and every gift of a bountiful Creator, would have been justice; to have spared them would have been lenity and goodness; but to send his only begotten Son from heaven to redeem us from all iniquity and ungodliness by his own blood; to grant us a free pardon for all our sins; to put us in a state of mercy and salvation; to take us into his kingdom and family; to give us an inheritance among his saints; to bless us with immortality and all spiritual blessings in heavenly places;-this is most wonderful and exuberant favour. Rightly is the doctrine which teaches it called the Gospel, or glad tidings. One would think it could not possibly have met with opposition from any part of mankind. But the JEW opposed it! He abhorred the Gentile, and contradicted the grace that honoured and saved him. The apostle pleads and defends our cause. His business is to confound the Jew, and to prove that we have as good a right as he to all the blessings of the Messiah’s kingdom. And, by his description of the vicious state of the Gentiles, in the former chapter, he has wisely made his advantage of the prejudices of the Jew; for nothing could please him more than the preceding discourse, in which the Gentiles are reduced to so vile and abject a state. Thus the apostle gives him an opportunity to condemn the Gentiles; but he does this that he may the more effectually humble him in this chapter; in which he proves that the Jews, having in an aggravated manner despised the goodness and broken the law of God, were as obnoxious to his wrath as the Gentiles; and if so, how could they, with any conscience or modesty, arrogate all the Divine mercy to themselves, or pretend that others were unworthy of it, when they had done as much or more to forfeit it! Must they not exclude themselves from being the people of God under the Gospel, by the same reason that they would have the Gentiles excluded! But this was an argument highly ungrateful to the Jew; and it would be very difficult to fix any conviction upon his mind. Therefore the apostle addresses him in a covert way:-Thou art therefore inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest; not giving out expressly that he meant the Jew, that the Jew might more calmly attend to his reasoning, while he was not apprehensive that he was the man. This point secured, the apostle, very judiciously and with great force of reasoning, turns his thoughts from his present superior advantages to the awful day of judgment, Ro 2:5; Ro 2:6, when God, in the most impartial equity, will render to all mankind, without exception, according to their works. Thus the apostle grounds his following argument, very methodically and solidly, in God’s equal regards to all men, in all nations, who uprightly practise truth and godliness; and his disapproving, and at last condemning, all men, in any nation, however privileged, who live wickedly. This was a blow at the root, and demolished, in the most effectual manner, the Jew’s prejudices in favour of his own nation, and the unkind thoughts he had entertained of the Gentiles. For, if a Jew could be convinced that a sober, upright heathen might be blessed with eternal salvation, he must be persuaded that it was no absurd matter that believing Gentiles should now be pardoned, and taken into the visible Church. Thus the apostle advances with great skill, insinuating himself, by degrees, into the Jew’s conscience. It is reasoning is well adapted to encourage the Gentile, humbled by the dismal representation in the preceding chapter; for he would here see that he was not utterly abandoned of God, but might, upon good grounds, hope for his mercy and kindness.”
Verse 1. That judgest] , the judger; thou assumest the character of a judge, and in that character condemnest others who are less guilty than thyself.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
It is much disputed to whom the apostle directs his discourse in the beginning of this chapter. Some think that having discovered the sins of the Gentiles in the former chapter, he here useth a transition, and turneth himself to the Jews, and lays open their more secret wickedness and hypocrisy. But the particle therefore in the front of the chapter, doth seem to intimate, that this is inferred from what went before, and is a continuance of the same argument. It is of the Gentiles then that he is still discoursing, and he begins by name to deal with the Jews, Rom 2:17. Some think he speaks more particularly of such as were judges and magistrates amongst the Gentiles, who, though they made laws for to judge and punish others for such and such crimes, did yet commit the same themselves. Some think he intends more especially such as were philosophers, and men renowned for virtue, as Socrates, Aristides, Fabricius, Cato, Seneca, &c., which last, as is said, was well known to the apostle. These, in their speeches and writings, did censure the evil manners of others, and yet were as bad themselves. As Cato is said to have used extortion, prostituted his wife, and to have laid violent hands upon himself; and yet he was affirmed by Velleius to be homo virtuti simillimus, a most virtuous man. But the received opinion is, that the apostle in general doth tax all such as censure and find fault with others, and yet are guilty of the same things themselves.
Thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: q.d. Thou art without all excuse, that dost assent and subscribe to the righteous judgment of God, that they who do such things as are mentioned in the foregoing chapter, are worthy of death, and yet doest the same thyself; if not openly, yet secretly and inwardly thou art guilty of the same or as great sins. Thou canst make no apology or pretence, why the sentence of death and condemnation, which is due to others, should not likewise pass upon thee.
For wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; i.e. in that very thing, or by that very law, whereby thou censurest and condemnest others, thou pronouncest sentence against thyself; thy own mouth condemns thee in the person of another: see Mat 7:3; 21:40,41,45; Joh 8:4,9.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man,…. Some think, from the connection of these words with the preceding chapter, that the Gentiles are here meant; and particularly those among them who seemed to be virtuous, and took upon them to be the reprovers of others, and yet did the same things themselves, as Socrates, Cato, Seneca, and others; and therefore must be inexcusable, because they knew better, and would be thought to have been so; wherefore such could never be justified before God by their works, but might be justly condemned by him, nor shall they escape his righteous judgment. Others think the Jews are meant, who despised and condemned the Gentiles, and thought themselves to be righteous persons, and justified in the sight of God; and who, though they were secretly guilty of many abominable iniquities, yet were very severe upon the sins of others, and therefore inexcusable: others think that magistrates are designed, whether among Jews or Gentiles, who reprove and punish sin in others, and therefore must be supposed to know the law, and the nature of sin, and so are inexcusable and self-condemned when they do the same things; wherefore though they may pass with impunity among men, they shall not escape the judgment of God. Rather the words respect every man, of whatsoever nation, office, or place; and may be particularly applied to hypocrites, and seem designed to correct censoriousness, and hasty judging, and to throw confusion on such who value themselves on being the censurers and reprovers of others:
whosoever thou art that judgest; whether a Jew or a Gentile, a public magistrate or a private person:
for wherein thou judgest another; that is, in what case or instance; the Complutensian edition and the Arabic version read, “in” “or with what judgment thou judgest another”; [See comments on Mt 7:2];
thou condemnest thyself; by judging them:
for thou that judgest dost the same things; art guilty of the same thing condemned in others, and therefore must be self-condemned.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
| Equity of the Divine Government. | A. D. 58. |
1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. 2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things. 3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? 4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? 5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; 6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds: 7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: 8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, 9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; 10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: 11 For there is no respect of persons with God. 12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; 13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. 14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 15 Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) 16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
In the former chapter the apostle had represented the state of the Gentile world to be as bad and black as the Jews were ready enough to pronounce it. And now, designing to show that the state of the Jews was very bad too, and their sin in many respects more aggravated, to prepare his way he sets himself in this part of the chapter to show that God would proceed upon equal terms of justice with Jews and Gentiles; and now with such a partial hand as the Jews were apt to think he would use in their favour.
I. He arraigns them for their censoriousness and self-conceit (v. 1): Thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest. As he expresses himself in general terms, the admonition may reach those many masters (Jam. iii. 1), of whatever nation or profession they are, that assume to themselves a power to censure, control, and condemn others. But he intends especially the Jews, and to them particularly he applies this general charge (v. 21), Thou who teachest another teachest thou not thyself? The Jews were generally a proud sort of people, that looked with a great deal of scorn and contempt upon the poor Gentiles, as not worthy to be set with the dogs of their flock; while in the mean time they were themselves as bad and immoral–though not idolaters, as the Gentiles, yet sacrilegious, v. 22. Therefore thou art inexcusable. If the Gentiles, who had but the light of nature, were inexcusable (ch. i. 20), much more the Jews, who had the light of the law, the revealed will of God, and so had greater helps than the Gentiles.
II. He asserts the invariable justice of the divine government, Rom 2:2; Rom 2:3. To drive home the conviction, he here shows what a righteous God that is with whom we have to do, and how just in his proceedings. It is usual with the apostle Paul, in his writings, upon mention of some material point, to make large digressions upon it; as here concerning the justice of God (v. 2), That the judgment of God is according to truth,–according to the eternal rules of justice and equity,–according to the heart, and not according to the outward appearance (1 Sam. xvi. 7),–according to the works, and not with respect to persons, is a doctrine which we are all sure of, for he would not be God if he were not just; but it behoves those especially to consider it who condemn others for those things which they themselves are guilty of, and so, while they practise sin and persist in that practice, think to bribe the divine justice by protesting against sin and exclaiming loudly upon others that are guilty, as if preaching against sin would atone for the guilt of it. But observe how he puts it to the sinner’s conscience (v. 3): Thinkest thou this, O man? O man, a rational creature, a dependent creature, made by God, subject under him, and accountable to him. The case is so plain that we may venture to appeal to the sinner’s own thoughts: “Canst thou think that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? Can the heart-searching God be imposed upon by formal pretences, the righteous Judge of all so bribed and put off?” The most plausible politic sinners, who acquit themselves before men with the greatest confidence, cannot escape the judgment of God, cannot avoid being judged and condemned.
III. He draws up a charge against them (Rom 2:4; Rom 2:5) consisting of two branches:–
1. Slighting the goodness of God (v. 4), the riches of his goodness. This is especially applicable to the Jews, who had singular tokens of the divine favour. Means are mercies, and the more light we sin against the more love we sin against. Low and mean thoughts of the divine goodness are at the bottom of a great deal of sin. There is in every wilful sin an interpretative contempt of the goodness of God; it is spurning at his bowels, particularly the goodness of his patience, his forbearance and long-suffering, taking occasion thence to be so much the more bold in sin, Eccl. viii. 11. Not knowing, that is, not considering, not knowing practically and with application, that the goodness of God leadeth thee, the design of it is to lead thee, to repentance. It is not enough for us to know that God’s goodness leads to repentance, but we must know that it leads us–thee in particular. See here what method God takes to bring sinners to repentance. He leads them, not drives them like beasts, but leads them like rational creatures, allures them (Hos. ii. 14); and it is goodness that leads, bands of love, Hos. xi. 4. Compare Jer. xxxi. 3. The consideration of the goodness of God, his common goodness to all (the goodness of his providence, of his patience, and of his offers), should be effectual to bring us all to repentance; and the reason why so many continue in impenitency is because they do not know and consider this.
2. Provoking the wrath of God, v. 5. The rise of this provocation is a hard and impenitent heart; and the ruin of sinners is their walking after such a heart, being led by it. To sin is to walk in the way of the heart; and when that is a hard and impenitent heart (contracted hardness by long custom, besides that which is natural), how desperate must the course needs be! The provocation is expressed by treasuring up wrath. Those that go on in a course of sin are treasuring up unto themselves wrath. A treasure denotes abundance. It is a treasure that will be spending to eternity, and yet never exhausted; and yet sinners are still adding to it as to a treasure. Every wilful sin adds to the score, and will inflame the reckoning; it brings a branch to their wrath, as some read that (Ezek. viii. 17), they put the branch to their nose. A treasure denotes secrecy. The treasury or magazine of wrath is the heart of God himself, in which it lies hid, as treasures in some secret place sealed up; see Deu 32:34; Job 14:17. But withal it denotes reservation to some further occasion; as the treasures of the hail are reserved against the day of battle and war, Job 38:22; Job 38:23. These treasures will be broken open like the fountains of the great deep, Gen. vii. 11. They are treasured up against the day of wrath, when they will be dispensed by the wholesale, poured out by full vials. Though the present day be a day of patience and forbearance towards sinners, yet there is a day of wrath coming–wrath, and nothing but wrath. Indeed, every day is to sinners a day of wrath, for God is angry with the wicked every day (Ps. vii. 11), but there is the great day of wrath coming, Rev. vi. 17. And that day of wrath will be the day of the revelation of the righteous judgment of God. The wrath of God is not like our wrath, a heat and passion; no, fury is not in him (Isa. xxvii. 4): but it is a righteous judgment, his will to punish sin, because he hates it as contrary to his nature. This righteous judgment of God is now many times concealed in the prosperity and success of sinners, but shortly it will be manifested before all the world, these seeming disorders set to rights, and the heavens shall declare his righteousness, Ps. l. 6. Therefore judge nothing before the time.
IV. He describes the measures by which God proceeds in his judgment. Having mentioned the righteous judgment of God in v. 5, he here illustrates that judgment, and the righteousness of it, and shows what we may expect from God, and by what rule he will judge the world. The equity of distributive justice is the dispensing of frowns and favours with respect to deserts and without respect to persons: such is the righteous judgment of God.
1. He will render to every man according to his deeds (v. 6), a truth often mentioned in scripture, to prove that the Judge of all the earth does right.
(1.) In dispensing his favours; and this is mentioned twice here, both in Rom 2:7; Rom 2:10. For he delights to show mercy. Observe,
[1.] The objects of his favour: Those who by patient continuance, c. By this we may try our interest in the divine favour, and may hence be directed what course to take, that we may obtain it. Those whom the righteous God will reward are, First, Such as fix to themselves the right end, that seek for glory, and honour, and immortality that is, the glory and honour which are immortal-acceptance with God here and for ever. There is a holy ambition which is at the bottom of all practical religion. This is seeking the kingdom of God, looking in our desires and aims as high as heaven, and resolved to take up with nothing short of it. This seeking implies a loss, sense of that loss, desire to retrieve it, and pursuits and endeavours consonant to those desires. Secondly, Such as, having fixed the right end, adhere to the right way: A patient continuance in well-doing. 1. There must be well-doing, working good, v. 10. It is not enough to know well, and speak well, and profess well, and promise well, but we must do well: do that which is good, not only for the matter of it, but for the manner of it. We must do it well. 2. A continuance in well-doing. Not for a fit and a start, like the morning cloud and the early dew; but we must endure to the end: it is perseverance that wins the crown. 3. A patient continuance. This patience respects not only the length of the work, but the difficulties of it and the oppositions and hardships we may meet with in it. Those that will do well and continue in it must put on a great deal of patience.
[2.] The product of his favour. He will render to such eternal life. Heaven is life, eternal life, and it is the reward of those that patiently continue in well-doing; and it is called (v. 10) glory, honour, and peace. Those that seek for glory and honour (v. 7) shall have them. Those that seek for the vain glory and honour of this world often miss of them, and are disappointed; but those that seek for immortal glory and honour shall have them, and not only glory and honour, but peace. Worldly glory and honour are commonly attended with trouble; but heavenly glory and honour have peace with them, undisturbed everlasting peace.
(2.) In dispensing his frowns (Rom 2:8; Rom 2:9). Observe, [1.] The objects of his frowns. In general those that do evil, more particularly described to be such as are contentious and do not obey the truth. Contentious against God. Every wilful sin is a quarrel with God, it is striving with our Maker (Isa. xlv. 9), the most desperate contention. The Spirit of God strives with sinners (Gen. vi. 3), and impenitent sinners strive against the Spirit, rebel against the light (Job xxiv. 13), hold fast deceit, strive to retain that sin which the Spirit strives to part them from. Contentious, and do not obey the truth. The truths of religion are not only to be known, but to be obeyed; they are directing, ruling, commanding; truths relating to practice. Disobedience to the truth is interpreted a striving against it. But obey unrighteousness–do what unrighteousness bids them do. Those that refuse to be the servants of truth will soon be the slaves of unrighteousness. [2.] The products or instances of these frowns: Indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish. These are the wages of sin. Indignation and wrath the causes–tribulation and anguish the necessary and unavoidable effects. And this upon the soul; souls are the vessels of that wrath, the subjects of that tribulation and anguish. Sin qualifies the soul for this wrath. The soul is that in or of man which is alone immediately capable of this indignation, and the impressions or effects of anguish therefrom. Hell is eternal tribulation and anguish, the product of wrath and indignation. This comes of contending with God, of setting briers and thorns before a consuming fire, Isa. xxvii. 4. Those that will not bow to his golden sceptre will certainly be broken by his iron rod. Thus will God render to every man according to his deeds.
2. There is no respect of persons with God, v. 11. As to the spiritual state, there is a respect of persons; but not as to outward relation or condition. Jews and Gentiles stand upon the same level before God. This was Peter’s remark upon the first taking down of the partition-wall (Acts x. 34), that God is no respecter of persons; and it is explained in the next words, that in every nation he that fears God, and works righteousness, is accepted of him. God does not save men with respect to their external privileges or their barren knowledge and profession of the truth, but according as their state and disposition really are. In dispensing both his frowns and favours it is both to Jew and Gentile. If to the Jews first, who had greater privileges, and made a greater profession, yet also to the Gentiles, whose want of such privileges will neither excuse them from the punishment of their ill-doing nor bar them out from the reward of their well-doing (see Col. iii. 11); for shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?
V. He proves the equity of his proceedings with all, when he shall actually come to Judge them (v. 12-16), upon this principle, that that which is the rule of man’s obedience is the rule of God’s judgment. Three degrees of light are revealed to the children of men:–
1. The light of nature. This the Gentiles have, and by this they shall be judged: As many as have sinned without law shall perish without law; that is, the unbelieving Gentiles, who had no other guide but natural conscience, no other motive but common mercies, and had not the law of Moses nor any supernatural revelation, shall not be reckoned with for the transgression of the law they never had, nor come under the aggravation of the Jews’ sin against and judgment by the written law; but they shall be judged by, as they sin against, the law of nature, not only as it is in their hearts, corrupted, defaced, and imprisoned in unrighteousness, but as in the uncorrupt original the Judge keeps by him. Further to clear this (Rom 2:14; Rom 2:15), in a parenthesis, he evinces that the light of nature was to the Gentiles instead of a written law. He had said (v. 12) they had sinned without law, which looks like a contradiction; for where there is no law there is no transgression. But, says he, though they had not the written law (Ps. cxlvii. 20), they had that which was equivalent, not to the ceremonial, but to the moral law. They had the work of the law. He does not mean that work which the law commands, as if they could produce a perfect obedience; but that work which the law does. The work of the law is to direct us what to do, and to examine us what we have done. Now, (1.) They had that which directed them what to do by the light of nature: by the force and tendency of their natural notions and dictates they apprehended a clear and vast difference between good and evil. They did by nature the things contained in the law. They had a sense of justice and equity, honour and purity, love and charity; the light of nature taught obedience to parents, pity to the miserable, conservation of public peace and order, forbade murder, stealing, lying, perjury, c. Thus they were a law unto themselves. (2.) They had that which examined them as to what they had done: Their conscience also bearing witness. They had that within them which approved and commended what was well done and which reproached them for what was done amiss. Conscience is a witness, and first or last will bear witness, though for a time it may be bribed or brow-beaten. It is instead of a thousand witnesses, testifying of that which is most secret and their thoughts accusing or excusing, passing a judgment upon the testimony of conscience by applying the law to the fact. Conscience is that candle of the Lord which was not quite put out, no, not in the Gentile world. The heathen have witnessed to the comfort of a good conscience.
| ——–Hic murus ahoncus esto, Nil conscire sibi——– Be this thy brazen bulwark of defence, Still to preserve thy conscious innocence.–HOR. |
and to the terror of a bad one:
| ——–Quos diri consein facti Mens habet attonitos, et surdo verbere cdit– No lash is heard, and yet the guilty heart Is tortur’d with a self-inflicted smart–JUV. Sat. 13. |
Their thoughts the meanwhile, metaxy allelon—among themselves, or one with another. The same light and law of nature that witnesses against sin in them, and witnessed against it in others, accused or excused one another. Vicissim, so some read it, by turns; according as they observed or broke these natural laws and dictates, their consciences did either acquit or condemn them. All this did evince that they had that which was to them instead of a law, which they might have been governed by, and which will condemn them, because they were not so guided and governed by it. So that the guilty Gentiles are left without excuse. God is justified in condemning them. They cannot plead ignorance, and therefore are likely to perish if they have not something else to plead.
2. The light of the law. This the Jews had, and by this they shall be judged (v. 12): As many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law. They sinned, not only having the law, but en nomo—in the law, in the midst of so much law, in the face and light of so pure and clear a law, the directions of which were so very full and particular, and the sanctions of it so very cogent and enforcing. These shall be judged by the law; their punishment shall be, as their sin is, so much the greater for their having the law. The Jew first, v. 9. It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon. Thus Moses did accuse them (John v. 45), and they fell under the many stripes of him that knew his master’s will, and did it not, Luke xii. 47. The Jews prided themselves very much in the law; but, to confirm what he had said, the apostle shows (v. 13) that their having, and hearing, and knowing the law, would not justify them, but their doing it. The Jewish doctors bolstered up their followers with an opinion that all that were Jews, how bad soever they lived, should have a place in the world to come. This the apostle here opposes: it was a great privilege that they had the law, but not a saving privilege, unless they lived up to the law they had, which it is certain the Jews did not, and therefore they had need of a righteousness wherein to appear before God. We may apply it to the gospel: it is not hearing, but doing that will save us, Joh 13:17; Jas 1:22.
3. The light of the gospel: and according to this those that enjoyed the gospel shall be judge (v. 16): According to my gospel; not meant of any fifth gospel written by Paul, as some conceit; or of the gospel written by Luke, as Paul’s amanuensis (Euseb. Hist. lib 3, cap. 8), but the gospel in general, called Paul’s because he was a preacher of it. As many as are under that dispensation shall be judged according to that dispensation, Mark xvi. 16. Some refer those words, according to my gospel, to what he says of the day of judgment: “There will come a day of judgment, according as I have in my preaching often told you; and that will be the day of the final judgment both of Jews and Gentiles.” It is good for us to get acquainted with what is revealed concerning that day. (1.) There is a day set for a general judgment. The day, the great day, his day that is coming, Ps. xxxvii. 13. (2.) The judgment of that day will be put into the hands of Jesus Christ. God shall judge by Jesus Christ, Acts xvii. 31. It will be part of the reward of his humiliation. Nothing speaks more terror to sinners, or more comfort to saints, than this, that Christ shall be the Judge. (3.) The secrets of men shall then be judged. Secret services shall be then rewarded, secret sins shall be then punished, hidden things shall be brought to light. That will be the great discovering day, when that which is now done in corners shall be proclaimed to all the world.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
Wherefore (). See Rom 1:24; Rom 1:26 for this relative conjunction, “because of which thing.”
Without excuse (). See on 1:21.
Whosoever thou art that judgest ( ). Literally, “every one that judgest,” vocative case in apposition with . Paul begins his discussion of the failure of the Jew to attain to the God-kind of righteousness (2:1-3:20) with a general statement applicable to all as he did (1:18) in the discussion of the failure of the Gentiles (Lightfoot). The Gentile is readily condemned by the Jew when he sins and equally so is the Jew condemned by the Gentile in like case. does not of itself mean to condemn, but to pick out, separate, approve, determine, pronounce judgment, condemn (if proper).
Another ( ). Literally, “the other man.” The notion of two in the word, one criticizing the other.
Thou condemnest thyself ( ). Note here with , to make plain the adverse judgment.
For (). Explanatory reason for the preceding statement. The critic
practises (, not single acts , but the habit ) the same things that he condemns.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
O man. General, but still with a general and slightly reproachful reference to the Jew.
Judgest [] . With the sense of condemning.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
GENTILE PAGAN MORALIZERS AS OTHER PAGANS
1) Therefore thou art inexcusable, (dio anapologetos ei) Wherefore thou art inexcusable, or you can offer no rational or sensible excuse to avoid the judgment of God, Rom 1:20; Rom 1:32; Rom 3:19.
2) 0 man, whosoever thou art that judgest, (0 anthrope pas ho krinon) Whoever engages or indulges (in) judging, or goes on judging. It appears that this chapter primarily concerns Jewish rejection of Divine truth and light, as Gentiles had particularly done in times past, Luk 13:1-5.
3) For wherein thou judgest another, (en ho gar krineis ton heteron) For in whatever thou judgest the other, the other of a different party, Gentiles and pagans of other times or places; Rom 2:3; Jas 4:12; Joh 7:24.
4) Thou condemnest thyself, (seauton katakrineis) Thou condemnest thyself; in doing evil, in spite of better and more knowledge, Jas 4:17; as David did himself, 2Sa 12:5; 2Sa 12:7.
5) For thou that judgest doest the same things, (ta gar auta prasseis ho krinon) For while you are judging others you are practicing the same (kind of) things; sinning against light, continually, Act 7:51-53; The Jews also engaged in and embraced the Spirit of rebellion against all moral and ethical principles as Gentiles before and among them had done, which led them, as a people to reject Jesus Christ and His church truth, Joh 1:11-12; Joh 5:43; Mat 7:12; Joh 8:9.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
1. Therefore inexcusable art thou, O man. ]This reproof is directed against hypocrites, who dazzle the eyes of men by displays of outward sanctity, and even think themselves to be accepted before God, as though they had given him full satisfaction. Hence Paul, after having stated the grosser vices, that he might prove that none are just before God, now attacks saintlings ( sanctulos ) of this kind, who could not have been included in the first catalogue. Now the inference is too simple and plain for any one to wonder how the Apostle derived his argument; for he makes them inexcusable, because they themselves knew the judgment of God, and yet transgressed the law; as though he said, “Though thou consented not to the vices of others, and seemest to be avowedly even an enemy and a reprover of vices; yet as thou art not free from them, if thou really examinest thyself, thou canst not bring forward any defense.”
For in what thou judgest another, etc. Besides the striking resemblance there is between the two Greek verbs, κρίνειν and κατακρίνειν (to judge and to condemn,) the enhancing of their sin ought to be noticed; for his mode of speaking is the same, as though he said, “Thou art doubly deserving of condemnation; for thou art guilty of the same vices which thou blamest and reprovest in others.” It is, indeed, a well-known saying, — that they who scrutinize the life of others lay claim themselves to innocence, temperance, and all virtues; and that those are not worthy of any indulgence who allow in themselves the same things which they undertake to correct in others.
For thou, judging, doest the same things: so it is literally; but the meaning is, “Though thou judgest, thou yet doest the same things.” And he says that they did them, because they were not in a right state of mind; for sin properly belongs to the mind. They then condemned themselves on this account, — because, in reproving a thief, or an adulterer, or a slanderer, they did not merely condemn the persons, but those very vices which adhered to themselves. (62)
(62) It is confessed by most that the illative, διὸ, at the beginning of the verse can hardly be accounted for. The inference from the preceding is not very evident. It is, in my view, an instance of Hebraism; and the reference is not to what has preceded, but to what is to come. It is not properly an illative, but it anticipates a reason afterwards given, conveyed by for, or, because. Its meaning will be seen in the following version: —
On this account, inexcusable art thou, O man, whosoever thou be who condemnest another, because, in what thou condemnest another thou condemnest thyself; for thou who condemnest doest the same things.
The verb, κρίνω, has here the idea of condemning, or of passing judgments; to judge is not sufficiently distinct. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL NOTES
Rom. 2:1. Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man., because the above description of the wickedness of mankind is true (in its main features) universally. O man.A general designation. Jews classed with Gentiles. Josephus says that there was not a nation under heaven more wicked than the Jewish nation. Jews judged the Gentiles. Heathen philosophers often guilty of what they condemned in others. , the result of judgmentthe sentence.
Rom. 2:2.It is not to be understood that every individual is chargeable with each and every vice named.
Rom. 2:3.The Jews thought to escape judgment, for in their rabbinical creed it is written, All Israel have a portion in the world to come, except heretics and deriders of the wise men.
Rom. 2:4. Or despisest thou the riches of His goodness?, goodness in general. , its exercise in postponing punishment. , again signifies continued . , to treat with contempt by word or deed. Leading to repentance.Moral improvement of soul, turning from unbelief to faith. sets forth the fact that God abounds in mercy and grace.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Rom. 2:1-4
The judgments of man and of God.The inhabitant of a shell has no idea of the vastness of the external world; the rustic who has never passed beyond the bounds of his own village green is not likely to possess the most liberal views; the man who never comes into true contact with his fellows is apt to have exaggerated views of his own importance. To know yourself you must go out of yourself, as well as look into yourself. The selfishness of the Pharisee produces a narrowness of vision which results in an intolerable dogmatism and self-conceit; but the soul of the publican commands a wider rangehe gazes upon the solemn heights of the infinite purity and the divine requirements, and is penetrated with a sense of his own shortcomings. The man who looks at himself in every aspect, who measures himself, not by himself, but by all that is grand and noble in the natural world, in divine revelation, and in the divine nature, will be forced to the conclusion that he is left without excuse, that he is a sinner, and must fly for refuge to the sinners Friend and Saviour. Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man. Let thy harsh temperament and thy severe judgments be tempered with a sense of thy own failings.
I. The judgments of men are fallible.We cannot suppose the apostle to mean that the critical faculty is to be stifled. We must compare ideas. We pass judgment on scenery, on pictures, on works of art, on books, and on persons. How are we to prosecute the journey of life with anything like satisfaction, if we are not to judge? In the complexities of modern life we are compelled to judge. If we entertain without reserve our modern strangers, we should not find many of them turn out to be angels. If they are, they will be angels unawares. But our judgments must be as rules of guidance, and not as sentences of condemnation, upon our fellows. However, in all judgments, were it not well to bear in mind that we are erring creatures? Perhaps some of our judges would have escaped mistakes had they kept before them the fact that all human judgment is fallible. The critics, both literary and moral, would not have exposed themselves to shame had they been mindful of the erring nature of all human judgments.
II. The judgments of men are often self-condemning.Self-preservation is one of the great instinctive laws of nature; and guided by this low motive of instinctive prompting, we ought to restrain ourselves from all harsh judgments. No pleasant task to be a judge if every sentence which is being pronounced prompts the inquiry, What is there in my past or present conduct which brings me into close relationship with the man upon whom I am now sitting in judgment? What tenderness should pervade the mind of the preacher as he finds in himself the sins, either in germ or in fuller development, which he denounces in others! Alas! our neighbours sins we place before our eyes, while our own sins we place behind where we can scarcely see them.
III. The judgments of men are often self-apologetic.In literary circles we are sometimes told that the critics are the failures, and the severest critics are those who have failed most miserably. In the moral sphere the critics are the failures; the greatest sinners too often pass the harshest judgments. And why is this? Because in excusing others they vainly think that they are excusing themselves. Vain man! thy apologia su vit is a miserable failure. The book thou hast written tells thy weakness, and pronounces thy condemnation. Self-apologetics are hideous failures. The Pharisees self-apologetics in the parable have made him the opprobrium of all time. The publicans God be merciful to me a sinner has lifted him high in the scale of being.
In opposition let us bear in mind that:
I. The judgments of God are infallible.God is all-wise, and therefore cannot err. They are according to truth. The judgments of God are not according to mens views of truth, but according to truth. The judgments of God are not shaped by human shibboleths. Our little systems have their day, but truth abides eternally. Truth is from everlasting. It existed in the mind and heart of the Infinite before the world was; the light of divine mornings shone out of the primal darkness of a newly made planet long before our modern wise ones preached to the world the truth which they pretend to have fashioned. Men may err; God cannot.
II. The judgments of God are tempered by mercy, and in their execution delayed.While we read of Gods wrath, we must not forget Gods mercy,
The attribute of God Himself;
And earthly power doth then show likest Gods
When mercy seasons justice.
We do pray for mercy. We all instinctively feel that there is mercy with God, and that we need mercy; but how seldom doth that same prayer teach us to render the deeds of mercy, and to exercise that judgment which is tempered by mercy. We seek to get our own debts forgiven, and then we straightway go away with the speech upon our lips, Pay me that thou owest. There is forgiving mercy in Jesus Christ. The execution of judgment is delayed. Opportunity for repentance is afforded. Butsolemn thought! dread-inspiring reflection!
III. The judgments of God, though tempered by mercy, and delayed in their execution, are not therefore a nullity.The mills of God may grind slowly, but they grind surely and exactly. Men may harden themselves in their crimes by saying, All things continue as they were from the creationyea, all things continue as they have been through the past ons of geologic records. Know, O vain man, that hardened sinners cannot escape the judgments of God. What a call to reflection in the apostles earnest remonstrance, And thinkest thou this, O man? Let thy thought move upward in the line of the divine thought; and, oh! seek to escape the judgment, the condemnation, of God by hearty repentance, and by sincere faith in Gods blessed Son, and by a life of holiness.
Human judgments rebuked; divine judgments exalted.
I. Human judgment is pronounced by inconsistent men.The men who judge, often those who judge most sternly, are themselves guilty. David and Nathan. The accusers and the woman taken in adultery. In the light of the Sermon on the Mount we are all inconsistent.
II. Divine judgment is pronounced by a perfectly righteous being.We notice:
1. The standard by which God judgestruth;
2. The spirit in which God judgesHis judgment is
(1) longsuffering;
(2) impartial;
(3) thorough. The character of the divine Judge is (a) an inspiration to those who seek well-doing; (b) a terror to those who obey unrighteousness.Homilist.
Rom. 2:4. Gods government of us; its ground and its end.Goodness, when it is seen in the deeds of Him who went about doing good, loses none of its awfulness; it stands out in more direct contrast to all wickedness; but we know that it is not abstract, that it is individualising, yet that it is without limitation. When we hear of Gods forbearance, we ask the ancient, ever-recurring question, whether He can care enough for our doings to feel anything like that provocation which the Bible speaks ofwhether such words must not be merely figurative, or must not detract from His holiness and majesty. When we seek to know the Father through the Son clothed in our nature, we see how purity and sympathy must be provoked every day by impurity and hardness of heart; the perfection must be diminished, if it were incapable of pain and sorrow for evil. The longsuffering becomes intelligible, like the forbearance, when we view it through this mirror. Till we so see it, we may ask ourselves whether there is not some boundary to it which we are obliged to conceive, though we cannot fix it. The cross of Calvary drives our reason from this vain and ambitious attempt. Now if this goodness, forbearance, longsuffering, belong to the very name and character of Him in whom we are living and moving and having our being, they constitute a wealth upon which we may always draw. The more we call them to mind, the more we believe in them, the more truly and actively they become ours. We may become moulded into their likeness; we may show them forth. This is that kingly inheritance which the Scriptures and the sacrament make known to us. But here comes in the great excuse for shame and for gloom. We have not taken the events that have befallen us as if they bore this signification; the wealth has been ours, and it has been squandered. We have despised the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering. But this thought has been left out of our calculation. We have not known that the goodness of God is leading us to repentance. Events are not leading us to it, sad or joyful, sudden or successive. Our own hearts, left to themselves, will not lead us to it. The experience of our own powerlessness to change our minds, to turn them round to the Light, may be an entirely true experience. But that goodness of God, which is with us, is not merely something which we may recollect, by which we may profit: it is an active, vital power. It is the one power which can act upon spirit. It is He who convinces us of sin, because we have believed in Him in whom is not sin, and who is always with us to deliver us from sin; of righteousness, because He has gone to the Father, as the righteous Head of our race, to justify us; of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged, and because each year is hastening on the time when he shall finally be cast out.Maurice.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Rom. 2:1-4
Gods attributes enhance His goodness.The apostle speaks of the riches of His goodness. These riches appear in numberless displays. But he adds, and forbearance and longsuffering, to induce us to consider the latter as the proof of the former. To see then the riches of His goodness, let us contemplate His forbearance and longsuffering. Everything in God enhances His patience.
I. His greatness enhances it.We are more affected with an affront from an equal than from a superior, and more from an inferior than from an equal. How does the master resent an offence from his slave? or a king from a subject? All comparison fails between God and us. He is the maker of all things; and all nations before Him are as nothing. This is the Being insulted. And who is the offender? A grovelling worm upon a dunghill. And yet He bears with us.
II. His wisdom enhances it.We cannot be affected with affronts of which we are ignorant. How would some be enraged if they knew only what is said of them by some of their friends! None of our offences are secret from God. He bears all, sees all, and knows perfectly every imagination of the thoughts of our heart. And yet He bears with us.
III. His holiness enhances it.If we do not think and feel a thing to be an affront, there is no virtue, for there is no difficulty in enduring it. The trial is when it touches us to the quick in some valued interest. Sin is exceedingly sinful. By nothing does God deem Himself so dishonoured. He is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity. It is the abominable thing which His soul hates. And yet He bears with us.
IV. His power enhances it.Why do we put up with a thousand wrongs? We know and feel them, but we reluctantly submit because we have no way to punish them. Why are not sinners destroyed? Moses, when he had provoked the Egyptians, saved himself by flight. But whither can we go from Gods presence or flee from His Spirit? Some, when they have provoked resentment, have defied it, and successfully too. But who ever hardened himself against God and prospered? His look is death. And yet He bears with us.
V. His bounty enhances it.We complain peculiarly of an injury or an insult from one who is much indebted to us. From another, we say, we could have borne it; but he is viler than the brute, for the ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his masters crib. We are under infinite obligations to the God we provoke. In Him we have lived, and moved, and had our being. His table has fed us; His wardrobe has clothed us; His sun has warmed us. And this is not all: His kindness continues, notwithstanding all our ingratitude. And He not only spares us, but in every way indulges us. He waits to be gracious, and is exalted to have mercy upon us. Yet are these riches of His goodness despised.
1. Despised by inconsideration. We treat them as unworthy of our notice. They do not occupy our thoughts or our words.
2. Despised by disobedience. We resist their design, which is to lead us to repentance. God calls, but we will not answer; He knocks, but we refuse to openwho is the Lord that we should obey His voice?
3. Despised by perversion. We turn them into instruments of rebellion, and make them the very means of increasing our impenitency. If we thought God would destroy us the next sin we committed, it would not be committed; but since He is too kind to do this, we are induced to offend Him. We are evil, because He is good. How unreasonable is this contempt! If an individual were to behave towards a fellow-creature as men are continually acting towards the blessed God, no one could notice him but with astonishment and contempt. Yet we talk of the dignity of human nature, or contend that it is but slightly injured by the Fall!W. Jay.
The justice of God.Slow goes the hand of justice, like the shadow on the sun-dialever moving, yet creeping slowly on, with a motion all but imperceptible. Still stand in awe. The hand of justice has not stopped. Although imperceptible, it steadily advances; by-and-by it reaches the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth hour. And now the bell strikes. Then, unless you have fled to Christ, the blow, which was so slow to fall, shall descend over the head of impenitence with accumulated force. Human standards of judgment.We measure from ourselves; and as things are for our use and purpose, so we approve them. Bring a pear to the table that is rotten, we cry it downtis naught; but bring a medlar that is rotten, and tis a fine thing; and yet Ill warrant you the pear thinks as well of itself as the medlar does.Trapp.
By judging we condemn ourselves.Wherefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art, that judgest others. The first argument in support of his proposition is deduced from the foregone conclusion, by which the apostle has concluded that the Gentiles in general, knowing the judgment of God, yet did things contrary thereto; and therefore that proposition is enunciated illatively, and as a sort of secondary conclusionWherefore thou art inexcusable, etc.; for in the act of judging another thou condemnest thyself. The argument runs thus: Whosoever condemns himself in the act of judging another is inexcusable: [But] thou, O man, says the apostle, addressing the Gentile philosophers individually, in the act of judging another condemnest thyself; therefore thou art inexcusable. The proposition is a-wanting; but the other two parts of the syllogism are given in the verse, only that the assumption, by hysterosis, is placed after the conclusion, Thou that judgest another doest the same things. He proves the assumption by an argument drawn from the effects of him who thus judged another, which effects are set forth under a comparison of equalityhe who does the same things for which he judges another, in the act of judging another condemns himself. But thou, says the apostle to each of the Gentile philosophers, that judgest another doest the same things for which thou judgest another; therefore in the act of judging another thou condemnest thyself. The assumption is expressed in the words just quoted, which form the last clause of this verse; but, by hysterosis, the proposition, with its proof, is given in the two following versesthe proof in the second, and the proposition itself therefrom deduced in the third.Ferme.
Privilege will not save.Having shown that the Gentiles could not entertain the least hope of salvation according to the tenor of the law of nature, it was next to be considered whether the law of Moses gave the Jews any better hope. This inquiry the apostle managed with great address. Well knowing that, on reading his description of the manners of the Greeks, the Jews would pronounce them worthy of damnation, he suddenly turned his discourse to the Jews, telling them that they who passed such a judgment on the Gentiles were inexcusable in hoping to be saved through the law of Moses, because by condemning he Gentiles they virtually condemned themselves, who, being guilty of the very same crimes, were thereby under the curse of Moses law (Rom. 2:1). And to enforce this argument the apostle observed that Gods sentence of condemnation passed in the curse of the law upon them who commit such things is known by all to be according to truth (Rom. 2:2). But although every Jew was condemned by the curse of the law of Moses, they all expected salvation on account of their being Abrahams children and of their enjoying the benefit of revelation. Wherefore, to show them the vanity of that hope, the apostle proposed the following question: Dost thou, who condemnest the Gentiles for their crimes, and yet committest the same thyself, think that thou shalt escape the righteous sentence of God declared in the curse of the law of Moses, merely because thou art a son of Abraham and a member of Gods visible Church? (Rom. 2:3.) By entertaining such a notion thou judgest amiss of thy privileges, which are bestowed on thee, not to make sinning more safe to thee than to others, but to lead to repentance (Rom. 2:4). These privileges therefore, instead of making thy salvation sure, if abused by thy obdurate and impenitent heart, will make thy punishment greater in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God.Macknight.
Thinkest thou.This is preaching to the conscience, to the quick. Our exhortations should be as forked arrows to stick in mens hearts, and not wound only, as other arrows. A poor hermit came to our Richard I., A.D. 1195, and, preaching to him the words of eternal life, bade him be mindful of the subversion of Sodom and to abstain from things unlawful; otherwise, said he, the deserved vengeance of God will come upon thee. The hermit being gone, the king neglected his words. But afterwards falling sick, he more seriously bethought himself, and waxing sound in soul as well as in body, he grew more devout and charitable to the poor.Trapp.
Repentance you must have.The consciousness and confession of ones self as a sinner is the inevitable first step in all true repentance. When one says, Oh yes, I know that we are all sinners, he merely inculpates others to lighten his own guilt, he makes no true confession of sin. When one charges himself with wrong expecting others to palliate his misdeed, it may be thinking that even God will not regard it as severely as he has stated it, he but adds insincerity to his other sins. Sometimes men boastfully declare that they have done some evil deed; this is to make a mock at sin. It is when one, like Job, cries to God, I have sinned, not excusing himself, not vainly hoping that God will look leniently upon his guilt, but rather himself trying to see more clearly the enormity of his iniquity, that he truly makes confession of sin. But there is no merit even in this. He confesses not for reward, but for pardon, So when he asks, What shall I do unto Thee, O Thou Preserver of men? it is not with the thought of propitiating God or of winning His favour; it is with the desire to show his repentance and gratitude in present and continued obedience. So repentance stops not at sorrowing for sin; it turns away from sin and unto God.Robert Wesley Peach.
ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 2
Rom. 2:1. The poet Nash.of other men by some excellency we conceive to be in ourselves. Nash, a poet, poor enough (as poets used to be), seeing an alderman with his gold chain upon his great horse, by way of scorn said to one of his companions, Do you see yon fellow, how big he looks? Why, that fellow cannot make a blank verse! Nay, we measure the goodness of God from ourselves: we measure His goodness, His justice, His wisdom, by something we call just, good, or wise in ourselves; and in so doing we judge proportionably to the country-fellow in the play, who said, if he were a king, he would live like a lord, and have peas and bacon every day, and a whip that cried slash.
Rom. 2:1. Prejudice in judgment.Nero thought no person chaste, because he was so unchaste himselfsuch as one troubled with the jaundice sees all things yellow. Those who are most religious are least censorious. Who art thou that judgest another mans servant? Those who are fellow-creatures with men should not be fellow-judges with God.
Rom. 2:1. Judge gently.If we thoroughly looked into and understood ourselves, we should surely be more charitable in our judgments of others. And yet it is strange that the more the sinner, the more severe the critic. Perhaps our condemnation of others is supposed to be a condoning of our own misdoings. But we have to take home the exhortation, For wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; especially if thou doest the same thing thyself.
Then gently scan your brother man,
Still gentler sister woman;
Though they may gang a-kennin wrang
To step aside is human.
Burns.
Rom. 2:1. Fault-finding.It is the painful necessity of people in certain positions in life that they have to find fault; but to do this with any useful result requires much tact and sympathy. When we are rebuked in this spirit, we do not resent it, but are rather obliged for the interest that is taken in us. Thomas Ken, Bishop of Bath and Wells, author of the Morning and Evening Hymns and of the Doxology, had acquired this art of profitable fault-finding. He was chaplain to Charles II., and spoke plainly to the king, who, however, was never angry at his faithfulness. I must go, he used to say, and hear little Ken tell me of my faults.
Rom. 2:2. Clearchus on oaths.Clearchus says to Tissaphernes, The oaths which we have sworn by the gods forbid us to be enemies to each other, and I should never consider him to be envied who is conscious of having disregarded such obligations; for from the vengeance of the gods I know not to what speed any one could flee so as to escape, or into what darkness he could steal away, or how he could retreat into any stronghold, since all things in all places are subject to the gods, and they have power over all everywhere alike. We have here one heathen appealing to another, to a stranger in race and religion, on the ground of a moral truth admitted by all. According to truth. Gods sentence corresponds with the reality of the case, on mans actual conduct. All judges aim at this; God attains it.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Text
Rom. 2:1-11. Wherefore thou art without excuse, O man, whosoever thou are that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest dost practice the same things. Rom. 2:2 And we know that the judgment of God is according to truth against them that practice such things. Rom. 2:3 And reckonest thou this, O man, who judgest them that practice such things, and doest the same, that thou shall escape the judgment of God? Rom. 2:4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering not knowing that the goodness of God leadest thee to repentance? Rom. 2:5 but after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up for thyself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; Rom. 2:6 who will render to every man according to his works: Rom. 2:7 to them that by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and incorruption, eternal life: Rom. 2:8 but unto them that are factious, and obey not the truth, but obey unrighteousness, shall be wrath and indignation, Rom. 2:9 tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that worketh evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Greek; Rom. 2:10 but glory and honor and peace to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek: Rom. 2:11 for there is no respect of persons with God.
REALIZING ROMANS, Rom. 2:1-11
52.
Why introduce the thought of judgment (on mans part) at this particular time? How does it relate to what has just been said?
53.
Read carefully through these eleven verses and mark the three principles or standards of judgment God will use in judgment. They are in Rom. 2:2; Rom. 2:6; Rom. 2:11. Name them.
54.
Who are the persons of whom the apostle speaks in verse two? (the them of the verse.)
55.
Do you belive that God will ever punish a man who does not know he is guilty?
56.
The goodness of God does not lead all men to repentance. What is needed in our understanding before this is true?
57.
What is repentance? Write out your definition.
58.
What would be a synonym for the word hardness as in Rom. 2:5?
59.
Will there be measures of punishment on the day of judgment?
60.
In what way will we be judged according to our works? I thought we were saved by grace through faith.
61.
Is Paul saying here that some Gentiles will be given eternal life even if they had no opportunity to hear of Christ, but continued to obey the law they knew? (Cf. Rom. 2:6-7)
62.
Why all the variety of words to describe punishment? i.e. wrath, indignation, tribulation, anguish.
63.
In what sense is God no respecter of persons? How does the acceptance of Christ relate to this thought?
64.
Will God give heaven to the Gentile who never heard of Christ, and never had opportunity, but lived up to the law of right and wrong that he did know? Be careful with this question; do not be too hasty on either side of the subject.
Paraphrase
Rom. 2:1-11. Since all who practice these crimes are worthy of death, thou are inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art, who thus judgest, and yet expected that thyself shall be saved: for whilst thou judgest the Gentiles worthy of death, thou condemnest thyself; because thou who thus judgest, committest the very same things.
Rom. 2:2 Besides, we know that the sentence of God contained in the curse of the law of Moses is agreeable to truth, even when it is pronounced upon the Jews who commit such crimes, and condemns them to death.
Rom. 2:3 This being the case, dost thou think, O Jewish man, who condemnest those heathens who commit such sins, and yet committest the same sins thyself, that thou shalt escape the sentence of God because thou are a son of Abraham, and a member of Gods visible church?
Rom. 2:4 Or dost thou misconstruct the greatness of his goodness, in bestowing on thee a revelation of his will, and forbearing to punish thee, and his being slow to anger with thee, by inferring from these things that God will not punish thee; not knowing that this goodness of God is designed to lead thee to repentance?
Rom. 2:5 Whatever thou mayest think, in proportion to thy own obduratness and impenitency of heart, thou layest up in store for thyself punishment, to be inflicted on thee in the day of punishment, when there shall be an illustrious display of the righteous judgment of God made before the assembled universe;
Rom. 2:6 Who will render to every man, not according to his external privileges, but according to the real nature of his works:
Rom. 2:7 To them, verily, who by perseverance (1Th. 1:3) in faith and holiness, according to the light which they enjoy, seek glory, honor, and immortality, he will render eternal life:
Rom. 2:8 But to them who, being of a proud skeptical disposition, dispute against, and obey not the truth concerning God and his will, made known to them, but obey unrighteousness from false principles and evil inclinations, anger and wrath shall be rendered.
Rom. 2:9 I speak of all men without exception: for I say, the severest punishment will be inflicted on every man who practices evil; upon the Jew first, or heaviest, because his sins are aggravated by superior advantages, and also upon the Gentile, because, being taught his duty by the light of nature, he is justly punishable.
Rom. 2:10 On the other hand, I affirm, that eternal life shall be to every one who practices good; first or chiefly to the Jew, who, through his superior advantages, hath made greater progress in virtue, and also to the Greek, whose improvement hath been in proportion to his advantages.
Rom. 2:11 For there is no respect of persons with God: A wicked Jew shall not escape at the judgment, because he is a son of Abraham; neither shall a wicked Gentile be spared, because he lived without revelation.
Summary
The Jew constantly condemned the Gentile for doing certain things, but in doing so he condemned himself, for he did the same things. Gods just judgment is against all who do such things as the Jew did. Therefore he cannot escape condemnation. The goodness and patience of God are designed to lead men to repentance, but the Jew misconstrues these and does not repent. By this course he heaps up for himself wrath in the last day, when God will render to every one according to his deeds. To the good he will give eternal life; on the disobedient he will inflict wrath. There is no partiality with God.
Comment
While this passage (like the rest of the book) was written primarily for the edification of Christians, it seems to have an equally important secondary purposeto convert the non-Christian Jew. This is seen in the fact that Paul is here addressing his remarks directly to the Jew, as a careful reading will substantiate.
With the above thought in mind we can realize that the eyes of the Jewish reader must have reflected the sense of self-righteousness he felt within his heart as he read Pauls conclusion of the state of the Gentiles. The apostle now turns to the other half of that world of Gentiles and Jews. He is to finally demonstrate that they are in reality less excusable than the Gentiles, and thus laboring under a greater need for the gospel. Verse one indicates nothing of the persons addressed, and the argument continues in this concealed form until the 17th verse. Since this is true, the Jew would read and hear these words without the veil of prejudice over his mind and would imagine Paul to be continuing in his discussion of the sinful state of the heathen. This being so, he would readily assent to the principles laid down in these verses; and yet before he knew it, he would begin to behold his natural face in the mirror.
21.
What is the primary and secondary purpose of Rom. 2:1Rom. 3:9 a?
22.
How does Paul begin his discussion of the need of the Jew?
23.
Why does he do it in this way?
24.
Why would it be ridiculous to excuse a man who practiced the same sins he condemned in another?
25.
Explain the purpose of the personal note in Rom. 2:3.
It would seem ridiculous to excuse the man who judged or condemned another and at the same time practiced the very sins he condemned (Rom. 2:1). This evident fact is based upon the eternal truth that God will render judgment upon the basis of truth, not upon heredity or position. The judgment of God will be against all such hypocrites (Rom. 2:2).
Making it still more personal (to the Jewish reader): this is a good principle but personally speaking do you, O man, who are doing this very thing, suppose that you will escape the judgment of God? Notice here the inspired author has anticipated the thoughts of the Jewish mind which were probably as follows: He seems to be applying this to me also, but Ill escape somehow; for although I am guilty of the above stated charges, I see no immediate judgment of God. He will overlook it. After all, I mean well and I am a son of Abraham and bear the mark of circumcision. (Rom. 2:3).
To correct this erroneous view, the inspired writer then points out that all this goodness of God, both in forbearing his judgments, and this suffering long with the offender, and in giving him a place in the family of Abraham, along with the mark of circumcision, is but directed to the end that he might repent. The fact that God has not sent his judgment upon you is evidence that He is giving you a period of time for repentance. And now if you fail to repent, you will despise all the riches of His goodness. But what are you doing? Why, through your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up for yourself a great portion of wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God. Rom. 2:3-5.
In this great day of judgment the Judge of the world will have one rule which He will be sure to use, and it wont be whether you are a son of Abraham and bear the mark of circumcision or not. The rule of judgment will be according to works. Then follow examples of the two classes of people who will appear before God to be judged by this rule. There are those who through patient continuance (stedfastness) in well doing seek for glory and honor and in-corruption; these shall be given eternal life. Notice: There is no indication here that sinless perfection is the requirement for receiving eternal life, but rather a constant, unwavering and honest effort to attain glory and honor and incorruption by doing that which they know to be rightright according to Gods law. This may not seem to you to be true, but please conclude this part of the study before reaching a definite conclusion. Then there are those who through a proud, self-centered spirit, dispute against that which they know to be right and obey not the truth, but unrighteousness; to them shall be meted out the punishment due for such willful disobedience: wrath, indignation, tribulation, and anguish. This punishment will be rendered to every soul of man who works evil. Note that they are lost, but not because they simply fell short of perfection. They are lost not only because they did not even try, but rather because they stedfastly disobeyed and deliberately opposed God, clamoring against His law. (Cp. Rom. 1:18 b, Rom. 1:25; Rom. 1:28 a) Although the Jew and Greek will be judged by the same rule (according to works), the Jew, because of his superior knowledge and opportunity is under a greater responsibility; hence he will receive more severe judgment than the Gentile who was less privileged. (Cp. Luk. 12:47-48) Thus we see that in the judgment, the Jew and Greek will each receive a fair consideration. Behold and admire the impartiality of Gods coming judgment. Truly God is no respecter of persons. (Rom. 2:1-11)
26.
What was the purpose of Gods long-suffering?
27.
To whom was this long-suffering of God especially directed?
28.
What did the Jew do instead of repenting?
29.
What was the Jew doing for himself by not repenting?
30.
On what basis will God judge these Jews and Gentiles?
31.
What is meant by patient continuance of Rom. 2:7?
32.
What will be given to those who so continue in well doing?
33.
In reference to the judgment, what is meant by the Jew first?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
Rethinking in Outline Form
THE NEED OF THE GOSPEL AMONG THE JEWS, Rom. 2:1-16
The Jews Were Truly in Need of Justification, for:
If Gods judgment was going to be:
1.
According to truth. Rom. 2:2
2.
According to works. Rom. 2:6
3.
With no respect of persons. Rom. 2:11
4.
According to doing and not hearing. Rom. 2:13
Then the Jews were tragically in need, for:
1.
According to truth. Rom. 2:2
a.
The Jews condemned others and practiced what they condemned. Rom. 2:1
b.
The Jew felt he would be treated in a special manner. Rom. 2:3
c.
He misunderstood Gods mercy as a license for sin and not an opportunity to repent. Rom. 2:4
40.
What thought is broken by this parenthetical statement?
41.
How does this thought read when the parenthetical statement is left out?
42.
To whom has God committed judgment? Cp. Joh. 5:22.
d.
By his hard heart and unrepentant attitude he was only increasing his coming wrath. Rom. 2:5
2.
According to works. Rom. 2:6
a.
To the steadfast well-doer, eternal life. Rom. 2:7
b.
To the factious and disobedient, hell. Rom. 2:8
c.
This will be given to everyone, Jews and Greeks. Rom. 2:9-10
3.
With no respect to person, Rom. 2:11
a.
Even the Gentles will be judged by this standard. They do by nature their law and will be judged accordingly. Rom. 2:14-15
In the day when God shall judge the secrets of the hearts of men it will be:
1.
According to truth.
2.
According to works.
3.
With no respect for persons.
4.
According to doing.
If this be so, and it is, then the Jew is truly, tragically, in need . . . for he is condemned ON ALL FOUR POINTS.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(1) Therefore.The description just given of the state of one section of the human race contains implicitly the condemnation of the other; for it is equally applicable to both.
Wherein thou judgest another.By the very act of sitting in judgment upon your fellow-man, you pass sentence upon yourself. You declare those acts to be criminal of which you are yourself guilty.
The words in the Greek, translated by judge and condemn, are related to each other much the same as the summing up of a judge is related to his verdict. In the first, sentence is in process of being passed, but there is still a possibility of acquittal; in the second, sentence has been definitely given in a sense adverse to the accused. Another, rather, strictly, the other, thy fellow, or neighbour.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 2
THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PRIVILEGE ( Rom 2:1-11 ) 2:1-11 So, then, O man, everyone of you who judges others, you yourself have no defence. While you judge others, you condemn yourself, for you who set yourself up as a judge do exactly the same things. We know that God’s judgment is directed against all who do such things, and that it is based on reality. Are you counting on this, O man, you who set yourself up as a judge upon people who do such things and who do them yourself–that you will escape the condemnation of God? Or, are you treating with contempt the wealth of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? In your obtuseness, and in your impenitent heart, you are storing up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath, the day when there will be revealed the righteous judgment of God, who will settle accounts with each man according to his deeds. To those who sought glory and honour and immortality in steadfast good work, he will assign eternal life. To those who were dominated by ambition, who were disobedient to truth and obedient to evil, there will be wrath and anger, tribulation and affliction. These things will come upon every soul of man who does the bad thing, upon the soul of the Jew first and then of the Greek. But glory and honour and peace will come to everyone who does the good thing, to the Jew first and then to the Greek, for there is no favouritism with God.
In this passage Paul is directly addressing the Jews. The connection of thought is this. In the foregoing passage Paul had painted a grim and terrible picture of the heathen world, a world which was under the condemnation of God. With every word of that condemnation the Jew thoroughly agreed. But he never for a moment dreamed that he was under a like condemnation. He thought that he occupied a privileged position. God might be the judge of the heathen, but he was the special protector of the Jews. Here Paul is pointing out forcibly to the Jew that he is just as much a sinner as the Gentile is and that when he is condemning the Gentile he is condemning himself. He will be judged, not on his racial heritage, but by the kind of life that he lives.
The Jews always considered themselves in a specially privileged position with God. “God,” they said, “loves Israel alone of all the nations of the earth.” “God will judge the Gentiles with one measure and the Jews with another.” “All Israelites will have part in the world to come.” “Abraham sits beside the gates of hell and does not permit any wicked Israelite to go through.” When Justin Martyr was arguing with the Jew about the position of the Jews in the Dialogue with Trypho, the Jew said, “They who are the seed of Abraham according to the flesh shall in any case, even if they be sinners and unbelieving and disobedient towards God, share in the eternal Kingdom.” The writer of the Book of Wisdom comparing God’s attitude to Jews and Gentiles said: “These as a father, admonishing them, thou didst prove; but those as a stern king, condemning them, thou didst search out” ( Wis_11:9 ). “While therefore thou dost chasten us, thou scourgest our enemies a thousand times more” ( Wis_12:22 ). 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.
To meet this situation Paul reminded the Jews of four things.
(i) He told them bluntly that they were trading on the mercy of God. In Rom 2:4 he uses three great words. He asks them: “Are you treating with contempt the wealth of his kindness, and forbearance and patience?” Let us look at these three great words.
(a) Kindness (chrestotes, G5544) . Of this Trench says: “It is a beautiful word, as it is the expression of a beautiful idea.” There are two words for good in Greek; there is agathos ( G18) and there is chrestos ( G5543) . The difference between them is this. The goodness of a man who is agathos ( G18) may well issue in rebuke and discipline and punishment; but the goodness of a man who is chrestos ( G5543) is always essentially kind. Jesus was agathos ( G18) when he drove the moneychangers and the sellers of doves from the Temple in the white heat of his anger. He was chrestos ( G5543) when he treated with loving gentleness the sinning woman who anointed his feet and the woman taken in adultery. So Paul says, in effect, “You Jews are simply trying to take advantage of the great kindness of God.”
(b) Forbearance (anoche, G463) . Anoche is the word for a truce. True, it means a cessation of hostility, but it is a cessation that has a limit. Paul, in effect, is saying to the Jews, “You think that you are safe because God’s judgment has not yet descended upon you. But what God is giving you is not carte blanche to sin; he is giving you the opportunity to repent and to amend your ways.” A man cannot sin forever with impunity.
(c) Patience (makrothumia, G3115) . Makrothumia is characteristically a word which expresses patience with people. Chrysostom defined it as the characteristic of the man who has it in his power to avenge himself and deliberately does not use it. Paul is, in effect, saying to the Jews: “Do not think that the fact that God does not punish you is a sign that he cannot punish you. The fact that his punishment does not immediately follow sin is not a proof of his powerlessness; it is a proof of his patience. You owe your lives to the patience of God.”
One great commentator has said that almost everyone has “a vague and undefined hope of impunity,” a kind of feeling that “this cannot happen to me.” The Jews went further than that; “they openly claimed exemption from the judgment of God.” They traded on his mercy, and there are many who to this day seek to do the same.
(ii) Paul told the Jews that they were taking the mercy of God as an invitation to sin rather than as an incentive to repentance. it was Heine who made the famous, cynical statement. He was obviously not worrying about the world to come. He was asked why he was so confident, and his answer was, “God will forgive.” He was asked why he was so sure of that, and his reply was, “C’est son metier” “It is his trade.” Let us think of it in human terms. There are two attitudes to human forgiveness. Suppose a young person does something which is a shame, a sorrow and a heartbreak to his parents, and suppose that in love he is freely forgiven, and the thing is never held against him. He can do one of two things. He can either go and do the same thing again, trading on the fact that he will be forgiven once more; or he can be so moved to wondering gratitude by the free forgiveness that he has received, that he spends his whole life in trying to be worthy of it. It is one of the most shameful things in the world to use love’s forgiveness as an excuse to go on sinning. That is what the Jews were doing. That is what so many people still do. The mercy and love of God are not meant to make us feel that we can sin and get away with it; they are meant so to break our hearts that we will seek never to sin again.
(iii) Paul insists that in God’s economy there is no most favoured nation clause. There may be nations which are picked out for a special task and for a special responsibility, but none which is picked out for special privilege and special consideration. It may be true, as Milton said, that “When God has some great work he gives it to his Englishmen,” but it is a great work that is in question, not a great privilege. The whole of Jewish religion was based on the conviction that the Jews held a special position of privilege and favour in the eyes of God. We may feel that that is a position which nowadays we are far past. But is it? Is there no such thing nowadays as a colour bar? Is there no such thing as a conscious feeling of superiority to what Kipling called “lesser breeds without the law”? This is not to say that all nations are the same in talent. But it is to say that those nations who have advanced further ought not to look with contempt on the others, but are, rather, under the responsibility to help them move forward.
(iv) Of all passages of Paul this deserves to be studied most carefully in order to arrive at a correct idea of Paulinism. It is often argued that his position was that all that matters is faith. A religion which stresses the importance of works is often contemptuously waved aside as being quite out of touch with the New Testament. Nothing could be further from the truth. “God,” said Paul, “will settle with each man according to his deeds.” To Paul a faith which did not issue in deeds was a travesty of faith; in fact it was not faith at all. He would have said that the only way in which you can see a man’s faith at all is by his deeds. One of the most dangerous of all religious tendencies is to talk as if faith and works were entirely different and separate things. There can be no such thing as faith which does not issue in works, nor can there be works which are not the product of faith. Works and faith are inextricably bound up together. How, in the last analysis, can God judge a man other than by his deeds? We cannot comfortably say, “I have faith,” and leave it at that. Our faith must issue in deeds, for it is by our deeds we are accepted or condemned.
THE UNWRITTEN LAW ( Rom 2:12-16 ) 2:12-16 As many as sinned without the law shall also perish without the law; and as many as sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; for it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous in the sight of God, but it is the doers of the law who will be accounted righteous, in that day when God judges the hidden things of men according to my gospel through Jesus Christ. For whenever the Gentiles, who do not possess the law, do by nature the deeds of the law, they, although they do not possess the law, are a law to them selves. They show the work of the law written on their hearts, while their consciences bear them witness, and while their thoughts within accuse or excuse them.
In the translation we have slightly changed the order of the verses. In the sense of the passage Rom 2:16 follows Rom 2:13, and Rom 2:14-15 are a long parenthesis. It is to be remembered that Paul was not writing this letter sitting at a desk and thinking out every word and every construction. He was striding up and down the room dictating it to his secretary, Tertius ( Rom 16:22), who struggled to get it down. That explains the long parenthesis, but it is easier to get the correct meaning in English if we go straight from Rom 2:13 to Rom 2:16, and add Rom 2:14-15 afterwards.
In this passage Paul turns to the Gentiles. He has dealt with the Jews and with their claims to special privilege. But one advantage the Jew did have, and that was the Law. A Gentile might well retaliate by saying, “It is only right that God should condemn the Jews, who had the Law and who ought to have known better; but we will surely escape judgment because we had no opportunity to know the Law and did not know any better.” In answer Paul lays down two great principles.
(i) A man will be judged by what he had the opportunity to know. If he knew the Law, he will be judged as one who knew the Law. If he did not know the Law, he will be judged as one who did not know the Law. God is fair. And here is the answer to those who ask what is to happen to the people who lived in the world before Jesus came and who had no opportunity to hear the Christian message. A man will be judged by his fidelity to the highest that it was possible for him to know.
(ii) Paul goes on to say that even those who did not know the written Law had an unwritten law within their hearts. We would call it the instinctive knowledge of right and wrong. The Stoics said that in the universe there were certain laws operative which a man broke at his peril–the laws of health, the moral laws which govern life and living. The Stoics called these laws phusis ( G5449) , which means nature, and urged men to live kata ( G2596) phusin ( G5449) , according to nature. It is Paul’s argument that in the very nature of man there is an instinctive knowledge of what he ought to do. The Greeks would have agreed with that. Aristotle said: “The cultivated and free-minded man will so behave as being a law to himself” Plutarch asks: “Who shall govern the governor?” And he answers: “Law, the king of all mortals and immortals, as Pindar calls it, which is not written on papyrus rolls or wooden tablets, but is his own reason within the soul, which perpetually dwells with him and guards him and never leaves his soul bereft of leadership.”
Paul saw the world divided into two classes of people. He saw the Jews with their Law given to them direct from God and written down so that all could read it. He saw the other nations, without this written law, but nonetheless with a God-implanted knowledge of right and wrong within their hearts. Neither could claim exemption from the judgment of God. The Jew could not claim exemption on the ground that he had a special place in God’s plan. The Gentile could not claim exemption on the ground that he had never received the written Law. The Jew would be judged as one who had known the Law; the Gentile as one who had a God-given conscience. God will judge a man according to what he knows and has the chance to know.
THE REAL JEW ( Rom 2:17-29 ) 2:17-29 If you are called by the name of Jew, if you take your rest in the Law, if you boast in God and know his will, if you give your approval to the excellent things, if you are instructed in the Law, if you believe yourself to be a leader of the blind, a light in darkness, and educator of the foolish, a teacher of the simple, if you believe yourself to have the very shape of knowledge and of truth in the Law–do you, then, who instruct another, not instruct yourself? Do you, who proclaim to others that stealing is forbidden, steal yourself? Do you, who forbid others to commit adultery, commit adultery yourself? Do you, who shudder at idols, rob temples? Do you, who boast in the Law, dishonour others by transgressing the Law? As it stands written, “Because of your conduct, God’s name is ill-spoken of among the Gentiles.” Circumcision is indeed an advantage if you do the Law. But if you are a transgressor of the Law your circumcision has become the equivalent of uncircumcision. For if uncircumcision observes the moral requirements of the Law, shall not uncircumcision be reckoned as the equivalent of circumcision, and will natural uncircumcision which keeps the Law, not become the judge of you who are a transgressor of the Law, although you have the letter and the circumcision? For he is not a real Jew who is externally a Jew; nor is the real circumcision the external circumcision in the flesh; but he is a real Jew who is a Jew in inward things; and real circumcision is the circumcision of the heart, in spirit, and not in letter. The praise of such a man comes not from men but from God.
To a Jew a passage like this must have come as a shattering experience. He was certain that God regarded him with special favour, simply and solely because of his national descent from Abraham and because he bore the badge of circumcision in his flesh. But Paul introduces an idea to which he will return again and again. Jewishness, he insists, is not a matter of race at all; it has nothing to do with circumcision. It is a matter of conduct. If that is so, many a so-called Jew who is a pure descendant of Abraham and who bears the mark of circumcision in his body, is no Jew at all; and equally many a Gentile who never heard of Abraham and who would never dream of being circumcised, is a Jew in the real sense of the term. To a Jew this would sound the wildest heresy and leave him angry and aghast.
The last verse of this passage, ( Rom 2:29), contains a pun which is completely untranslatable. “The praise of such a man comes not from men but from God.” The Greek word for praise is epainos ( G1868) . When we turn back to the Old Testament ( Gen 29:35; Gen 49:8), we find that the original and traditional meaning of the word Judah is praise (epainos, G1868) . Therefore this phrase means two things. (a) It means the praise of such a man comes not from men but from God. (b) It means the Jewishness of such a man comes not from men but from God. The sense of the passage is that God’s promises are not to people of a certain race and to people who bear a certain mark on their bodies. They are to people who live a certain kind of life irrespective of their race. To be a real Jew is not a matter of pedigree but of character; and often the man who is not racially a Jew may be a better Jew than the man who is.
In this passage Paul says that there are Jews whose conduct makes the name of God ill-spoken of among the Gentiles. It is a simple fact of history that the Jews were, and often still are, the most unpopular people in the world. Let us see just how the Gentiles did regard the Jews in New Testament times.
They regarded Judaism as a “barbarous superstition” and the Jews as “the most disgusting of races,” and as “a most contemptible company of slaves.” The origins of Jewish religion were twisted with a malicious ignorance. It was said that Jews had originally been a company of lepers who had been sent by the king of Egypt to work in the sand quarries; and that Moses had rallied this band of leprous slaves and led them through the desert to Palestine. It was said that they worshipped an ass’ head, because in the wilderness a herd of wild asses had led them to water when they were perishing with thirst. It was said that they abstained from swine’s flesh because the pig is specially liable to a skin disease called the itch, and it was that skin disease that the Jews had suffered from in Egypt.
Certain of the Jewish customs were mocked at by the Gentiles. Their abstinence from swine’s flesh provided many a jest. Plutarch thought that the reason for it might well be that the Jews worshipped the pig as a god. Juvenal declares that Jewish clemency has accorded to the pig the privilege of living to a good old age, and that swine’s flesh is more valuable to them than the flesh of man. The custom of observing the Sabbath was regarded as pure laziness.
Certain things which the Jews enjoyed infuriated the Gentiles. It was the odd fact that, unpopular as they were, the Jews had nonetheless received extraordinary privileges from the Roman government.
(a) They were allowed to transmit the temple tax every year to Jerusalem. This became so serious in Asia about the year 60 B.C. that the export of currency was forbidden and, according to the historians, no less than twenty tons of contraband gold was seized which the Jews had been about to despatch to Jerusalem.
(b) They were allowed, at least to some extent, to have their own courts and live according to their own laws. There is a decree issued by a governor called Lucius Antonius in Asia about the year 50 B.C. in which he wrote: “Our Jewish citizens came to me and informed me that they had their own private gathering, carried out according to their ancestral laws, and their own private place, where they settle their own affairs and deal with cases between each other. When they asked that this custom should be continued, I gave judgment that they should be allowed to retain this privilege.” The Gentiles detested the spectacle of a race of people living as a kind of separate and specially privileged group.
(c) The Roman government respected the Jewish observance of the Sabbath. It was laid down that the Jew could not be called to give evidence in a law court on the Sabbath. It was laid down that if special doles were being distributed to the populace and the distribution fell on the Sabbath, the Jews could claim their share on the following day. And–a specially sore point with the Gentiles–the Jews enjoyed astrateia, that is, exemption from conscription to the Roman army. This exemption was directly due to the fact that the Jewish strict observance of the Sabbath obviously made it impossible for him to carry out military duties on the Sabbath. It can easily be imagined with what resentment the rest of the world would look on this special exemption from a burdensome duty.
There were two special things of which the Jews were accused.
(a) They were accused of atheism (atheotes, compare G112) . The ancient world had great difficulty in conceiving of the possibility of a religion without any visible images of worship. Pliny called them, “a race distinguished by their contempt for all deities.” Tacitus said, “The Jews conceive of their deity as one, by the mind alone…. Hence no images are erected in their cities or even in their temples. This reverence is not paid to kings, nor this honour to the Caesars.” Juvenal said, “They venerate nothing but the clouds and the deity of the sky.” But the truth is that what really moved the Gentile to such dislike, was not so much the imageless worship of the Jews, as the cold contempt in which they held all other religions. No man whose main attitude to his fellows is contempt can ever be a missionary. This contempt for others was one of the things which Paul was thinking of when he said that the Jews brought the name of God into disrepute.
(b) They were accused of hatred of their fellow-men (misanthropia, compare G3404 and G444) and complete unsociability (amixia). Tacitus said of them: “Among themselves their honesty is inflexible, their compassion quick to move, but to all other persons they show the hatred of antagonism.” In Alexandria the story was that the Jews had taken an oath never to show kindness to a Gentile, and that they even offered a Greek in sacrifice to their God every year. Tacitus said that the first thing Gentiles converted to Judaism were taught to do was “to despise the gods, to repudiate their nationality, and to disparage parents, children and brothers.” Juvenal declared that if a Jew was asked the way to any place, he refused to give any information except to another Jew, and that if anyone was looking for a well from which to drink, he would not lead him to it unless he was circumcised. Here we have the same thing again. The basic Jewish attitude to other men was contempt and this must ever invite hatred in answer.
It was all too true that the Jews did bring the name of God into disrepute, because they shut themselves into a rigid little community from which all others were shut out and because they showed to the heathen an attitude of contempt for their worship and complete lack of charity for their needs. Real religion is a thing of the open heart and the open door; Judaism was a thing of the shut heart and the shut door.
-Barclay’s Daily Study Bible (NT)
Fuente: Barclay Daily Study Bible
1. Therefore Inasmuch as, according to the above previous verse, the most depraved know their guilt.
O man Whether Jew or Gentile, including all of mankind who impenitently claim exemption from condemnation because there lies a worse class below them.
Whosoever thou art Whether heathen philosopher or Jewish rabbi.
That judgest That usest thy knowledge in condemning others rather than in repenting for thyself. Wrongly doest thou assume the judgment seat rather than the criminal box.
Doest the same things In nature if not in degree. The apostle relies upon the response of every man’s conscience for the proof of this charge. Dividing human sins into sins of unlawful love and unlawful hate, every lustful thought indulged is as truly, though not as deeply, damning as self-abuse, and every malicious purpose is of the nature, though not of the degree, of murder.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
I. THE RUIN.
FALLEN MAN WITHOUT THE GRACE OF CHRIST, Rom 1:18 to Rom 3:20.
1. Condition of the heathen world, Rom 1:18 to Rom 2:16 .
The structure of human salvation must base its pillars deep in the profound of human ruin. Of that ruin, therefore, the apostle furnishes a just but gloomy picture.
1. He first portrays the heathen world, illustrating man’s fall by the extremes of depravity to which condemning history shows that human nature can go, (Rom 1:18-32.)
2. Leaving this deep depravity of the heathen masses, and approaching the Jews by covered advances, he next takes the case of the more moralized yet inconsistent heathen, whose rebukes of vice condemn themselves, (Rom 2:1-10.)
3 . He touches the case of heathen who may be considered as keeping the law, (Rom 2:11-16.)
4. Having approached by ascending steps, he may now, without cause of offence, treat the case of the Jew, and through much and earnest debate with the Jew, conceptually present, he attains the conclusion that all are under sin, (Rom 2:17 to Rom 3:20.) Such being the Ruin, there comes a demand for the Remedy.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Paul Challenges All Who Judge Others To Consider What It Involves For Themselves (2:1-5).
‘For this reason you are without excuse, O man, whoever you are who judges, for in that in which you judge another, you condemn yourself, for you who are judging are practising the same things.’
‘For this reason’ refers back to the previous argument about the many sins of mankind, and especially to the final verses of chapter 1. He wants his readers to recognise that what he has said there also applies to judges and philosophers, to Rabbis and to Jews, to people who felt themselves superior, or who might claim that they did retain God in their knowledge, and who were therefore prone to judge others. For the truth was that in spite of their superior attitudes they revealed themselves by their behaviour to be as guilty of the unrighteousnesses he has described as others. For they themselves did what they condemned in others.
Consequently being a judge or self-appointed adviser was a dangerous position to be in, because it meant that they were passing moral judgments on people, whilst overlooking or ignoring the fact that they themselves were guilty of the same things. By judging others, therefore, they condemned themselves, leaving themselves totally without any excuse. As James would have reminded them, ‘be not many teachers knowing that we will receive the greater condemnation, for in many things we all offend’ (Jas 3:1-2).
Note that Paul’s questions are addressed in the singular, as though speaking to one man. But the phrase ‘whoever you are who judges’ brings out that it applies to the many. It has in mind all who pass judgment on others, each addressed personally.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Even Respectable Men, Judges, Philosophers, Rabbis and Jews Come Under God’s Judgment As Sinners (2:1-16).
Having demonstrated the sinfulness and inexcusability of the majority of mankind, Paul now turns to those who are, as it were, standing listening and nodding their approval. The philosophers had said the same thing as Paul had about the general populace. The judges recognised in what Paul had said what they had found to be true about the people who were brought before them. The Rabbis and Jews, maintaining their confidence in the Law, and seeing themselves as superior because of it, also approved. They would all have nodded their heads in agreement with Paul. But they were all sure that what he had said did not apply to them.
So Paul now turns his attention to them. He speaks to those who see themselves as having responsibility for the behaviour of mankind, both Jew and Gentile. There has always been disagreement about whether these early verses in chapter 2 are to be seen as spoken to Gentiles or Jews. That Jews are included is unquestionable because Paul speaks of ‘to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile’. But that phrase equally means that Gentiles are also included. And this is brought out by the fact that Paul carefully avoids using allusions which will pin down who is being spoken to. He is speaking to ‘moral men’ generally. He must thus be seen as having in mind all who looked down their noses at others from a position of supposed superiority.
His argument is quite simple, and it is that those who claim to act as judges of others in the way that these people did, nevertheless regularly indulge in similar sins themselves, something which makes them doubly without excuse in the sight of God. For by judging others they have removed their excuse of ignorance. They have demonstrated by their judgments that they do know what is right and wrong. And yet they still behave wrongly. They must therefore recognise that God shows no favours to His ‘fellow-judges’, and will judge truly. Why, says Paul, if they pass judgment on others, as they do, do they really think that they can themselves expect to escape God’s judgment?
This passage splits clearly into three sections, something brought out by the literary arrangement. In the first section (Rom 2:1-5) we have challenges seemingly put to an individual in the form of charge (‘you are without excuse’) and question (‘and do you think, O man –?’ – ‘Or do you despise –?’), with the verbs in the singular as though addressing one person. In the second section (Rom 2:6-11) we have a change of style , and a clear chiasmus which follows Old Testament patterns. In the third section (Rom 2:12-16) the emphasis is on the fact that both Jew and Gentile will be judged by some form of law, ending with the warning of the coming judgment of all men by Jesus Christ. The three sections do, however, run into each other so that the whole passage also reads as one whole.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
God’s Call through Man’s Conscience: Testimony to Man’s Heart – Rom 1:18-32 reveals the fallen nature of the world, in particular, the Gentiles in their heathen idolatry. 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. This passage focuses upon the man who lives by his conscience to discern between good and evil. So, in this passage Paul writes, under divine inspiration, that the best moral man is also judged as being in sin because he does the same things that the heathen do, living contrary to the law of their conscience. The testimony of the conscience, which is the voice of man’s heart, bears witness to human depravity. It is not enough to have a moral law, but one must do what this law says, or be condemned. The conscience of the Gentiles had born witness that they were sinners. The Jews had violated their conscience when they broke the commandments and statutes of the Mosaic Law. This passage of the Scripture also reveals the distinctions in divine judgment between the Jews and the Gentiles.
Rom 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
Rom 2:1
Rom 1:20, “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse :”
Rom 2:1 “whosoever thou art that judgest” Scripture References – Note:
Rom 8:34, “ Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died , yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.”
Rom 2:1 “for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself” – Comments – If a man speaks against a fault, and but is also found guilty of the same fault, he not only condemns the other man, but condemns himself also.
Rom 2:1 “for thou that judgest doest the same things” Comments – That is, they practice those same vices listed in the previous verses of Rom 1:28-31 that the Gentiles practice.
Rom 2:2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.
Rom 2:2
Rom 2:2 Comments – God is just and right in judging these who practice sin.
Rom 2:3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?
Rom 2:4 Rom 2:4
Word Study on “goodness” Strong says the Greek word “goodness” ( ) (G5544) means, “usefulness, i.e. excellence (in character or demeaner).” BDAG says it means, “goodness, kindness, generosity.”
Rom 2:4 “not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance” Word Study on “goodness” Strong says the Greek word “goodness” ( ) (G5543) means, “employed, i.e. useful (in manner and morals).” BDAG notes the substantive use of this adjective, and translates it “kindness.”
Rom 2:4 Comments The phrase “goodness of God” encompasses the divine virtues that immediately precedes this phrase, so that God’s goodness includes His goodness, forbearance and longsuffering. When we sin, or a man persists in sin, it is God’s goodness that restrains His immediate judgment and He give man ample opportunity to repent. If He executed His wrath upon every sinful deed of mankind, then no one would survive. Just as we patiently instruct and guide our children out of love, so does God watch over us in patience and love. However, God’s patience is not a license to sin.
Rom 2:5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;
Rom 2:5
Rotherham, “But, according to thy hardness, and thine impenitent heart, art treasuring up for thyself anger, in a day of anger and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,
YLT, “but, according to thy hardness and impenitent heart, thou dost treasure up to thyself wrath, in a day of wrath and of the revelation of the righteous judgment of God,”
Rom 2:5 Word Study on “righteous judgment” Strong says the Greek word “righteous judgment” ( ) (G1341) means, “a just sentence.” BDAG says it means, “righteous judgment.” This word is used one time in the New Testament.
Comments TDNT says the earliest use of the Greek word outside the New Testament is found in the Testament of Levi, which has been debated as to it having a Jewish origin (2 nd c. B.C.) or Christian origin (2 nd c. A.D.). It is possible that Paul coined this word and used it for the first time in his epistle to the Romans.
Rom 2:5 Comments – TDNT notes the contrast between men who judge others and commit the same sins (Rom 2:1-3), and God’s judgment, which alone is righteous. TDNT says His judgment is “according to truth” (Rom 2:3). Paul will use a similar phrase ( ) in 2Th 1:5. (see TDNT on “ ”)
Rom 2:2, “But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.”
2Th 1:5, “Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer:”
God’s wrath was poured forth upon His Son Jesus Christ on Calvary. For this reason, God is no longer judging mankind in the present age as He did in the Old Testament. For those who reject Jesus Christ, God is saving up His wrath for the Great White Throne Judgment (Rev 20:11-15).
Rom 2:6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
Rom 2:7 Rom 2:8 Rom 2:9 Rom 2:9
We know as I write in May 2001, the Lord is coming soon and the Tribulation will be coming upon the earth soon. We note that the Jews preceded this event, going through a great tribulation sixty years earlier during the Holocaust of World War II. The world mourns for those Jews who died and suffered during the Holocaust, not knowing that the Tribulation will bring such heartache to the Gentiles who do not turn to Jesus Christ.
Scripture References:
Mat 11:24
Luk 12:47, “And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.”
Rom 2:10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
Rom 2:11 Rom 2:12 Rom 2:12
Rom 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
Rom 2:13
Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
Rom 2:15 Rom 2:15
Rom 2:15 Comments Keith Moore once said that feelings are the voice of the body, reason is the voice of the mind and our conscience is the voice of our spirit. [152] God has given to every human being a conscience, so that he instinctively knows between good and evil.
[152] Keith Moore, interviewed by Kenneth Copeland, Believer’s Voice of Victory (Kenneth Copeland Ministries, Fort Worth, Texas), on Trinity Broadcasting Network (Santa Ana, California), television program.
Rom 2:12-15 Comments Man’s Conscience In Rom 2:12-15 Paul speaks directly about man’s conscience as a moral guide. Mankind received their awareness of right and wrong when Adam and Eve partook of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Up until the time of the Fall, Adam and Eve lived in a state of innocence. At this time, man became conscience of good and evil. He now had a conscience to guide him in his actions. Before this act of sin, man lived in a state of innocence, being unaware of sin because his conscience has never told him that he had done something wrong. When he partook of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, his conscience convicted him of sin for the first time in his life. This is why God gave the tree its name, because it causes man to become aware of good and evil. It was Adam and Eve’s conscience that brought them to that knowledge. When they ate of the tree, then both knew they had done wrong because their conscience told them. At the same time, their sin brought shame. This shame made them aware that their nakedness was unpleasant. Thus, they covered themselves.
Rom 2:16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
Rom 2:16
“But Luke, who was of Antiochian parentage and a physician by profession, and who was especially intimate with Paul and well acquainted with the rest of the apostles, has left us, in two inspired books, proofs of that spiritual healing art which he learned from them. One of these books is the Gospel, which he testifies that he wrote as those who were from the beginning eye witnesses and ministers of the word delivered unto him, all of whom, as he says, he followed accurately from the first. The other book is the Acts of the Apostles which he composed not from the accounts of others, but from what he had seen himself. And they say that Paul meant to refer to Luke’s Gospel wherever, as if speaking of some gospel of his own, he used the words, ‘according to my Gospel .’” ( Ecclesiastical History 3.4.7-8)
Note the other times when Paul used this phrase:
Rom 16:25, “Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel , and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,”
2Ti 2:8, “Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel :”
To Paul the apostle was given the divine assignment of establishing the doctrines of the New Testament church, which he did by writing his thirteen (fourteen) epistles. Thus, the phrase “my Gospel” may imply Paul’s efforts to lay down these doctrines for the churches.
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
The Calling of the Gentiles and Jews In Roman Rom 1:8 to Rom 3:20 Paul reveals how God has called Gentiles and Jews through the Gospel of His Son (Rom 1:8-17) because (1) mankind has rejected God’s call through the revelation of His creation (Rom 1:18-32), which revelation bore witness to man’s understanding of God through his mind, (2) man has rejected God’s call through his conscience (Rom 2:1-16), which conscience is the voice of man’s heart, (3) and man has rejected God’s call through the Mosaic Law (Rom 2:17 to Rom 3:20), which bears witness to man’s unrighteous deeds and actions of his body. Thus, God has testified of Himself to man’s mind, spirit, and body, the triune make-up of man. In this section revealing God’s call to mankind, Paul expound s upon His method of divine judgment because of the fact that all have sinned, the Jew as well as the Gentile.
Outline Here is a proposed outline:
1. The Calling of the Gentiles thru the Gospel Rom 1:8-17
2. God’s Wrath Reveals Man’s Rejection of His Call Rom 1:18 to Rom 3:20
Justification Begins with the Depravity of Mankind – As a side note, it is interesting that Paul does not begin his exposition on justification by discussing the existence of God, but rather, by explaining the depravity of mankind. However, Paul does make a brief statement about the witness of God’s existence in Rom 1:19-20, where creation testifies of a general revelation of mankind.
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Doctrinal Message: The Doctrine of Justification (An Exposition of The Gospel of Jesus Christ) In Rom 1:8 to Rom 11:36 Paul the apostle gives an exposition of the Gospel of Jesus Christ; but it is presented from the perspective of the office and ministry of God the Father as He makes a way of justifying mankind and bringing him into his eternal glory in Heaven. Thus, we can describe Rom 1:8 to Rom 11:36 as an exposition of the doctrine of justification through faith in Jesus Christ. The body of the epistle of Romans discusses God the Father’s method of justification for mankind (Rom 3:21 to Rom 8:16), while His predestination is emphasized in the introduction (Rom 1:1-7), His divine calling introduces this section of doctrine (Rom 1:8 to Rom 3:20), and His plan of glorification for the Church (Rom 8:17-28) and for Israel are given (Rom 9:1 to Rom 11:36) are given last.
In this grand exposition of the doctrine of justification through faith in Jesus Christ Paul uses a number of examples to explain God’s way of justifying mankind. For example, Abraham’s faith is used to explain how we also put our faith in Christ to be justified before God. The analogy of Adam being a type and figure of Christ is used to explain how divine grace takes effect in the life of the believer. He uses the example of the laws of slavery and freedmen to explain our need to walk in our new lives, no longer under the bondages of sin. The illustration of marriage and widowhood is used to explain how we are now free from the Law and bound to Christ. It is very likely that the Lord quickened these examples and analogies to Paul while he sought to understand and explain this doctrine of justification in the synagogues and to the Gentiles during his years of evangelism and church planting. So, when he sat down to write out an exposition of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, Paul drew upon many of the examples that he had used over the years under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Outline Here is a proposed outline:
1. The Calling of Gentiles Rom 1:8 to Rom 3:20
2. God’s Righteousness Revealed In Christ Rom 3:21 to Rom 8:16
3. Glorification by Divine Election: Glorification Rom 8:17-28
4. Summary of God’s Divine Plan of Redemption Rom 8:29-39
5. Divine Election and Israel’s Redemption Rom 9:1 to Rom 11:32
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
God’s Wrath Reveals Man’s Rejection of His Call Rom 1:18 to Rom 3:20 gives us a lengthy teaching on the depravity of mankind, both Gentile and Jew. Throughout this lengthy passage Paul will explain how man’s sinful nature serves as a testimony of why God is righteousness in inflicting His wrath upon mankind from heaven, as stated in Rom 1:18, which is the underlying theme of this passage in Romans. Since the Gospel of Jesus Christ declares man’s depravity and God’s righteous judgments, then man’s depravity also serves to reveal God’s righteous judgments. In this passage of Scripture Paul builds a case for man’s depravity so that he can explain in the subsequent passage of God’s only way of justification for mankind, which is through faith in Jesus Christ.
The first way that we understand God’s standard of righteousness is to be made aware of His divine wrath that rests upon a depraved humanity. Therefore, Paul will first expound upon man’s unrighteousness, or depravity, and show how God has given man over to his unrighteous passions. God pours out His divine wrath because He has revealed His divine nature to mankind (Rom 1:19-20), and they have rejected it (Rom 1:21). Thus, Paul proves that God’s standard of righteousness for mankind has been revealed to him since he was created in the Garden of Eden. There is, therefore, no excuse for sin and depravity. Rather, it is a choice that man makes for himself.
In Rom 1:18-32 Paul reveals man’s depravity and rejection of God. He explains how God has revealed Himself to mankind (Rom 1:19-20) and how man has fully rejected Him (Rom 1:21-32). Thus, we understand why God the Father has destined all of mankind to divine wrath. Paul then broadens his definition of depravity by addressing those who condemn evil and consider themselves moral and good as he reveals their sinful nature through their conscience (Rom 2:1-16). In Rom 2:17 to Rom 3:20 Paul further broadens his definition of man’s depravity to include the Jew. He directly addresses the Jews as he uses the Law to convict them of their sins. In Rom 3:9-20 Paul draws his argument to a conclusion by stating that both Jews and Gentiles are both under sin. So, although the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God, these oracles only declare that all have sinned.
Thus, Paul proves in his arguments that man has rejected the three witnesses of God the Father. Mankind has rejected the witness of creation (Rom 1:18-32), the witness of his conscience (Rom 2:1-16), and the witness of the Law (Rom 2:17 to Rom 3:20). He has rejected the physical testimony of creation, the testimony of his heart through his conscience, and the testimony of his understanding through the Law, which witnesses have testified to man’s spirit, soul and body (1Jn 5:19).
1Jn 5:19, “And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.”
Outline – Note the proposed outline:
1. The Depravity of the Heathen Rom 1:18-32
2. The Depravity of the Moral Man Rom 2:1-16
3. The Depravity of the Jew Rom 2:17 to Rom 3:20
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
The Guilt of the Jews.
Correct knowledge and judgment alone avails nothing:
v. 1. Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest; for wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
v. 2. But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.
v. 3. And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?
v. 4. Or despisest thou the riches of His goodness and forbearance and long-suffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?
The apostle had uncovered the deep moral depravity of the Gentile world, a description that may well fill the reader with shuddering, horror, and loathing. But now there was danger, and the apprehension had apparently been realized, that someone, and especially a Jew, as the connection shows, seeing the unexampled moral degradation of the Gentiles, would transfer his condemnation from the sins to the sinner, while he himself stands back in smug self -satisfaction and self-conceit. But such a person forgets that the same principle on which the Gentile is condemned, that of doing evil in spite of better knowledge, condemns him as well. He therefore that judges and condemns another is himself inexcusable, is in the same condemnation. Every one that judges: Paul purposely makes the statement very general, it applies to all men of all times. For in this that thou judgest another thou condemnest thyself: By and through the act of judging the sinful act, by condemning the transgressor, a person passes sentence upon himself, for he makes a practice of committing the same sins which he is so ready to censure in others. Note that the apostle’s words are directed chiefly against the uncharitable condemning of the neighbor’s person, of making personal matters of the transgressions. That class of people is growing in numbers whose members are ever ready with censure and condemnation for the sins of others, but who are themselves guilty of the identical sins concerning whom their horror is so great; and St. Paul’s rebuke is very timely.
To the fact that the uncharitable critics are without defense and excuse the apostle adds an emphatic reference to the coming judgment. We, that is, the apostle, together chiefly with his Jewish readers, know that the judgment of God is in accordance with the truth, it squares with the facts, and is therefore directed against those who make a practice of doing such things. Two facts here stand out: The judgment of God is certain, inevitable; it will strike the guilty ones, no matter what their position, their real or implied importance in life, their supposed superiority over others. This is brought out especially by the rhetorical questions which Paul here inserts, not without some show of irony. Is any one of the opinion that he, for his own person at least, while he is judging those that make it a practice of committing the sins enumerated above and yet is doing the same things, shall escape the righteous judgment of God? The number of paragons of virtue and morality, largely of their own imagination, that believe God will make an exception in their case, that surely their better knowledge and correct judgment will shield them from the wrath to come, has assumed alarming proportions in our days, due to the religion of works which is being proclaimed everywhere. But theirs is a vain hope; the holiness and justice of God expects much more than an imagined superiority and a haughty aloofness.
Paul presents the matter from a slightly different viewpoint. If a person cannot escape his own judgment, if his own reasoning must condemn him, does he expect to escape on the ground of the peculiar goodness of God? Does he despise the riches of God’s goodness, patience, and forbearance, not understanding or comprehending the true nature and design of the goodness of God, which is to lead him to repentance? The kindness and goodness of God at the present time is merely a manifestation of His providence, Mat 5:45, and does not justify the conclusion that these blessings will continue indefinitely, nor that the self-restraint, the patient waiting of the Lord may not soon have an end. The goodness of God is rather a tender invitation and admonition to effect a complete change of heart, to work repentance in the heart of man. Note: That has ever been the attitude of the great majority of men toward the providential goodness of God: they look upon His kindness as self-evident, as their due, as an obligation which He owes them, and are highly indignant when “the world does not give them the living they expect. ” Only he whom the Word of God has led to the proper understanding of God’s goodness and mercy and thus to proper repentance will make use of the patience and forbearance of God to his own salvation.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
EXPOSITION
Rom 2:1-29
(b) Those who judge others, not excepting the Jews. Here a new stage of the argument, in proof of the position propounded in Rom 1:18, begins, and is continued to the end of the chapter. The position to be proved is that all mankind is guilty before God (see note on Rom 1:18). So far this has been shown with regard to the mass of the heathen world; its general moral corruption, prevalent and condoned, having been pointed out finally as a glaring proof; the main point of the argument having been to trace this state of things to man’s own fault, in that he had refused to retain and act on a knowledge of God originally imparted to him through nature and through conscience. From such refusal had ensued idolatry; thence, as a judicial consequence, profligacy; thence a general prevalence of abominable practices; and at last (in many at least) the “reprobate mind,” lost to moral restraint, and approving of vice as well as practising it. Thus it is sufficiently proved that the heathen world, regarded as a whole, is under sin, and liable to the wrath of God.
But the required proof that the whole of mankind is guilty is not yet complete. It might be said that there are many still who disapprove of all this wickedness, and sit in judgment on it, and who are, therefore, not themselves implicated in the guilt. To such persons the apostle now turns, his purpose being to show that their judging others does not exempt themselves, unless they can show that they are themselves sinless. All, he argues, are tainted with sin, and therefore implicated in the guilt of the human race, while the very fact of their judging others condemns them all the more.
It is usually said by commentators that, the sin of the heathen world having been established in the first chapter, the second has reference exclusively to the Jews. But this is surely not so. The expressions, and (Rom 1:1, Rom 1:3), seem evidently to include all who judge others; and it is not till Rom 1:9 that any distinction between Jew and Gentile comes in. Nor would the argument have been complete without refutation of Gentile as well as Jewish judgers of others. For the philosophical schools especially claimed superiority to the mass of mankind, and would be likely to resent their own inclusion in the general condemnation. Notably the Stoics, whose philosophy was at that time, as well as that of the Epicureans, extensively professed by educated Romans. Seneca was a contemporary of St. Paul. The Stoics might be suitably designated as : for they affected to look down from a position of calm philosophical superiority on those who followed their mere natural impulses, professing to be themselves guided by right reason, and superior to the passions of ordinary humanity. It was a home-thrust at them to askAre you, who thus judge others, as exempt as you profess to be from the vices you condemn? If the accounts that have come down to us of Seneca’s own life be true, he certainly was not a paragon of virtue. Now, be it observed that the sort of people now addressed are not concluded to be sunk into all the depths of sin spoken of above; their very affecting to judge others implies, at any rate, theoretic approval of the right. Nor does St. Paul anywhere suggest that there is no difference between man and man with regard to moral worth before God; nay, in this very chapter he forcibly declares the moral excellence of some, without the Law as well as with the Law, and eternal life as its reward (verses 7, 10, 14, 15). All he implies of necessity is that none whatever are so exempt from sin as to be in a position to judge others; and it is the judgment of others that he here especially attacks, as increasing, rather than exempting from, condemnation. For it involves in itself the sin of presumption, unless those that judge are sinless. But it may be said that the universal sinfulness of mankind is still not proved. For
(1) it is not actually demonstrated that all of those who judge “do the same things.” The answer to this objection is, that this does not admit of rigid proof, and that therefore the apostle deems it enough to appeal to the consciences of the judgers themselves as to how the matter stands with them. But it may be said
(2) that the sinfulness of such persons as are spoken of in verses 7, 10, 14, 15, 29-such, namely, as sincerely strive after good without setting themselves up as judgesis still unproved. So it is in this chapter; and, for logical completeness, the proof must be taken as implied. It was, we may suppose in the writer’s mind, and afterwards, in Rom 7:1-25., where the inner consciousness of even the best is analyzed, the missing link of the argument is supplied.
Rom 2:1, Rom 2:2
Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou doest (rather, dost practise; the word is , see Rom 1:32) the same things. But we know that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit (or, practise, as before) such things. As has been observed above, the fact that “does the same things,” is not proved; it is incapable of patent proof, and so the argument takes the form of an appeal to the consciences of such persons. “Porro quia ipsos interioris impuritatis insimulat, quae ut humanos oculos latet, redargui convincique nequeat humanis testimoniis, ad Dei judicium provocat, cui nec tenebrae ipsae sunt absconditae, et cujus sensu tangi peceatoribus, velint nolint, necesse est” (Calvin). On , in Rom 2:2, Calvin also remarks, “Veritas porro haec judicii in duobus consistit: quod sine personarum respectu delictum puniet, in quocunque deprehenderit homine; deinde quod externam speciem non moratur, nec opere ipso contentus est nisi a vera sinceri-tate animi prodeat.”
Rom 2:3, Rom 2:4
And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which practise such things, and doest the same, that thou (, emphatic) shalt escape the judgment of God? Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and long-suffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? Two possible mental attitudes of are supposedthat of really calculating () on escaping the judgment, or that of obduration, consequent on God’s long forbearance towards him, in that “sentence is not executed speedily.” (For a similar view of God’s merciful purpose in delaying the final judgment, and of man’s abuse of his forbearance, cf. 2Pe 3:9.)
Rom 2:5
But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God. The “day of wrath” is the day of judgment, the final display of eternal righteousness, when the “forbearance” will be over; ever represented, notwithstanding the world’s redemption, under a terrible aspect for the persistently impenitent (cf. 2Th 1:9). It may be here observed again that it is against whom these indignant denunciations are hurled, and this on the very ground of his thus setting himself up to judge while being himself guilty. Of him it is implied, not only that he shares the guilt of mankind, but also that he especially will not escape the final judgment. Of others who, conscious of their own failings, seek sincerely alter good, this is not said, however liable to condemnation on their own mere merits they may be. Indeed, the contrary is emphatically asserted in the verses that follow; nay, even eternal life is assured to such, whoever they may be, and under whatever dispensation, though it does not fall within the scope of the argument to explain in this place why or how. It is important for us to see this clearly for an understanding of the drift of the chapter, and of St. Paul’s whole doctrine with respect to human sin and its consequences.
Rom 2:6
Who will render to every man according to his works. This assertion is no contradiction of the main portion of the Epistle as it proceeds, as to justification being not of works; the phrase here being, not on account of his works, but according to them. “Nequaquam tamen quid valeant, sed quid illis debeatur pretii pronunciat” (Calvin). The ground of justification is not here involved. All that is asserted is what is essential to any true conception of God’s justice, viz. that he has regard to what men are in assigning reward or punishment; it is what is given in Heb 11:6 as a first principle of faith about God, “that he is a Rewarder of them that diligently seek him.” It is further evident from , and still more from all that follows, that all such will be so rewarded, whether before Christ or after his coming, whether knowing him or not knowing him. Nor is the inclusion of the latter inconsistent with the doctrine that salvation is through Christ alone. For the effect of his atonement is represented as retrospective as well as prospective, and as availing virtually for all mankind (cf. Rom 3:25; Rom 5:15, Rom 5:18, Rom 5:20). Hence the narrow doctrine of some divines, who would confine the possibility of salvation to those who have had in some way during life a conscious faith in the atonement, is evidently not the doctrine of St. Paul.
Rom 2:7-9
To them who by patient continuance in well-doing (literally, good work, , with reference to preceding) seek for glory and honour and immortality (literally, incorruption, ), eternal life. But unto them which are contentious (so Authorized Version; in Revised Version, factious. As to true meaning, see below), and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth (rather, worketh, , with reference again to in Rom 2:6) evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile (literally, Greek). The expression, , is rendered in the Authorized Version “them which are contentious,” being translated “contention” also in 2Co 12:20; Gal 5:20; Php 1:16; Php 2:3; Jas 3:14, Jas 3:16. So, too, the Vulgate, qui sunt ex contentione; and similarly Origen, Chrysostom, OEcumenius, Theophylact, Erasmus, Luther, Beza, Calvin, etc. This, however, is not the classical sense of the word, which is not connected with (“strife”), but with , which means originally a day labourer, or a worker for hire, being so used in Homer. Hence meant
(1) labour for wages, and came to mean
(2) canvassing or intriguing for office, and
(3) faction, or party-spirit (cf. Arist., ‘Pol.,’ 5. 2, 6; 3, 9).
Notwithstanding the weight of ancient authority for its bearing the sense of “contention” in the New Testament, that of “faction” seems more likely and suitable in the passages where it occurs; and certainly so here, the idea seeming to be that the persons spoken of factiously renounced their allegiance to “the truth,” obeying instead. We observe how expressions are here heaped up, significant of the Divine indignation against high-handed sin, unrepented and unatoned for, of which the apostle, in very virtue of his view of the eternal , had an awful sense (see above on Rom 1:18; and of. 1Th 1:8, etc.; and also Heb 10:27; Heb 12:29). Still, neither this verse nor Jas 3:5 is of necessity inconsistent with other well-known passages, where St. Paul seems to contemplate God’s reconciliation in the end of all things to himself in Christ (see Rom 5:15, et seq.; 1Co 15:24-29; Eph 1:9, Eph 1:10, Eph 1:22, Eph 1:23; Col 1:20). The “indignation and wrath” spoken of in the passages before us (being, as was said under Rom 1:18, inseparable from a full conception of the eternal righteousness) may still be conceived as having a corrective as well as a punitive purpose. Nor is the doctrine which has been called that of “eternal hope” of necessity precluded by statements which imply no more than that sin, unrepented and unatoned for, must inevitably undergo its doom in the unknown regions of eternity. The thought, at the end of Jas 3:9, for the first time passes distinctly to the Jew’s assumed exemption from the condemnation of the rest of mankind; and to this exclusively the remainder of the chapter is devoted. The “indignation,” etc., it is said, will be upon the Jew first (cf. Jas 1:16), which may mean either in the first instance, or principally. His priority in Divine favor involves priority in retribution, while his pre-eminence in privilege carries with it corresponding responsibility (cf. Luk 12:47, Luk 12:48; also Psa 1:3 -8 and 1Pe 4:17). Then in Jas 3:10 a like priority is assigned to the Jew with respect to reward, the general assertion of Jas 3:7 being repeated (with some differ-once of expression) in order to complete the view of his prior position in both respects. For the covenant was with the Jews; the promises were to them: the Gentiles were as the wild olive tree, grafted in, and made partakers of the root and fatness of the olive tree (Rom 11:17). “Judaei particeps Graecus” (Bengel).
Rom 2:10, Rom 2:11
But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile (literally, Greek, as before): for there is no respect of persons with God (cf. Act 10:34). This, with what follows, is important, as bringing out in a striking way the clear doctrine of the New Testament that the Jews had no monopoly of Divine favour with respect to final salvation. Whatever advantages certain races of mankind seem undoubtedly to have above others in this world (and that this has been, and is so, with other races as well as the Jews is obvious), all men are described as standing on an exactly equal footing at the bar of eternal equity.
Rom 2:12
For as many as have sinned without Law () shall also perish without Law (). Their perdition, if it ensues, will not be due to transgression of a code they had not, but to sin against such light as they had; if without knowledge of Law they sinned, without reference to Law their doom will he, And as many as have sinned in Law (or, under Law. denotes the condition in which they were; cf. and , Rom 4:10) shall be judged by Law. The requirements of the Law which they knew they will be held accountable for transgressing here, instead of , because a definite standard of judgment is supposed (cf. Psa 1:1-6.).
Rom 2:13
For not the hearers of Law are just before God, but the doers of Law shall be justified; In this verse, as in the previous one, is anarthrous according to the best-supported readings, though the Textus Receptus has before it. It has, therefore, been rendered above simply as Law, not as either the law, or a law, as the same word will be below, whenever it stands by itself without either the article or any modifying genitive. Much has been written by commentators on the senses in which this word is to be understood, as used by St. Paul with or without the article. In an Appendix to the Introduction to the Epistle to the Romans in the ‘Speaker’s Commentary’ will be found a summary of the views taken by critics of repute, with exhaustive references to the usage of the word in the Septuagint, in the New Testament generally, and in the writings of St. Paul. It has not been thought necessary in this Commentary to discuss further what has been so amply discussed already. It may suffice to state certain principles for the reader’s guidance, which appear plainly to commend themselves to acceptance.
(1) , with the article prefixed, always means the Mosaic Law.
(2) , without the article, may have, and often has, specific reference to the Mosaic Law; but, if so, the emission of the article is not arbitrary, but involves a difference of meaning.
The article in Greek is prefixed to a word when the latter is intended to convey some definite idea already familiarized to the mind, and “the natural effect of its presence is to divert the thoughts from dwelling on the peculiar import of the word, and is adverse to its inherent notion standing out as a prominent point in the sense of the passage”. Hence the omission of the article, where it might have been used, before a word has often the effect of emphasizing and drawing attention to the inherent notion of the word. We may take as an instance verse 17 in this chapter, where the Textus Receptus has but where the preferable reading omits the article. In either case the Mosaic Law is referred to; but the omission of the article brings into prominence the principle of justification on which the Jew restedviz. Law, which exacts entire obedience. In the following verse (the eighteenth), in the phrase, the article is inserted, the intention being simply to say that the Jew was instructed in the well-known Law of Moses. The same difference of meaning is intimated by the omission or insertion of the article in verse 23 and elsewhere in other parts of the chapter and of the whole Epistle (see especially Rom 7:1-25.). The apostle, who, however spontaneous and unstudied might be his style of writing, by no means used phrases at random, would not surely have thus varied his expressions so often in one and the same sentence without intended significance.
(3) without the article seems evidently in many passages to be used by St. Paul to denote law in the abstract, without any exclusive reference to the Mosaic Law at all, or to any particular code of law. Doubtless the Mosaic Law, in which he had been educated, and which he had painfully proved the impossibility of keeping perfectly, had been to him the grand embodiment and representative of law; but he had hence been led to an abstract conception, ever before his mind, of law as representing the principle of exaction of full obedience to requirements; and when he says, as he so often does, that by law no man can be justified, he means that none can be so on the principle of complete conformity being required to the behests of Divine righteousness, whether as revealed from Mount Sinai or through the human conscience, or in any other way; for by law is the knowledge of sin and consequent guilt, but not the power of avoiding sin. Those who ignore the distinction as above explained, saying, as some do, that , whether with or without the article, always means simply the Law of Moses, fail to enter into the depth and generality of the apostle’s argument. The distinction will be observed in this translation throughout the Epistle ( being translated “the Law,” and “law”), and it will be found always to have a meaning. (For one instance in which it is hardly possible to suppose St. Paul to have omitted and inserted the article in the same sentence without a meaning, cf. Gal 4:21.)
Rom 2:14, Rom 2:15
For when Gentiles, which have not law, do by nature (or, having not law by nature, do; cf. Rom 2:27, ) the things of the Law (i.e. the Mosaic Law), these, not having law, are law unto themselves; which (, with its usual significance of quippequi) show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness (or, bearing witness therewith), and their thoughts betwixt each other accusing or else excusing (not, as in the Authorized Version, meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another, being used as a preposition, governing ). The “for” at the beginning of Rom 2:14 connects it with the preceding one thus: “Not hearers but doers of law will be justified.” The Jew, therefore, has no advantage in the way of justification over the Gentile from being in a peculiar sense a hearer. For Gentiles also may be doers, though not of a positive revealed law, yet of the law of conscience. It is not, of course, implied that on the ground of any such doing they “shall be justified;” only that, so far as they do, they will, equally with the Jews, be rewarded. Nor is it said that any, in fact, do all that law enjoins. We observe the hypothetical form of expression, , and also, , i.e. any of the Law’s requirements. The Law, for instance, says, “Thou shalt not steal;” and if a Gentile, though knowing nothing of the ten commandments, on principle refrains from stealing, his conscientious honesty will have its own reward as much as that of the Jew who refrains in obedience to the revealed commandment. A few of the expressions in these verses call for consideration.
(1) What is meant by , said to be “written in their hearts”? cannot be pleonastic, as supposed by Tholuck. One view is that it is equivalent to , which is an expression frequently used elsewhere (Rom 3:27, Rom 3:28; Rom 9:32; Gal 2:16; Gal 3:2, Gal 3:5, Gal 3:10); and the singular number has been explained as collective, as in 1Co 3:13; Gal 6:4, and Gal 6:7 above (so Meyer), or as “applying to each of the particular cases supposed in the … ” (so Alford). The objection to this view is that it is not the works of the Law that can be said to be written, but rather the Law itself from which the works proceed. Seeing that implies evident reference to the tables of the Law, it seems best to take as denoting the efficacy of the Law, as opposed to the letter, which alone was written on the tables. So in effect Bengel: “Legem ipsam cum sua activitate. Opponitur literae, quae est accidens.”
(2) How do they show () this ? Evidently, from the context of Gal 6:14, by doing ; i.e. doing them (as is, of course, implied) as being the right things to do, and approving them. The very possibility of their doing this is evidence of an innate moral sense in the human heart, which, however it may often be obscured or perverted, remains as a characteristic of humanity, and is more or less operative in all communities. “Nulls enim gens unquam sic ab humanitate abhorruit ut non se intra leges aliquas contineret. Constat absque dubio quasdam justitiae et rectitudinis conceptiones, quas Graeci recant, hominum animis esse naturaliter ingenitas” (Calvin).
(3) What is exactly meant by the conscience witnessing, and the thoughts accusing or else excusing? is not the Law in the heart, but rather our consciousness, whereby wittingly, in accordance with that Law, we approve or condemn. The compound verb seems to denote a joint witness of conscience. In Rom 8:16 and Rom 9:1, where alone the word occurs elsewhere, it is followed by a dative, and means certainly concurrent witness. But, if so here, with what? Probably with the already spoken of. Right conduct on principle, and conscience approving, witness together to the inward law; or, conduct and conscience together witness to a man’s merits or demerits in accordance with that law. Then, what is added about the shows how conscience operates. Reason comes into play, evoked by conscience, to reflect on its witness, and definitely condemn or approve what has been done. A kind of court of judicature is supposed. Man calls himself to the bar of his own moral judgment; his conscience adduces witness to the character of his deeds, or rather, with his deeds bears witness for or against himself; his thoughts are as advocates on both sides, arguing for condemnation or acquittal. “Observa quam erudite describat conscientiam, quum dicit nobis venire in mentem rationes, quibus quod recte factum est defendimus; rursum quae nos flagitiorum accusent et redarguant” (Calvin).
Rom 2:16
In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men, according to my gospel, by Jesus Christ. About this verse the main question is, what previous assertion the “when” refers to. The time denoted by “when” (whether we suppose or i.e. the present or future tenseto have been intended by the writer) is certainly the of 1Co 3:13, and ether passagesthe day of doom, when “every man’s work shall be made manifest.” Hence immediate connection of this verse with the preceding one, which would otherwise have been the natural one, seems to be precluded; for in 1Co 3:15 the present operation of conscience, during this present life, was described. One way of making the connection obvious is by understanding 1Co 3:15 as itself denoting the manifestation reserved for the day of judgment, when all will stand self-convicted. But not only the verb in the present tense, but also the fact of the whole verse being so obvious a description of present human consciousness, seems to preclude this view. Some would connect 1Co 3:16 with 1Co 3:12, of which it is in itself a natural sequence; and this connection is intimated in the Authorized Version, which includes the three verses that come between in a parenthesis. The objection to it is the length of the parenthesis. Probably the apostle, in his characteristic way, paid little regard to precise logical sequence; he only desired to express, in this concluding verse, that in the great day full justice would be done, and all that he had been speaking of would be made plain. My gospel means “the gospel committed unto me to preach” (cf. Rom 16:25; 2Co 4:3; 2Th 2:14; 2Ti 2:8). The idea that it means “the Gospel according to St. Luke,” said to have been written under St. Paul’s superintendence, is too improbable to call for serious notice.
Rom 2:17
But if (the true reading being certainly , not , as in the Textus Receptus) thou (, emphatic) art named a Jew. The Israelites who had remained in Palestine, or who returned to it after the Captivity, seem thenceforth to have been designated Jews (, though they included some of other tribes than that of Judah, notably that of Benjamin, of which St. Paul himself was, and of course of Levi. They are so called, whether resident in Palestine or elsewhere, throughout the New Testament, as well as by Roman writers. the term being applied in the New Testament (usually at least) to distinguish those Jews who adhered to the Hebrew language in public worship, and to national customs and traditions, from those who Hellenized (). It was the name on which the people prided themselves at that time, as expressing their peculiar privileges. The apostle, having at the beginning of this chapter addressed himself generally to “whosoever thou art that judgest,” now summons the Jew exclusively to the bar of judgment, whose claims to exemption from the general condemnation have come to the front in the preceding verses. By the emphatic , he calls on him now to give an account of himself, and justify his pretensions if he can. The point of the argument is that the Jews were notoriously at that time no better than other nations in moral conductnay, their national character was such as to bring their very religion into disrepute among the heathenand therefore doing, and not either privilege, knowledge, or profession, being according to the very Law on which they rested the test required, their whole ground for national exemption was taken away. And retest on law (, here without the article, so as to emphasize the principle on which the Jew professed to rest for acceptance), and makest thy boast of God. The Jew gloried, as against the heathen, in his knowledge and worship of the one true God.
Rom 2:18
And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed (, which implies regular training, whether catechetically in youth, or through rabbinical and synagogic teaching) out of the Law. So far the Jew’s own claims on the ground of his own position have been touched on; what follows expresses his attitude with regard to others. We may observe throughout a vein of irony.
Rom 2:19, Rom 2:20
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, having the form of knowledge and of the truth in the Law. Here the form () does not mean the mere outward show, but the real representation in concrete form of knowledge and truth. The Jew had that; and the Law itself is by no means disparaged because the Jew presumed on it without keeping it (cf. Rom 7:12).
Rom 2:21
Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? The here does not involve an anacoluthon after the reading in Rom 2:17, though St. Paul would not have much cared if it had been so. It serves only to sum up the lengthened protasis, and introduce the apodosis: “If dost thou then,“ etc.? In what follows it is not, of course, implied that all Jews who relied on the Law were, in fact, thieves, adulterers, etc., but only that the Jews as a nation were no more exempt from such sins than others; and it may be that those specified were not selected by the apostle at random, but as being such as the Jews had a peculiar evil notoriety for at that time. Thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?
Rom 2:22
Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? The word () thus rendered in the Authorized Version means literally “robbest temples,” though it may bear also the general meaning of “sacrilege.” Commentators differ as to what is meant. Some, considering that the word would not have been used except to denote something really sacrilegioussome offence against true sanctityrefer it to the withholding of gifts and offerings from the temple at Jerusalem, or of tithes from the priests, or embezzlement of the temple revenues. Mal 3:8, etc., is adduced in illustration, “Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings,” etc. (cf. also Mal 1:7-14). A passage also is quoted from Josephus, ‘Archaeol.,’ B. 18, c. 5, where certain Jews are said to have appropriated to their own use purple and gold which had been given to them for the temple at Jerusalem by one Fulvia, a proselyte of theirs at Rome, in consequence of which the Emperor Tiberius, having been informed of the transaction by the lady’s husband, had banished all the Jews from Rome. Others take the word in a general sense to denote any profanation of sanctity. So Luther, Calvin (“profanatio divinae majestatis”), and Bengel (“sacrilegium committi’s, quia Deo non das gloriam, quae proprie Dei est”). Inasmuch, however, as definite malpractices of the Jews at that time, on account of which the name of God was blasphemed among the Gentiles (verse 24), seem to be here alluded to, the word may, perhaps more probably, be understood in its proper sense of plundering temples, meaning heathen templesa practice which Jewish zealots, in their professed abhorrence of idolatry, might be addicted to when they had opportunity. A writer, though himself attaching no idea of sanctity to such temples, might still use the current term . SO, among the ancients, Chrysostom and Theophylact understand it; the latter, however, limiting it to taking away the . He says, “For if they did abhor the idols, yet nevertheless, dominated by covetousness, they touched the idol-offerings for filthy lucre’s sake.” In doing this, he seems to imply, they broke the very Law which had enjoined their ancestors to “destroy the altars, and break down the images” of idolaters (Deu 7:5); for the sauna Law had forbidden them to “desire the silver and gold that is on them,” or “take it unto thee, for it is an abomination to the Lord thy God” (Deu 7:25). A strong confirmation of the view that plundering of heathen temples is denoted by is found in Act 19:37, when the town-clerk of Ephesus defended the Christians against the popular fury by declaring that they were not , that is (as he might mean) not temple-plunderers, such as ordinary Jews had the reputation of being. It has been objected against this view that there is a lack of recorded instances of such temple-plundering on the part of Jews, and that they could not have had much chance, as things then were, of thus displaying their zeal. But there may have been instances, notorious at the time, though not recorded; and, if so, the drift may be, “Thou displayest thy abhorrence of idolatry, enjoined by the Law, by acts of violence and greed, such as the very Law forbids.”
Rom 2:23, Rom 2:24
Thou that makest thy boast in law, through thy transgression of the Law dishonourest thou God? (or, thou dishonourest God). For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you, as it is written. The reference is to Isa 52:5, where the LXX. has . The passage is not quoted as a prophecy now fulfilled, or as in its original reference exactly applicable, but only as serving to express well how the character of the Jews had brought their very religion into disrepute (el. Tacitus, ‘Hist..’ Isa 5:4, etc.). The remainder of the chapter is devoted to a clear and final exposition of the principle, involved throughout all the previous verses, that Jewish privileges were of no profit in themselves, or without their meaning and purpose being understood and acted on. The thought now passes exclusively to circumcision, as being the original token of the covenant, and the Jew’s rite of initiation into his whole privileged position (Gen 17:1-27.). When Jew had come to be the peculiar designation of the children of the covenant, persons were said to become Jews by circumcision. Thus Est 8:17, “And many of the people of the land became Jews,” where the LXX. has, . It may be here observed that the known fact of other races as well as the Jews having practised, and still practising, circumcision is not subversive of the scriptural view of its being a peculiarly Jewish rite. For to the Jew alone it had a peculiar significance.
Rom 2:25, Rom 2:26
For circumcision verily profiteth (not justifieth, but only profiteth: it is of advantage, and no unmeaning rite, if thou understandest and carriest out its meaning; it introduces thee into a state of knowledge and opportunity, and certainty of Divine favour), if thou keep the Law: but if thou be a transgressor of the Law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. If therefore the uncircumcision keep the ordinances of the Law, shall not his uncircumcision he counted for circumcision? Here, again, as in Rom 2:10, Rom 2:11, Rom 2:14, Rom 2:15, the impartiality of God’s dealings with all men alike is distinctly declared.
Rom 2:27-29
And shall not the uncircumcision which is by nature (i.e. men in a state of nature, Without any distinct revelation, or sign of a peculiar covenant) judge thee (thou presumest, in virtue of thy position, to judge them; nay, rather, they shall judge thee), who by (rather, with, i.e. though in possession of) the letter and circumcision dost transgress the Law? For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: but he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter (or, in spirit, not in letter. Both the nouns, , and , here are without the article, so as to bring out their inherent significance. See above as to and ). Whose praise is not of men, but of God. In these two concluding verses we observe the double sense in which the term may be used. It denotes here one possessed of the true spirit of Judaism; in which sense the Gentile might be the better Jew. In a like double sense we may use the word “Christian” (cf. Joh 1:47, ; Joh 8:39, “If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham;” also Joh 4:1-54. and Gal 3:7). So, too, for spiritual circumcision ( Col 2:11), in the sense of inward dedication to God’s service, and “putting off the body of the sins of the flesh” (Col 2:11; see also Php 3:2, Php 3:3). Such ethical significance of the rite appears even in the Old Testament. We read there of “uncircumcised lips” (Exo 6:12, Exo 6:30), or “ears” (Jer 6:10), or “hearts” (Le 26:41); and in Deu 30:6 we find the significant words.” The LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live;” and in Jer 4:4, “Circumcise yourselves to the Loan, and take away the foreskins of your hearts, ye men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem.” (Cf. Isa 3:1, “Put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.”)
HOMILETICS
Rom 2:1-3
Judgment, human and Divine.
This sudden and impassioned appeal was made, in reality though not expressly, to the Jew. St. Paul imagined himself in the presence of a Hebrew fellow-countryman, whom he supposed to be listening to his burning denunciation of the vices and. crimes of heathen society. Now, the distinctive characteristic of Christianity as a moral system was its insistence upon righteousness, purity, and charity of heart, and not merely of conduct; and no one more thoroughly entered into this characteristic than did the apostle himself. With quick perception, St. Paul discerned, in the mind of the Jewish hearer or reader of his first chapter, indignation and disgust springing up at the picture of moral corruption which fairly represented the state of Gentile society. But the apostle wished to prove all men under condemnationJew and Gentile alike; and upon the Christian principle that morality is of the heart, he was able to do this, and was justified in doing it. Hence the language of indignation with which he turns upon the Pharisee, who recoils from Gentile iniquity, who pronounces upon those guilty of it the sentence of condemnation. “Thou art inexcusable; thou that judgest doest the same things!” The appeal is instructive, as to judgment passed upon man’s conduct by his fellow-men and by his God.
I. THE JUDGMENT OF MAN BY MAN,
1. It is always fallible. For who has knowledge sufficient to enable him to sit in judgment upon his fellow-sinners?
2. As a matter of fact, it is often unjust. For who is so perfectly upright and impartial as to be entrusted, not with judicial authority over men as agents, but with moral authority over them as accountable beings?
3. He who judges his fellow-man is liable to have his attention withdrawn from his own sins, errors, and ill deserts. He is troubled by the mote in his brother’s eye, and forgets the beam which is in his own eye.
4. In the case of fallible and sinful men, the ‘condemnation of others is always condemnation of self. “Thou art the man!” is the response which is suggested The form of wrong-doing denounced may not be the identical form by which the denouncer is chiefly tempted; but the principle of sin is one, though the forms assumed be many.
II. THE JUDGMENT OF MAN BY GOD.
1. This is always and exactly just; for justice is a Divine attribute; and it would be absurd to attribute to the infinitely perfect Being, the Governor of the universe, either imperfection of knowledge or partiality and respect of persons.
2. It is not to be impugned. “The judgment of God is according to truth;” it needs no court of revision, no court of appeal; its decisions are final and unquestionable.
3. It is inevitable. Foolish and ignorant must be the man into whose mind the thought can enter that the Divine judgment can be escaped.
APPLICATION. Let a man judge, not his fellow-men, but himself, lest he incur the righteous judgment of God.
Rom 2:4-6
Long-suffering.
It is certain that we live under a moral government administered by a holy and righteous Ruler, of infinite knowledge and irresistible power. Yet there are sinful men who, while admitting this to be the case, live as if they believed that government and retribution had no reference to themselves. The apostle, in this passage, appeals to such persons, expostulates with them, and shows them the guilt and folly of disregarding the Divine Law and authority, and of presuming too far upon the Divine forbearance.
I. THE FACT OF GOD‘S LONG–SUFFERING. This may be traced:
1. In human history, which abounds with examples of Divine patience with the sins of nations.
2. In the Christian dispensation, which is certainly the crowning proof of the long-suffering of the Eternal.
3. In individual experience; for no man who will be candid with himself will question that such forbearance has been exercised towards him.
II. THE ABUSE OF GOD‘S LONG–SUFFERING. There are many who, instead of gratefully acknowledging Divine forbearance, and using aright the opportunity of repentance and reformation which they owe to it, despise the riches of God’s long-suffering and mercy.
1. The facts upon which this abuse is founded are these: God in his nature is kind and gracious, delighting in the exercise of clemency and compassion. God in his retributive action is slow and patient, often withholding the condemnation and penalty threatened and deserved.
2. The false inferences drawn from these facts may be thus stated: Either, God will not fulfil the threats which he has made, will not enforce by the awful sanctions of his justice the laws which he has promulgated; or, we are for some reason exempt from the operations of God’s judicial authority. This last seems to have been the belief of many of the Jews, who, because theirs was the chosen and favoured nation, believed themselves secure from the penalties which would befall the unbelieving and impenitent sinners of the Gentiles.
III. THE EXHAUSTION OF GOD‘S LONG–SUFFERING.
1. It must not be forgotten that what the apostle calls “wrath,” and righteous retribution, are facts in the government of the Eternal. They do not cease to be facts, because God is forbearing and kind. He can have no compromise with sin. He cannot overlook the distinction between the rebel and the loyal subject. He cannot admit to his favour and fellowship those who detest his laws and defy his authority.
2. And it is equally important to remember that the government of God is universal and impartial. It extends to all mankind. There is not one code for the Jew and another for the Gentile; one for the privileged and another for the unprivileged. “Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.” But in this case it is vain for them to hope that they shall escape God’s just censureand condemnation. All alike are guilty; and all alike, if saved, must be saved upon the same termsterms honourable to God, and beneficial to human nature and human society.
IV. THE PURPOSE AND USE OF GOD‘S LONG–SUFFERING. After all that has been said, it must yet be insisted upon that the attribute of Deity here referred to by the apostle is a glorious and blessed attribute, and that we cannot be sufficiently grateful to God for its exercise towards us, who stand so sorely in need of it. How shall we so use it that it may be for our truest and eternal advantage?
1. Believe it, as a truth harmonizing with Divine righteousness.
2. Submit to it, as an influence inducing to repentance.
3. Act upon it, as affording opportunity for practical reformation.
Rom 2:11
Divine impartiality.
The apostle’s immediate intention in thus stating the perfect equity of the Divine government, and the utter absence of partiality from his nature and from his administration, was to remove from the mind of any Jewish hearer or reader the belief that his descent from Abraham could be of any avail in God’s sight if moral and spiritual qualifications were lacking. But, as is so often the case, especially in St. Paul’s writings, local and temporary references gave occasion for the utterance of broad, general, and eternal principles. The simplicity and grandeur of this assertion must appeal to the moral nature of every reader of the Epistle.
I. DIVINE IMPARTIALITY CONTRASTS WITH HUMAN PARTIALITY. However it may be with God and his government, certain it is that, both in private and in public life, men’s treatment of their fellow-men has usually been marked by personal favouritism. No one can read those passages in the Old Testament referring to “gifts,” i.e. bribes, and to “regarding the face “or the person of suitors, without perceiving how general was judicial corruption in the Oriental world. And there are allusions in the New Testament which prove to us that even the great Roman officials were not free from this taint. The prevalence of the practice of bribery, corruption, and favouritism must have suggested to the minds of ordinary men the possibility that the Judge of all regarded men’s persons.
II. DIVINE IMPARTIALITY IS SUPPORTED BY CONVINCING EVIDENCE.
1. There is the testimony of the unsophisticated conscience of man. Crime, no doubt, exists and flourishes in society; and men’s interests induce them to connive at its presence. But, explain it how we may, the fact is undeniable that the inner voice of reason and conscience bears witness to the justice and impartiality of God. Idolatry is indeed associated with beliefs and expedients based upon the unfairness and corruptibility of the deities held in honour or in dread. But let the idea of one supreme God take possession of men’s souls, and the moral nature with which they are endowed refuses to be satisfied except by a conviction that this Being is far above what are felt to be human infirmities and faults. If there be a God, that God is just.
2. Revelation supports this conviction. There are passages of Scripture which may seem to conflict with it, but these have been misunderstood and misinterpreted, or they would have been seen to be in consistency with what is the general tenor and the express teaching of the Word of God. How many are the passages in which the offerings of the insincere are indignantly rejected, in which we are taught that external circumstances and hypocritical pretences are valueless in the sight of him who “searcheth the heart, and trieth the reins of the children of men”!
3. The ministry of Christ is especially emphatic upon this point. It is sufficient to refer to our Lord’s rebuke of those who boasted that they were Abraham’s seed; he bade them reflect upon God’s ability to raise up even from the very stones of the fields children unto Abraham. And he constrained the acknowledgment from his enemies that “he regarded not the person of man.”
III. DIVINE IMPARTIALITY IS EXHIBITED IN CERTAIN STRIKING PARTICULARS.
1. In judgment God is just to all. There is one law by which all are judged. In the application of that standard a righteous regard is had to the opportunities of knowledge and enlightenment afforded by circumstances; but no other consideration is allowed to enter.
2. The salvation which is by Christ Jesus is provided for all alike. God is the “Saviour of all men, specially of them that believe” Christ died, not for any class, but for the ungodly, i.e. for all mankind, who alike needed redemption and salvation. And the heralds of the cross preached the Saviour to Jew and Gentile alike.
IV. DIVINE IMPARTIALITY AFFORDS MOST IMPORTANT LESSONS TO ALL TO WHOM THE WORD OF GOD IS PREACHED. 1. Here is a rebuke addressed to the proud, the self-righteous, the self-confident, to all who deem themselves the favourites of Heaven, and who indulge the persuasion that they are in possession of some special recommendation to the consideration of the Lord and Judge of all. 2. Here is encouragement for the timid and the lowly, They have good reason to believe that, if they are viewed with disfavour by men, on account of some supposed disadvantage or deficiency, they will not on this account be rejected by him who raiseth up those that he bowed down.
Rom 2:13
Hearers and doers.
It is impossible to overlook the resemblance which this passage bears to words of the great Teacher uttered towards the close of the sermon on the mount. In this, as in so many places, the apostle is evidently indebted for his thoughts, and almost his very words, to the Divine Fountain of all the streams of spiritual wisdom and life.
I. A PRINCIPLE OF CONDEMNATION.
1. It is possible to hear the Law, and yet not to obey it.
2. In the case of the disobedient, the continued hearing of the Law may be the occasion of continued and even increased insensibility, indifference, and hostility.
3. Thus the very hearing and the familiarity resulting from it may become the ground of condemnation, because an aggravation of the offence. Thus the abuse of what is best leads to the worst results. The Law is holy, just, and good; but it is the severest condemnation of the rebellious and impatient.
II. A PRINCIPLE OF LIFE.
1. In the case of those who perfectly fulfil the righteous Law of God, the consequence of their perfect obedience is justification by works. It is needless to say that no member of the human race has ever fulfilled this condition. There is none whom the Law thus justifies. One only among the sons of men has fulfilled all righteousnesseven the Son of God himself, who came to fulfil the Law, not only by his teaching, but in his life.
2. Yet the very violation of the perfect Law of God is the means of calling men’s attention to the need and the provision of salvation by grace through faith in the Lord Jesus.
3. And in the case of those who are saved by grace, the Law of God becomes the standard of conduct, to attain which is the aim of all who are led by the Spirit of God. The whole moral life of the true Christian is an endeavour to fulfil that Law which was formerly the principle of condemnation, but has now become a principle of life.
Rom 2:17-27
Tu quoque!
Although himself a Jew, St. Paul shows no favor to his fellow-countrymen. No sooner has he characterized and condemned the sins of the heathen, than he turns upon the Israelites to include them in the same condemnation of sin and unbelief. In this passage, where close reasoning is combined with vigorous irony, he presses home upon those Jews who censure the flagitious crimes of heathenism the sentence which justice compels them to admit as their due.
I. PRIVILEGE IS ADMITTED.
1. Hereditary advantages are undeniable. The Jew entered at birth into a heritage of favourable circumstances, belonging, as he did, to the nation distinguished by privileges at that age of the world unparalleled.
2. Acquired familiarity with the Law of God was a natural result of national privileges. From childhood, the Jew was trained to reverence God’s Name, to recite God’s Law, to listen to the teaching of God’s prophets.
3. There resulted a position of influence and responsibility in the discharge of the obvious duty of communicating and inculcating the Divine will. The Jew was the “guide of the blind,” the “instructor of the foolish,” the “tether of babes.” He was the witness to the truth and to the commandments of the Eternal. Reflection may show us that we occupy, under the Christian dispensation, a similar position of privilege and responsibility.
II. UNFAITHFULNESS IS IMPUTED.
1. The crimes condemned are committed by those who condemn them. The list is indeed appalling. Upon the religious Jew are charged offences which it can hardly be supposed were all committed by one person, in one human life. Yet there is no limit to the possibility of man’s hypocrisy. Theft, adultery, sacrilege, blasphemy,such are the awful crimes and sins which are charged upon the Jews, who professed so loudly their moral superiority to their Gentile neighbours.
2. The ungodly Jew not only commits the crimes he condemns; he hinders the cause it is his professed business to further and to advocate. To him is committed, as it were, the custody of monotheism; he is called upon to witness to the Divine nature and character, as contrasting with the conceptions of their deities cherished by the heathen. And lo! he becomes, by his immorality, the occasion of God being dishonored, of God’s Name being blasphemed among the Gentiles. The parallelism may be traced between the unfaithful Jew and the unfaithful Christian.
III. CONDEMNATION IS PRONOUNCED.
1. Privilege avails not. It is in human nature to rely upon the enjoyment of great advantages. But the truth is, that the possession of privileges heightens responsibility. No man can be saved because he pleads that the light shone brightly round about him; the question must beDid he walk in the light while he had the light? Circumcision did not save the Jew; similarly, mere outward participation in the sacraments of Baptism and Lord’s Supper will not save the professing Christian. The possession of privileges is no proof of their due and proper use.
2. The less favoured may, in character and life, excel the more favoured. The uncircumcised may keep the Law which the circumcised allows himself to break. This fact was seen and stated by the Lord himself, who continually warned his fellow-countrymen that many should come from the east and the west, and should sit down in the kingdom of God, whilst they should be thrust out.
3. The highly privileged who are unfaithful to their trust shall, it is foretold, be judged by those whose advantages have been fewer, but who have made a good use of such as they enjoyed. It must have astonished the Jew of repute and standing to be told that he should be judged by those of the uncircumcision. Yet this was quite in harmony with, the warning of the Divine Saviour that the men of Tyre and Sidon should rise up in the judgment against the unfaithful of his generation.
Rom 2:28, Rom 2:29
The religion of the flesh exchanged for the religion of the spirit.
It is difficult for us to understand all that was meant by this assertion. The apostle was a Hebrew of the Hebrews, and we know, from the general tenor of his writings, how highly he valued the religion in which he had been trained, and how warmly he was attached to the race from which he sprang. That those who remained Jews in faith, who gloried in having Abraham as their father, and who prized as their own peculiar possession the covenant and the oracles of God,that they would experience a shock of surprise and resentment upon reading such language as this, is evident. And even those who had accepted Jesus as the Messiah for the most part retained much of their hereditary confidence in the special privileges of their nationality and their religion. Such teaching as this undoubtedly introduced a revolution into the heart of religious societya revolution in thought, and a revolution in practice.
I. A PROTEST. There is often no possibility of avoiding conflict and opposition in, expounding and maintaining the truth. Paul was certainly not the man to shrink from controversy; his was the nature of the warrior, and when he found himself face to face with error and sin, his nature was roused to its depths, his native combativeness found a congenial field of battle. And although Christianity was indeed the development and the fulfilment of Judaism, it could not but come into conflict with much which human nature had connected with Judaism by bonds not easily to be broken. Spiritual as were the intuitions of the inspired psalmists and prophets in whose writings the Hebrew people gloried, it is clear that, at the time of our Lord’s ministry, religious formalism was prevalent among the Jewish leaders and the Jewish people. Scribes and Pharisees were too often hypocrites. Religion was too much an affair of ritual and ceremonial observance. Even those who drew near unto God with their lips were deserving of censure, because their hearts were far from him. Now, the four Gospels make it plain to us that the ministry of Christ was a ministry of protest against a religion of form. He would not have directed so much of his teaching against the religion of the letter, had he not seen and felt the necessity of such an attitude of opposition, such action of controversy. And, indeed, he was perfectly awarefor he knew what was in manthat, the evil was one not simply of Jewish habit, but of human nature. Where is the religion, however spiritual in the apprehension of its true expositor, which has not degenerated into formalism? Man’s nature is bodily as well as spiritual; his religion must express itself, or it will die; words and outward worship, organization and official action, all seem, if not essential, yet contributive to religious life and efficiency. And it is most natural that, in the minds of the unthinking and the worldly, the symbol should take the place of the truth it symbolizes, the letter should overgrow the spirit, and officialism should substitute ministry. Certainly this is what happened in the case of Judaism. And against this the apostle of the Gentiles, in his Epistle to the Romans, raised the most vigorous protest which has proceeded from any disciple of Jesus. The seed of this protest was, indeed, sown in the teaching of the Master; but here we find that the seed was bearing fruit. The position which St. Paul occupied, the special work to which he was called, threw the burden of the protest and the controversy upon him. His ministry was hindered by the religious pedantry and bigotry of those who had been trained in the same school with himself. His large heart resented with indignation the formality, the narrowness, the pettiness, which he encountered wherever he met his fellow-countrymen in their synagogues. His commission was one which admitted of no terms, of no truce, with a religion of “the flesh,” “the letter.” If, as a worker, he was called upon to be the minister of Christ to the Gentiles, as a thinker it was his great vocation to exhibit the spiritual character of Christianity; and the identity of a spiritual with a universal religion must be obvious to every reflecting mind. The apostle’s detestation of a merely external religion is evident all through this Epistle, equally in the doctrinal and the practical sections. To no compromise upon this point would he for a moment consent. For a Jew who was a Jew only outwardly, he had no consideration, and circumcision merely in the flesh he held in no esteem. Even in our own time there is need of a protest against a religion of forms and of custom; there is no Church which is free from the danger here intimated; for the temptation against which the inspired apostle puts us upon our guard is a temptation which gathers strength from a principle and habit deep-seated in human nature itself.
II. A DOCTRINE. Over against the protest contained in the twenty-eighth verse is the positive assertion of the twenty-ninth. A man might be a descendant of Israel, and yet might not be a Jew, in the deeper and spiritual significance which the apostle attached to the designation. There were many who boasted that they were “Abraham’s seed,” who had “Abraham to their father,” according to natural descent, who yet lacked Abraham’s faith, the true “note” of incorporation in the elect race. And, on the other hand, there were many who were deemed by Hebrews “sinners of the Gentiles,” who were “children of faithful Abraham,” who were numbered among the Israel of God. Circumcision was a badge of nationality, and a sign and seal of the covenant which God entered into with his chosen people; but it conferred no special grace, and the grace which it symbolized was often received in vain, for privilege and prerogative are in many cases misused. But, under the new covenant, the only circumcision which avails is that of “the heart,” “the spirit.” Such is the peculiar character of Christianity, which commended it to the reason and the conscience of the apostle. There are passages in abundance to be found in the Old Testament which show that the enlightened and pious Hebrews were fully aware of the spiritual nature of religion. But the words of our holy Saviour made these precious truths as “current coin” to pass amongst men. The conception of God must be spiritual; the character of worship must be spiritual; the morality of Christ’s disciples must be spiritual; the religious life as a whole must be spiritual. “The letter,” St. Paul assures us, “killeth; the spirit giveth life.” The letter and circumcision were so largely abused by being regarded otherwise than as intended, that the apostle seems to have regarded them almost with suspicion, if not with aversion; by them, he saw, men transgressed the Law. Hence his insisting so strenuously, as here, upon the purity of the heart and the spirit. It is with the heart that man believes unto righteousness, with the spirit that he worships God; accordingly the supreme concern is that all be well here. Repentance, faith, consecration, hope, and love,all are virtues of the inner nature. Where they are present, they will find expression in deeds and words; where they are absent, all deeds and words are vain. Most beautifully in accordance with this positive teaching of the apostle in this verse is the petition which in the Prayer-book is placed at the opening of the Communion Service, that God would “cleanse the thoughts of our hearts by the inspiration of his Holy Spirit.”
III. A MOTIVE. How far St. Paul was referring to his own experience in speaking here of the praise of men as following upon the practice of formal and ceremonial religion, we cannot say; unquestionably he was influenced by his recollection of the spirit and conduct of many with whom he had come in contact. The Lord himself had observed how those who rejected him and his teaching, and clung to the externals of Judaism, were influenced by their love for the praise of men rather than by regard to the honour which cometh from God only. Men may praise those whose professions are loud, whose conformity is rigid, whose piety is ostentatious, whose observances are scrupulous; “they have their reward.” But those who are taught by the Spirit of God count it “a small thing to be judged with men’s judgment.” Such can look away from men’s fallacious opinions and men’s capricious approval, and can anticipate the acceptance and approval of him who searcheth the heart and trieth the reins of the children of men. For the “Israelites indeed,” the “children of faithful Abraham,” there is in reserve a meed of blessed recompense when “every man shall have praise of God.”
HOMILIES BY C.H IRWIN
Rom 2:1-4
The goodness of God.
The great object of St. Paul, in these opening chapters of Romans, is to show the world’s need of a Saviour. In the first chapter he has shown the inexcusableness of the heathen, and their fallen and lost condition. But he remembers that he is writing to Jews and Jewish Christians at Rome as well as to Gentiles. He knows well the human heart. He can imagine some of his Jewish readers saying to himself, “Yes, indeed; those heathen are certainly without excuse.” But St. Paul does not allow him to cherish this complacent spirit of self-righteousness very long. He seeks to bring home the truth to himself. “Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou condemnest another, thou judgest also thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things” (verse 1). As if he said, “It is quite true that the heathen are inexcusable. So are you. It is quite true that they have not lived up to the light they got. But have you lived up to the light you have got? Have you not come short of the Law of Moses just as much as they came short of the law of nature?” Thus the Divine Word ever seeks to turn us in upon ourselves. Thus it puts its searching questions, and lays down its searching tests. The Gentile is guilty; so is the Jew. The Jew needs repentance as well as the Gentile. It is this, as we have seen above, that makes the gospel a message for every man. It comes to our fallen humanity everywhere, and, with its message of the goodness and mercy of God, seeks to win us from the paths of sin and death to the way that leadeth to everlasting life. Hence St. Paul emphasizes here the goodness of God.
I. THE GOODNESS OF GOD, AND HOW IT IS SHOWN. The goodness of God is no new idea. It is as old as the rainbow, as old as the seasons, as old as the sunshine. So strong and deep is the conviction of the human heart about the goodness of the Supreme Being, that when our Anglo-Saxon forefathers were framing words to express their ideas, the word they chose to describe the Almighty was this very word “God,” which simply means “The Good,” “The Good One.” So even in that early age he was regarded as the personification of goodness. Let us consider how God’s goodness is shown to us. Think of what temporal blessings he bestows upon us. Think of his goodness to our souls. He has not left us, here on earth, to wander in the dark places of sin and sorrow, of uncertainty and despair. He has not left us, alone and helpless, to meet the king of terrors, and to step out from the darkness of a hopeless life into the darkness of an unavoidable eternity. If, on the one hand, he has given us the light of conscience and the moral law to show us our guilt, on the other hand he has given us the light of the gospel, the light of the cross of Jesus, to reveal to us our hope of safety and peace. And, then, how much he has done for each of us personally! How very mercifully God has dealt with us! We are ashamed of many things in our own lives. The memory of them haunts us like an unbidden guest, like a ghost out of the guilty past. Yet God did not cast us away from his presence, nor take his Holy Spirit from us. “He hath not dealt with us after our sins, nor rewarded us according to our iniquities.” Surely he must have an inexhaustible store of patience, of compassion, of mercy. Ah, yes! Paul was right when he spoke of “the riches of his goodness and forbearance and long-suffering.”
“I know that blessings undeserved
Have marked my erring track;
That wheresoe’er my feet have swerved,
His chastening turned me hack.
“That more and more a providence
Of love is understood,
Making the springs of time and sense
Sweet with eternal good.
“That death seems but a covered way
Which opens into light,
Wherein no blinded child can stray
Beyond the Father’s sight.
“That care and trial seem at last,
Through memory’s sunset air.
Like mountain-ranges overpast,
In purple distance fair.
“That all the jarring notes of life
Seem blending in a psalm,
And all the angles of its strife
Slow rounding into calm.”
Yes, “the good hand of God,” as the old Hebrews loved to call it, is shown in every circumstance and event of life. “Oh taste and see that the Lord is good: blessed is the man that trusteth in him.”
II. THE GOODNESS OF GOD, AND HOW IT IS RECEIVED. “Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and long-suffering?” (verse 4). There are few professing Christians who would admit that the goodness of God is thus received by them. They would not like it to be said that they despise God’s goodness. Yet must we not all admit that we do not think as much of God’s goodness as we might? We take much of it as a matter of course. We forget that we have no claim on these bounties of God’s providence and gifts of his grace, but rather the contrary. How little we praise him compared with what we might! How poor a return we make for his goodness by any effort or service of our lives! How poor are the offerings we make of our wealth and substance for God’s cause! What is all this but in a sense to despise God’s goodness? It is treating God’s goodness with indifference; it is making light of it; it is looking down upon it. How indifferent we are even to Jesus Christ, God’s own Son! What an evidence of God’s goodness was the coming of Christ into the worldhis life, his sufferings, his death I “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” Yet with what amazing indifference and coolness this message of Divine mercy, this message of redeeming love, is received! How cold and apathetic our hearts are to the love of Jesus! “He came unto his own, and his own received him not.” From Jesus, the Crucified One, the King, who stands with outstretched hands waiting to receive and bless us, we turn away our hearts after the world and the things of it. Deaf to his loving voice, we turn our back upon our Saviour. We stretch forth our hands after money, and we say to it, “I will follow thee.” We stretch out our hands after pleasure, and we say to it, “I will follow thee.” We stretch out our hands after popular applause and the favour of men, and we say to them, “I will follow you.” But, alas! how few have the gratitude and the courage to say, “Lord, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest”!
III. THE GOODNESS OF GOD, AND HOW IT IS MEANT. “The goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance” (verse 4). God’s goodness is intended to lead us to repentance. And what more potent influence could he use than the influence of mercy and of love? What influence is so likely to make us repent of a wrong we have done to any person than the kindness of that person toward us? If you have injured a neighbour or a friend by word or deed, and he meets you with angry words, this only tends to make you more stubborn, more hostile, than before. But if, on the contrary, you see him bear with patience your attacks, your unkind remarks, does it not tend to make you sorry for the wrong you have done him? Or perhaps he heaps coals of fire on your head, and melts down, by deeds of kindness and a foraying spirit, the hardness of your heart. Is it not a picture of how God deals with men? We have sinned. He has berne with us. We have stood condemned as guilty sinners in the presence of a broken Law. He has sent his own Son to redeem, to justify, to save our souls. All this God has done that he might draw our hearts from sin, that by all his overflowing goodness be might lead us to repentance. He puts before us the guilt of sin and the danger of it, the terrors of the judgment and the agony of the lost. But over and above all he puts the message of mercy. “God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” It is this, the story of a heavenly Father’s mercy; it is this, the story of a Saviour’s love; it is this, the story of the cross,that has touched the blunted conscience and melted the hardest heart, and won the most hardened sinners to repentance. “Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the Lord, for he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.”C.H.I.
Rom 2:5-16
“The righteous judgment of God.”
In the previous verses we saw how the goodness of God is too often received; how there are many who despise the riches of his goodness and forbearance and long-suffering. It is especially to such persons that St. Paul addresses his account of God’s righteous judgment from the fifth verse to the sixteenth. Those who despise God’s goodness have a great fact to face. Those who live as if there was no God, who evade his commandments, who evade his offer of salvation, cannot evade his righteous judgment. As there is one event to all in the universal certainty of death, so we must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ. It is good even for Christians to be reminded of the judgment to come. We live too little under its power. We realize too imperfectly that one day we shall have to give an account of our stewardship. We realize too imperfectly our responsibility toward those around us. How little we enter into Paul’s views of the judgment, when he said, “Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men” (2Co 5:11)! The subject of God’s righteous judgment is an important one both for Christian and for sinner.
I. THE JUDGE. He is a righteous Judge. It is most important that, in thinking of the judgment, we should think of this aspect of God’s character. “The righteous judgment of God” (Rom 2:5). We are not to think of the judgment as necessarily a terror in itself. It is, what the laws of human society ought to be, a terror to the evil-doer, but a praise to them that do well. If we think of the judgment with terror, the fault lies, not with God, but in ourselves. God is a righteous Judge. His judgment is a righteous judgment. There are some who cherish hard thoughts of God, who think of him as a stern and relentless Judge. For such hard thoughts there is no foundation anywhere in God’s dealings with men. His character is what we should call a character of perfect fairness. His judgment will be perfectly fair. There may be some one who will say, “I did not know that such a course of action was wrong; I had not the Law of God to guide me.” St. Paul meets just such a case: “As many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law” (Rom 2:12). The judgment will be entirely according to our opportunities and privileges. If God condemns us or inflicts punishment upon us, it will only be because we deserve it. Every man will get a fair hearing. “There no respect of persons with God (Rom 2:11). Every man will get a fair chance Those who have the Bible in their hands cannot say that they have not had a fair chance. We have all got the offer of salvation. We have all heard of the love of Jesus. We have all heard the invitations of the gospel What could God have done for us that he has not done? He has done all he could do for our salvation, when “he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” He has done all he could, so long as man remains a free agent, to warn us to flee from the wrath to come, to win our hearts to himself. He is slow to anger, plenteous in mercy, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin; and yet he will by no means clear the guilty. He gives us every chance, that by his goodness he may lead us to repentance. It may be observed here that the idea of righteousness is so bound up in the idea of the judgment of God, that St. Paul uses one word in the original to express what we describe by two words”righteous-judgment.”
II. THE PERSONS JUDGED. That judgment no one can escape. “Who will render to every man according to his deeds” (Rom 2:6). Many escape here on earth the just reward of their deeds. Gross crimes are perpetrated, and the murderer escapes the just sentence of the law; the defrauder and the betrayer and the slanderer occupy positions of respectability in life. But they go down to the grave with their sins upon their soul, to pass on into the presence of that tribunal from which earthly rank and earthly wealth can purchase no escape. As the apostle tells us in the eleventh verse, “there is no respect of persons with God.” God looks upon the heart; he looks upon the motives; he looks upon the character. Thus regarding men, thus judging them, he sees but two classes. What are these? The rich and the poor? No. The learned and the unlearned? No. The Christian and the heathen? No. The Protestant and the Roman Catholic? No. In God’s sight it is character and conductnot country, or class, or creedthat divide men. St. Paul speaks of the two classes thus: “Every soul of man that doeth evil” (Rom 2:9), and “Every man that worketh good” (Rom 2:10). Or, again, he describes them, “Those who by patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory and honour and immortality” (Rom 2:7), and “Those that are contentious [or, ‘self-seeking’], and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness” (Rom 2:8). To one or other of these classes every one of us belongs.
III. THE EVIDENCE. Here again we see how righteous will be the judgment of God. There will be no circumstantial evidence needed, however strong its chain of many links may often be. There will be no need to depend on the testimony of others. There will be no danger of the Judge being led astray by the impassioned pleading or the fallible logic of a human advocate. Our own deeds will be there to speak for themselves. “Who will render to every man according to his deeds.“ Ah, how solemn is the thought that we are now writing the evidence by which we shall be judged on the judgment-day! In the red sandstone there are found, in some places, marks which are clearly the impressions of showers of rain, and these so perfect that it can even be determined in what direction the shower inclined, and from what quarter it proceededand this ages ago! So also scientific men have been able to trace out from the fossil remains, buried for ages in the earth, the shape and characteristics of animals whose species are long since extinct. So our deeds leave their record behind them, and that record in the judgment-day will testify to what our character was when we were here on earth. The judgment-day will be a day of revelation (Rom 2:5). It will reveal the righteous judgment of God. It will unveil many mysteries in God’s dealings which we did not understand before. It will reveal the true character of men. Then “God shall judge the secrets of men” (Rom 2:16). Then shall all hidden things be brought to light, all deceits discovered, all hypocrisies unmasked. Then, too, shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Their character, often here hidden under a cloud, often misunderstood, often misrepresented, shall then be vindicated for all eternity and before all the world. “The fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.” This also makes God’s judgment a righteous judgment, that the evidence shall be the evidence of men’s own deeds.
IV. THE RESULT OF THE JUDGMENT. To some will be given eternal life (Rom 2:7). That will be to those who have lived according to the light they had. No mere profession will save us. Neither will our own good works save us. But our works are the evidence whether or not we are believers on the Lord Jesus Christ. Those who have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb; those whom God’s goodness has led to repentance; those who have kept his commandments; those who have not been weary in well-doing, but “by patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory and honour and immortality;” those who have denied themselves, and taken up their cross and followed Christ; they “shall have right to the tree of life, and shall enter through the gates into the city” (Rev 22:14). To othersoh, what a dark future! “Indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish” (Rom 2:8, Rom 2:9). God’s judgment is a righteous judgment. “He that soweth to the flesh, shall of the flesh reap corruption.” The apostle speaks of “treasuring up wrath against the day of wrath” (Rom 2:5). That is what every one is doing who goes on in the path of unbelief, impenitence, disobedience, godlessness. What folly to lay up a treasure like that!C.H.I.
Rom 2:17-29
True religion.
Most men want to have a religion of some sort. If they do not want to have it while they live, yet, recognizing the importance of eternity and the judgment, they want to have it before they die. Hence men who never think of religion in their hours of health and activity, will send for the minister when they are on a bed of sickness. Hence you have such cases as that of the great Emperor Charles V. of Germany, who had been a man of war and restless ambition almost all his days, retiring into a convent for the closing years of his life, and seeking within its cloistered walls that preparation for eternity which he had so long put off. But we want a religion not merely to die with, but to live by. After all, it is but a poor religion which a man puts on as if it were to be his shroud. What, then, is true religion? Where is it to be found? The answers are so various and so contradictory as to perplex the earnest seeker after truth. Old ecclesiastical systems contend that theirs, and theirs only, is the true religion, and in consequence of that belief, and in order to make others conform to it, they have persecuted, and imprisoned, and tortured, and burned those who differed from them. Then, in our own day, we have little companies of sincere and well-meaning people breaking away from all existing Churches, claiming for themselves that theirs only is the true religion, and excommunicating all others. But we come here as immortal souls, seeking after truth, and we turn from all human answers on the question of religion to the one infallible guide of faith and practicethe Word of God. That Word is the lamp to our feet, and the light to our path. I come, then, to this Divine Word; I come to the Father of my spirit; I come to Jesus, the Saviour and the Teacher of the world; I come to the Spirit of truth; and, as a humble and unworthy sinner, I ask this questionWhat is true religion? The answer to that question is given by the apostle in the verses now before us.
I. WHAT TRUE RELIGION IS NOT.
1. True religion is not observance of the sacraments. “What!” some one may say, “you tell us that the sacraments are of Divine appointment, that a sacrament is a holy ordinance instituted by Christ, and yet you tell us that religion does not consist in the observance of the sacraments!” Even so. Christ instituted the sacraments. But what for? As a means to an end. As the symbols, the outward signs, of spiritual truths. They are helps to religion. They teach us the foundation of all true religionthe death, the sufferings, the cross of Christ, as set forth in the Lord’s Supper. They teach us the meaning of true religionthe cleansing and purity and change of heart, as set forth in the sacrament of baptism. But they are not in themselves true religion. If they were, would not more stress be laid upon them? St. Paul says here, “Circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the Law” (Rom 2:25); and again, “Neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh” (Rom 2:28). The outward ordinance, though it signified, did not create or cause a change of heart. Observe the attitude of our Saviour himself towards the sacraments. We read that “Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples” (Joh 4:2). If the sacrament of baptism had such regenerating power as is attributed to it, the Saviour would surely have used it on every possible occasion. We may notice also how St. Paul speaks of baptism in the first chapter of 1 Corinthians. “I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gains; lest any should say that I had baptized in my own name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel.” St. Paul did not think that religion consisted in the observance of the sacraments, or he would have put the sacraments in the very forefront of his work. Yet how many are resting entirely on the sacraments! They have been baptized. They have been regular communicants at the Lord’s table, and therefore they think they are Christians. Ah! religion is something more than this. The sacraments will not save our souls. We need something more than the observance of sacraments, if we are to enter into the kingdom of God.
2. Religion does not consist in the observance of any outward forms. “He is not a Jew, who is one outwardly” (verse 28). In the verses from the seventeenth to the twenty-fourth, the apostle shows how many who are called Jews, and make their boast in the Law, are among the chief transgressors of the Law. Through breaking the Law they had dishonoured God; so much so, that the Name of God was blasphemed among the Gentiles by reason of their conduct (verses 23, 24). Although St. Paul was a Jew himself, he was a candid and impartial observer of human life, and he found that Jews, like other men, were guilty of dishonesty and impurity and other sins. They had the Law, but instead of living up to it, they trusted to the form of religion instead of the reality. Paul shows them the uselessness of this. The form is useful along with the reality. But without the reality the form is utterly useless. “For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the Law: but if thou be a breaker of the Law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision” (verse 25). It is just as if he said to a professing Christian, “Your profession of religion is right, is useful, if you show the spirit and obey the teachings of Christianity; but if your life is in opposition to that spirit and teaching, then your Christianity is no better than heathenism.” “Faith without works is dead.”
3. Religion is not to be regulated by the opinions of men. “Whose praise is not of men “(verse 29). The religion which our Saviour found among the Jews in his time was very much a worship of human opinion. Their leaders taught for commandments the traditions of men. The Pharisees and scribes gave their alms and said their prayers to be seen of men. Their object was to have praise of men. And Christ tells us “they have their reward.” Such a religion reaches its end in this life. It has no aim, and it certainly will have but poor results, in the life that is to come. It has always been an injury to true religion when it has been influenced too much by the opinions of men. It was so in the history of the Jewish religion, when the kings of Israel corrupted it by their desire of imitating heathen nations. It was so in the early Christian Church. The more the Church came under the control of the state, under the control of human authorities, the more worldly it became, the further it departed from the simplicity and spirituality of apostolic times. Thank God for the clear-headed, Christian-hearted men, who in all ages have resisted the intrusion of human authority and human opinion in matters of religion. Such men were the Waldenses in Italy, the Reformers in Germany and England, France and Spain, and the brave Covenanters of Scotland. It is a great principle, worth dying for, worth living for too, that religion is not to be regulated by the opinions of men. Human influence, human authority, human rank, are of little account in this matter. This is true as regards the Church of Christ, and it is true also as regards the individual.
II. WHAT TRUE RELIGION IS.
1. Religion is a matter of the heart and spirit. “He is a Jew, who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter” (verse 29). Religion, therefore, is a personal matter. The outward form is useless without the internal reality. We want inward ChristiansChristians in heart, Christians in spirit. All other Christians are useless, and worse than useless. They are deceiving others, and perhaps they are deceiving themselves. We want Christians whose everyday life is a song of praise, who meditate on God’s Law day and night, who walk not in the company of evil-doers, who sit not in the seat of the scornful, and who commune with God in silent but earnest prayer. As I stepped one day into the office of a leading man of business in New York, I noticed over his desk a portrait of a citizen who, as he afterwards told me, had been a dear friend of his own. Beneath the portrait were words so beautiful that I got the owner’s permission to copy them: “Whose face was a thanksgiving for his past life, and a love-letter to all mankind.” It is Christians like that we want, who carry in their heart and on their face love and gratitude to God, and also love to men. Christians like that would soon transform the Church. Christians like that would soon transform the world. “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and the widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.”
2. Religion is to be regulated by the commandments of God. There is no true religion where there is not obedience to the Law of God. “Thou that makest thy boast of the Law, through breaking the Law dishonourest thou God?” (verse 23). Whether in doctrine, or worship, or practice, God’s Word is to be our guide, and to please God is to be our aim. “Whoso praise is not of men, but of God” (verse 29). We are too much influenced, even in matters of religion, by the opinions of men. While our religion is to influence us in our dealings with our fellow-men, and while we are to influence them so far as we can by the power of true religion, we are not to permit men to dictate to our conscience, or to regulate our doctrines or our worship. That is a matter between God and our own souls. Whether men will praise us or whether they will blame us, matters very little, if we are serving God as his Word and our own conscience direct. From all the clash and conflict of human opinion, let us turn for light and guidance to him who is the Light of the world.
“Some will hate thee, some will love thee,
Some will flatter, some will slight.
Cease from man, and look above thee;
Trust in God, and do the right.”
May we earnestly and diligently cultivate this true religion. “For he is not a Jew, who is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew, who 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.”C.H.I.
HOMILIES BY T.F. LOCKYER
Rom 2:1-11
Without excuse.
Hitherto Paul had carried his Jewish reader with him, for the Jews were glad to condemn the Gentiles. From the high tribunal of their Law they “judged” the misdeeds of the heathen. And, in the exercise of this censorious spirit of judgment, they would perhaps catch at the idea (Rom 1:20) that the heathen were without excuse by reason of their possible knowledge of God. But how quickly does the relentless logic of the apostle turn back this truth upon themselves! “Without excuse,” because they might have known God’s will? “Wherefore thou art without excuse, O man that judgest!” For the very judging implied a knowledge of the wrong, and by that knowledge they were self-condemned. We have herethe false hope of the Jew; the just judgment of God.
I. THE FALSE HOPE OF THE JEW. The Jew was greatly privileged, and God had shown him marvellous mercy. On either of these grounds, or both, he looked for exemption from judgment and wrath.
1. The chief hope of the Jew was founded upon the election of grace; he was called from among the nations to subserve a special purpose of God, and he fondly thought that he was called to security and bliss. He was singled out for service; he thought that he was singled out for inevitable salvation. He reckoned to escape altogether the judgment of God; he proudly deemed himself exempt by his very birth even from an inquiry into character.
2. But if perchance not quite so blind to spiritual claims, yet did not God’s very goodness and forbearance and long-suffering, the wealth of which had been lavished upon the Jew, incline him to a careless ease, which was virtually presumptuous contempt? God had taught his wrath against unrighteousness, but he had also shown his mercy. Why not riot in the mercy. The old apology of God of the human heart,” God is good; he will forgive.”
II. THE JUST JUDGMENT OF GOD. But “let God be true, and every man a liar!” Neither pride of birth, nor the affluence of God’s love, shall be security against just judgment.
1. God’s judgment is true. (Rom 2:2.) It proceeds upon the eternal principles of right; therefore an exemption on the ground of privilege, “respect of persons,” is impossible. “The righteous God trieth the hearts” (Psa 7:9).
2. God’s true judgment condemns the evil and rewards the good.
(1) Now: “is against them that practise such things.”
(2) “The day shall declare it:” manifested judgment. There is an “end” towards which all things are tendingan end which shall also be a beginning. Reason and revelation point to this. The law of future retribution is the same with the law of present judgment: “to every man according to his works.” According to what a man is in himself shall he be regarded by God. And the deeds declare the man. So, then:
(a) To the good, “eternal life,” “glory, honour, peace;”
(b) to the evil, “wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish.”
3. God’s goodness, therefore, does but seek to prepare the way for the exercise of judgment. He must condemn the evil, both now and then, and therefore he will seek to lead men from their evil that he may not condemn. The doctrine of justification is wrapped up in this; for if God can but change a man’s self, the obliteration of the past is provided for in Christ. The deep damnation of those who think to pervert such saving love; instead of a wealth of love, there shall be a wealth of wrath for them!
Let us learn the danger : of a blinded consciencebecause we, forsooth, are “Christians,” therefore we are saved! and of a hardened heartGod’s very love, if we will not read its meaning, may be our death. Eternally, and without any exception, “the righteous Lord loveth righteousness” (Psa 11:7).T.F.L.
Rom 2:12-24
Law and guilt.
God, as the Judge, is utterly impartial. But how, then, shall the differences between Jew and Gentile, especially in respect of the Law, be dealt with in that day? Sin shall be judged, condemned, in Jew or Gentile. The Gentile shall perish according to the measure of his sin; the Jew according to the measure of his. For law must pass into life, otherwise it is void and useless, save for condemnation. We have herethe Gentiles and the Jews in their respective relations to Law; and the supreme sin of the Jews.
I. THE GENTILES AND THE JEWS IN THEIR RESPECTIVE RELATIONS TO LAW. The Gentile might have pleaded that his ignorance should save him; the Jew certainly did assume that his knowledge would save him. Paul will lay to their charge “that they are all under sin” (Rom 3:9), and to this end he now shows that they are all under law before God.
1. Gentiles.
(1) The law of instinctive impulse: “by nature;” “a law unto themselves.” A correct and complete philosophy of the religious nature and relations of man seems almost impossible to us now; but doubtless we must recognize here the fact that man has still, more or less, the native impulses of righteousness moving in the heart, which but for the Fall would have been perfect and all-containing in us, and but for the redemption would have been altogether lost. This, then, is one part of man’s primal constitution as a moral and religious being; he is moved to love and serve God, and to work righteousness, by an original instinct of his nature. Hence heroism, generosity, etc., in ancient and modern world. God works in man, and so far forth man does not suppress God’s working.
(2) The law of reflective consciousness: “their conscience bearing witness therewith;” “their thoughts one with another accusing or else excusing them.” Man does not show his true moral nature till the instinct of the heart is obeyed with the intelligent approbation of the reflective consciousness. The instincts of the heart, so far as they approach completeness, afford the essential contents of the moral law; but it is for man to discern, embrace, and obey. And, till righteousness is wrought thus of deliberate choice, it may scarcely be called righteousness. For there are other impulses, which may lead to wrong; and, till the discerning judgment has checked the native impulse, there is hardly moral worth in the one more than in the other. The “thoughts” must excuse or accuse; then the will may act.
2. Jews. But man’s heart is corrupt and man’s mind is dark by reason of hereditary sin; therefore to the Jews God gave, in trust for the world, a Law, to correct and confirm the law of the heart and mind. The coincidence of the Law of Sinai with the true law of the heart and mind; the convincing authority of that Law, in its Divine power of awakening and purifying the law within. Hence to the Jew there was added the Law of revelation. He was doubly taught his duty.
II. THE SUPREME SIN OF THE JEWS. But to what end was the Law given, whether of nature or of revelation? To teach righteousness. And therefore the man who wrought unrighteousness, according to his knowledge of the Law, whether Jew or Gentile, frustrated the purpose of God, was under condemnation, and would “perish.“ Yet the Jew gloried in his enlightenment, oblivious of its purport and intent!
1. The Boast.
(1) Personal.
(a) His name”a Jew.” Called by God, indeed, but for work rather than privilege. He perverted his call by a narrow, selfish exclusion.
(b) Resting upon the Law. Knowledge was safety, he thought; whereas knowledge was duty (see Rom 2:18, Rom 2:20).
(c) Glorying in God: a merely national God to him, and One who would merely “save.”
(2) Relative.
(a) Guide of the blind.
(b) Light of them that are in darkness.
(c) Corrector of the foolish.
(d) Teacher of babes.
2. The shame.
(1) Inconsistency (Rom 2:21-23).
(2) Crime (Rom 2:21-23).
(3) Blasphemy (Rom 2:24). Their God indeed; what must he be!
Our higher privilege, in the matter of law: Christ, and the Spirit. Our graver peril: orthodoxy, and the name of Christian. “Why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?” (Luk 6:46).T.F.L.
Rom 2:25-29
Symbolic religion.
Closely involved in the Jew’s boast of his name and Law and God was his glorying in circumcision, the outward sign of the covenant of the Law. This leads the apostle to enunciate the law of symbolic religion, and to assert the supreme value of a true spiritualism.
I. SYMBOLIC RELIGION. The law of all symbolism in religion is wrapped up in the words, “Circumcision indeed profiteth, if thou be a doer of the Law.” That is, the sign is of worth just in so far as it leads to, and attests, the thing signified.
1. Personal value. Man’s nature is complex, and the spiritual and the sensuous react on each other. Hence a definite, tangible sign may help the spirit. So circumcision: God’s people. So baptism and the Lord’s Supper now.
2. Relative value. An attestation of spiritual truths can be emphasized by an outward sign. So circumcision spoke forcefully to the heathen around, and so perhaps baptism and the Lord’s Supper have such use now.
II. A TRUE SPIRITUALISM. That, however, which is educative and attesting has no intrinsic worth. Hence:
1. The unvalue of mere symbolism: a childish trifling. Nay, worsea perpetual condemnation, mocking the reality with the shadow.
2. The supreme value of true spiritualism. If the lesson is learnt, and the witness borne, the work is done; for “God is a Spirit, and they that worship him,” etc. So the man of circumcised heart was the true Jew; the man of baptized spirit, and who feeds upon Christ by faith, is the true Christian.
Let us learn, in the best sense, “Thou God seest me.”T.F.L.
HOMILIES BY S.R. ALDRIDGE
Rom 2:4, Rom 2:5
Long-suffering abused.
How prone we are to censure others for what we ourselves are guilty of without remorse! Men delude themselves, either hoping somehow to escape condemnation, though others shall be judged, or else making light of judgment because it has not fallen on them as yet. The apostle wonders at the prevalence of this strange alternative. “Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.”
I. THE KINDNESS OF GOD TO SINNERS. Its abundance. The apostle uses his favourite word to exhibit the munificence of God; his “riches” of every sort, and enough for the whole creation, are ceaselessly, profusely bestowed. His temporal bounties enrich their lives. The children are so engrossed with the enjoyment of the gifts as to forget to uplift thankful smiles to the parental Giver. His spiritual mercies should be remembered. The Gentiles have the warning voice, the guiding light of conscience, to preserve from error and ruin; yet is this token of Divine care frequently slighted and even hated, as Zechariah was slain by Joash. It was no slight favour that blessed the Jews with the “lively oracles;” and Christians may well prize the unsearchable riches of gospel truth. ‘Tis when we are anxiously seeking the fight way we are most sensible of our helplessness, and welcome the aid of the Word and Spirit. God’s kindness is especially visible in the length of the day of grace vouchsafed. The apostle puts it negatively and positivelyGod’s” forbearance” in restraining his thunderbolts of wrath, and his “long-suffering” in the painful endurance of sin in his dominions. We have tried his patience. He bears long with an evil generation, suffers their manners to go unpunished all these years. Even the souls under the altar echo the complaint of earth, “How long, O Lord, holy and true?”
II. THE INTENT OF THIS KINDNESS. None of God’s gifts is without meaning. To use them rightly, to improve them, is the recompense he seeks. His forbearance is designed to change men’s lives. Reflection begets repentance, the grieving over past follies, the resolution to forsake them, and the actual turning to a godly life. He gives men time to alter. He is “long-suffering, not willing that any should perish.” See this in years while the ark was a-preparing, in the period of prophecy before the Captivity, and in the interval between the Day of Pentecost and the day of judgment. Men have prayed God to spare their lives in the hour of peril, and the moments after rescue have blotted out the memory of his mercy and their vow. He employs agencies adapted to this end. His revelation and the admonitions of the Spirit, preachers, and providences, have been directed towards arousing the lethargic, rebuking the careless, forcing them to trace a connection between sin and destruction. He woos them to a better life by his goodness. He is drawing them as with a magnet, so that if they repent not it is because they resist his “leading.”
III. THE TREATMENT THIS KINDNESS TOO OFTEN RECEIVES. Contempt. Men scoff at the idea of retribution awaiting them, arguing final impunity from the arrival of present donations that speak of the Creator and Preserver’s benevolence. They mistake his slowness to strike for incapacity. His unwillingness to destroy is imputed to inability. Contempt is a sign of ignorance. “Not knowing that,” etc. It is the foolish who display brazen hardihood; the wise man makes light of no threatening storm. Such ignorance is blamable. The source of it is the “hardness and impenitence of the heart.” “Their eyes have they closed, and their ears are dull of hearing, because the heart of this people is waxed gross.” The Scriptures would drive us from every refuge of lies, would make us ashamed of our behaviour that we may mourn and amend. There is no hope of reformation as long as the pachyderm of self-complacency is not pierced with the compunction of responsibility.
IV. THE AWFUL CONSEQUENCE TO THE IMPENITENT. They aggravate their punishment. The pent-up storm bursts with the greater fury. The more the advantages, the weightier the account demanded; the longer the time granted for amendment, the severer the castigation for wasted opportunities. Men “treasure up” wrath for themselves. Character indurates, like the writing on clay tablets hardened in the sun. No possible excuse can be found where the day of grace has passed unused. A dreadful contrast, to accumulate a store of wrath instead of profiting by the riches of God’s goodness. The money of heaven was placed at men’s disposal; but, throwing this away as rubbish, they made their own counterfeit coins, and are punished for their treason against the King’s government. Trifle not with sin when thou seest its present disastrous results, but calculate thence the “wrath of the Lamb,” when gentleness has been spurned and maltreated, and goodness must give place to severity. The smoothly gliding river of God’s long-suffering, if barred out of thy heart by closed gates, will swell to a mighty torrent, sweeping thy frail obstructions away to ruin.S.R.A.
Rom 2:6-11
A righteous Judge.
That the anticipation of a judgment rises naturally in the mind is shown by the present testimony of consciencea law recognized as in, yet above us, and by the utterances of heathen writers on morals. The Scriptures corroborate and clarify this conception. The apostle asserts of the future what Abraham felt of the present Providence, “Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? Will he slay the righteous with the wicked?” Note some particulars confirming the righteousness of God’s judgment.
I. THE RECOMPENSE WILL BE PROPORTIONED TO MEN‘S DEEDS. Not their professions, but their acts, will determine their destiny. And the character and number of their acts will be reckoned. There is no conflict between this statement and other Scripture passages which speak of the reward as one of grace, not of merit, and as a gift bestowed on all Christians. For the reward will be immensely greater than men’s deeds deserve, and will not be earned by them, but conditioned by their conduct. The gospel comes not as a substitute for, but as a help to realizing, practical righteousness; and whilst every justified believer will be saved, each will have the praise that is his, according to his works of faith and labours of love.
II. THE JUDGMENT WILL TAKE ACCOUNT OF MEN‘S AIMS IN LIFE, The one class seek “glory, honour, and incorruption,” and also “peace.” Their choice does them credit; they selected what is fair and lovely and permanent, what is opposed to the rule of the flesh, and is unaffected by the ravages of time. Their goal is not the “vain pomp and glory of the world;” not simply success, but to reach a position of pure, lasting excellence. And they shall receive in fullest measure what they desire. “Eternal life’ comprehends all blessednessdeliverance from the thraldom of sin; no need to gather up the skirts lest defilement ensue, for the very streets of their city shall be of pure gold; enwrapment with the Divine splendour; walking in the light of God; manifested as his sons by the likeness they wear; elevated to princely employments and regal dignities. The objects for which the other class strive are not definitely stated, but may be gathered from antithesis and from the unrighteousness to which they yield themselves. They seek not “peace” and “truth,” and their harvest likewise is the multiplied outcome of the seeds they have sown. No description of hell can transcend the awful picture of” wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish,” resting upon the soul; that, clasping unrighteousness to its bosom as a prize on earth, finds it sting like a serpent and burn with fiercest remorse when allowed full sway in its “own place.”
III. THE AWARD WILL BEAR RELATION TO THE METHODS BY WHICH THE OBJECTS OF EARTHLY ENDEAVOUR HAVE BEEN PURSUED. A righteous aim can be permanently attained only in righteous ways. The recognition of this stamps the government of the universe as moral. The “patient continuance” of the one class could only be practised by the well-doing. It includes passive endurance and active perseverance; the stationary posture of the caryatides, and the carrying of a burden in the face of wind and storm. The other class are described as “factious,” quarrelling with their lot, coveting pleasure and notoriety, “working evil.” Refusing to bow to the yoke of truth, they become the slaves of unrighteousness; and a hard master and terrible paymaster does unrighteousness prove. The judgment of God will proceed on easily intelligible principles. It is not difficult for men to decide whether they are working good or working evil. It is not reaching a conclusion after abstract speculation, nor holding a creed with multitudinous details. Only an omniscient Judge, however, could bring to light the hidden deeds of darkness, the secret thing, good or bad.
IV. THE JUDGE WILL OBSERVE RIGOROUS IMPARTIALITY. With him “is no respect of persons.” Jew and Greek shall be tried with due regard to the presence or absence of religious light (cf. Act 10:35 in the history of Cornelius). It is impossible to bribe the almighty Arbiter or to overawe his tribunal. The anticipation of a Divine judgment has been a comfort to the oppressed, remembering that “One higher than the high regardeth;” and it will be a terror to the worker of iniquity, and an incentive to all noble deeds. “Knowing the terror of the Lord, we persuade men.” None can complain that their condition makes it impossible to be patient in well-doing. Christ, our Pattern and our Power, offers his “very present help” to all who find the stress and strain of life too severe for mortal strength.S.R.A.
Rom 2:21
A sermon to teachers.
The apostle supposes a Jew to have listened complacently to the long catalogue of crimes of which the heathen world has been guiltycrimes which blacken the lip to mention. And then the apostle turns strategically round upon the self-satisfied possessor of a Divine revelation to put the scathing inquiry, why he has not been freer from violations of the moral law. Advantage entails responsibility; it was inconsistent to eagerly proselytize to a religion which the preacher observed more by precept than by example. A lesson here for all teachers of the Word: let their instructions mould their own lives!
I. THE WORK OF TEACHING.
1. Its possibility. It presumes that some are able and willing to teach, and that others are equally in a position to learn. Knowledge begets the desire of communication to others; truth by its dissemination enriches all, leaves none the poorer. The possession of the Scriptures constitutes a capacity in those who study to explain their meaning to others less happily situated for meditation. Besides the preachers of the gospel from the pulpit, we have a noble army of volunteers sacrificing their ease each Lord’s day to impart to the young what they themselves have learned of Christ. And the youthful mind is plastic, its heart easily impressed.
2. Its importance. Education is a work of beginnings, of seed-sowing, of filling the pockets with treasure in the shape of facts and principles to be afterwards used, applied, recognized, in fulness of meaning. The mind must be fed as well as the body, or we have dwarfed, stunted souls, miserable and corrupt. To neglect the garden is to fill it with weeds. We insufficiently value acquisitions whose worth cannot be tabulated in monetary figures. Of what priceless value is a new happy inspiring thought of God! To be led where we can get a better sight of Christ and his salvation, is surely a service for which we can in no wise adequately thank or pay our guide.
3. Its difficulty. Some hesitate to teach unless they can answer every objection which may be urged against the truth they enforce. And on religious subjects there is no end to the queries which may be started. There are many adverse influences preventing the ready reception of the facts and doctrines of Christianity, or checking the subsequent advance in learning. Recall our Lord’s parable of the sower, and its picture of the multiform ways in which sin works against the leaven of the truth. There is a roseate and there is a practical view of Sunday school work. Yet, whilst we would not forget the restlessness of the young, and the far aim of making them “wise unto salvation” so frequently hindered by unlovely homes, neither should any despair, but remember they are wielding the sword of the Spirit, and that to God all hearts are open. Let preachers think of the Lord and his apostles as failing to conquer the opposition and win the assent of all their hearers, and, instead of renouncing toil, remember that they are not responsible for success, but only for effort.
II. THE REFLEX INFLUENCE OF TEACHING ON THE TEACHERS,
1. Incites to their own culture. There is the felt necessity of being in advance of the learners. The more we know and the more thoroughly and clearly we understand it, the greater the enjoyment and the success of the work. We often take pains for the sake of others which we should reject for ourselves. How can we teach if we do not instruct ourselves? There ought to be no sad hiatus between our declarations and our spiritual conduct. We must not only be finger-posts, but guides”lest, having preached to others, we ourselves become castaways.”
“The lore of Christ and his apostles twelve
He taught, but first he followed it himself.”
If we are the channels of good to our fellows, it behoves us to clear away all that might impede the flowing, and defile the purity of the stream of truth from God.
2. Necessarily promotes their own improvement. Earnest sincere teaching not only demands self-culture and progress, but is certain to result therein. All Christian service is self-rewarding.
“Thou shalt be served thyself, by every sense
Of service which thou renderest.”
Teaching clarifies our own views, enforces truth upon our own souls. Many a teacher has enjoyed prayer and realized the sweetness and significance of the Scriptures most when preparing the lesson for his scholars. The Divine plan for oblivion of our own sorrows is to become saviours to the helpless, physicians to the sick. The outrush of Christian benevolence protects against the inflow of corroding cares or pleasures.S.R.A.
Rom 2:28, Rom 2:29
Heartfelt religion.
Religion may be conceived of as external or internal. According to the former view, we regard the religious man as one who in the sight of others observes the ceremonies of religion, attends Divine service, and conforms to the outward ordinances of Scripture. According to the latter view, we think of the heart of the man as moved by inward impulses, affected by certain sentiments, forming religious resolves, and conscious of holy affections.
I. A GENERAL MISTAKE CORRECTED: THE PRONENESS OF MANKIND TO LAY THE STRESS OF RELIGION UPON OUTWARD OBSERVANCES. The Jew grounded his self-satisfaction upon his initiation into the covenant by circumcision; upon his religious dress, with its phylacteries and fringes; upon his prayers, fasting, and tithes. The heathen religion consisted mainly in superstitious ceremonies, sacrifices, and incantations. And the people’s query to John the Baptist, “What shall we do?“ like the jailor’s request of Paul, “What must I do to be saved?” shows this natural tendency, which begets in our day nominal Christianity; that contents itself with baptism and the Lord’s Supper, reading the Bible, and subscribing to societies. Their religion ends theremere formalism. Its causes may be found in the following circumstances.
1. We are under the governance of the senses. We like, and need to a certain extent, the visible signs and seals of religion, and thus run the risk of exalting unduly their importance. Resting in the embodiment, we neglect the spiritual significance.
2. It saves the trouble of investigating our spiritual condition. Definite rules please us, by relegating to codes or authorities the difficulty and weariness of understanding principles, and deciding as to times and degrees and dispositions of religious service.
3. The rites may be performed without necessarily renouncing pleasurable vices. There is a sort of compromise effected, such and such duties condoning such other laxities. Even asceticism is easier than rigorous inward control and mortification. To depreciate internal religion is evidently wrong:
(1) From the whole tenor of Scripture in many places. Even the Law of Moses affirmed the necessity of loving God with all the heart and soul. The prophets constantly denounced sacrifices which represented no moral feeling, no inward confession of sin or respect to the glory of God.
(2) The intent of religious observances is as means to an end, and to stop at the means is to frustrate the aim of ceremonies, which are designed to purify our conceptions of righteousness, to strengthen our aspirations after the noble and the good, and to leaven the whole life with godliness.
II. A WRONG CONCLUSION OBVIATED: THAT EXTERNAL OBSERVANCES MAY BE DISREGARDED. It is man’s habit, as Butler has remarked, when two things are compared, to fancy that the one adjudged less preferable may be wholly neglected. “These ought ye to have done, and not to have left the other undone.” The practice of religion demands some outward rites.
1. Expression is helpful to our thoughts. Singing increases thankfulness; written vows stamp themselves on the memory. And the symbolic acts of a religion thus lend impressive definiteness to our inward decisions.
2. The union of Christians is assisted by participation in the same rites. Attending the same gatherings, affixing the same badge to the breast, cements the conviction of brotherhood, and renders co-operation possible.
3. The honour of God is subserved by outward worship and confession. His glory is in revelation, and by visible adoration the Church reflects his radiance and becomes the light of the world. There is a moral obligation resting on the disciples of Christ to respect the institutions he himself established.
III. THE TRUE RELATION OF EXTERNAL TO INTERNAL RELIGION.
1. The external observance must be the outgrowth of the inward condition. The sign of a change of heart or disposition. The profession is designed as an index to the soul, a dial-plate of the inner workings; otherwise it is false and worthless, a mockery and an injury. Hence the anxiety of the gospel method to reform and renew the heart, that from a pure spring pellucid rills may flow. “Make the tree good, and its fruit will be good also.” Even moral acts have no beauty in them if performed from unworthy motives. To give merely because we are importuned, or to head a subscription list, is not liberality.
2. When there is a conflict between moral duties and religious observances, then only can the latter be neglected. Whilst both are commanded, the moral obligations have the additional sanction of arising from the light of nature. Our Saviour showed that it was better to rescue an ox or a sheep than to keep the sabbath. He declared the Pharisees not to understand the statement, “I will have mercy, and not sacrifice.” They did not perceive that the general spirit of religion consists in piety and virtue, as distinguished from outward forms and regulations. “To obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.”
IV. THE DIVINE APPROVAL WHICH CROWNS A TRULY RELIGIOUS LIFE. “Whose praise is not of men, but of God.” The supreme object is to please him who alone can really see our thoughts and aims, and judge righteous judgment. Men praise where they should blame, and censure when they ought to approve. As Paul cried, “I appeal unto Caesar,” so we may appeal unto God. His praise is worth having. The degrees in his university mean merited honours. All our inward strivings against temptation and struggles to hold fast to faith in his Word he has witnessed. Human eyes can only discern our failures or our seeming successes, but Christ’s “eyes of flame” test the gold of our actions. And the commendation of the Lord implies blessed reward, to be publicly conferred hereafter. With him is no inadequacy of testimonials to express his sense of his people’s services.S.R.A.
HOMILIES BY R.M. EDGAR
Rom 2:1-16
The leading principles regulating the general judgment.
Having stated so clearly the state of the Gentile world as under God’s wrath, the apostle now introduces to us a critic who endorses the Divine dealings. He is a severe critic, as guilty men will often be. His spirit towards the heathen world, so manifestly under the Divine curse, is, “Serve them right.” He is evidently a Jew (cf Rom 2:17). Criticizing the heathen world from the platform of superior privileges, the Jew concluded that they had got no more than they deserved. The apostle, however, ventures to tell him he is as “inexcusable” as his Gentile brother. If the Gentile had so misused “the light of nature” and of “conscience” as to become so degraded, why has the Jew so misused the additional light of God’s Law as to become so self-righteous? God will not judge the secrets of men upon any narrow and partial grounds, but will dispense judgment fairly. The section now before us presents the leading principles of the Divine judgment in a most masterly fashion.
I. GOD‘S JUDGMENT IS ACCORDING TO TRUTH. (Rom 2:2.) The apostle declares to his self-righteous critic that he is surethe Revised Version gives it “know”that God’s judgment in the cases already referred to is according to truth ( ). By this we are to understand that it is according to the reality of the things in question. That is to say, the Divine judgment is not based on appearances, it does not rest on superficial grounds, but goes down to the very nature of things. And this is a general principle characterizing God’s judgment always. Men may judge according to the appearance, but God looketh on the heart, and dispenses to each individual what he deserves. Now, we could have confidence in no other judgment than this one which conforms to the reality and nature of things. If we are able to analyze fairly God’s dealings with sinful men, we shall find that his severe judgments have always had sufficient reason. In the present instance, the critic vindicates the Divine procedure. As he declares the Gentiles to have suffered rightly, he really becomes the champion of God, although in doing so he, as the apostle shows, condemns himself.
II. GOD‘S JUDGMENTS MAY BE PRECEDED BY A DISPENSATION OF FORBEARANCE. (Rom 2:3-5.) While God’s judgments when executed are truthful and thorough, they may not be executed immediately. In the case of the Jew under review by the apostle, God has been exercising amazing forbearance. Although the recipient of superior privileges, he has been sinning just as really as his Gentile brother, and wholly misinterpreting the Divine forbearance. God, by his goodness, forbearance, and long-suffering, has been leading him to repentance, to a thorough change of character and heart (); but he will not be led, but insists on regarding all this forbearance as merited on his part. His heart still continues hard and impenitent (), so that he is really treasuring up wrath for himself which shall be revealed at the day of judgment. And this solemn warning should be heeded by many. There are many still who interpret forbearance as approval; who think highly of themselves because they have been exempt from suffering; who base upon their good health, good fortune, and general comfort the mistaken conclusion that God must contemplate such people with a large amount of complacency. But it is forbearance he is exercising, and no justification could be extended to such self-righteous individuals.
III. REWARD AND PUNISHMENT WILL BE METED OUT EVENTUALLY ACCORDING TO EACH MAN‘S DEEDS. (Rom 2:6-10.) To the apostle’s eye men resolved themselves into two classes: one class was seeking, by patient continuance in well-doing, glory and honour and immortality; the other class was contentious, not obeying the truth, but obeying unrighteousness (). Now, to the one, reward will be given in the form of all that is implied by “eternal life;” while to the other shall be meted out in strict proportion “indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish.” Just as, in a well-ordered state, the doer of evil is punished and the doer of good rewarded, so will it be, only with infallible accuracy, under the government of God. Now, at first sight, it seems hard to reconcile a judgment according to works with a justification by faith alone; but if we will only consider the fruits of justification, in those good works which God hath before ordained that his people should walk in them (cf. Eph 2:8-10), we can see that the scheme of grace can yet include a reward proportional to work. Let us grant at once that all the work got out of the believer is divinely prompted, that it is the outcome of grace, nevertheless it has its moral value in the universe of God and deserves reward. Besides, as the judgment-scene in Mat 25:1-46. shows, the servants that are welcomed and rewarded receive their reward with wonder. Just as magnanimous minds, when some acknowledgment of their valuable labours is offered, declare it to be beyond their deserts, and feel what they declare, so the rewarded well-doer at the last will be the first to acknowledge that the reward rests, not on any absolute merit, but on abounding grace. On the other hand, the evil-doers will acknowledge that the “indignation and wrath, the tribulation and anguish,” have been fully earned and richly deserved (cf. Jonathan Edwards’s ‘Works: Occasional Sermons,’ Nos. 7., 8.). And if we inquire how those who have died in infancy, and those who have been saved as by fire at life’s last moments, like the dying robber at the side of Christ, are to fare at a judgment based upon works, we have only to reply that their history after death has doubtless attested the gracious Spirit which was given them, and will justify their reception into the joys of eternal life.
IV. GOD‘S JUDGMENT WILL BE WITHOUT RESPECT OF PERSONS. (Mat 25:11.) In speaking of this reward and punishment according to works, the apostle is careful to note that each will be “to the Jew first, and also to the Greek (): for there is no respect of persons () with God.” The reason why the Jew comes first in the order of judgment is that he has had all along such superior privileges as make his judgment all the more serious matter. If he has not profited by these privileges his judgment shall be all the more severehe shall be beaten truly with many stripes; and if he profited, his reward shall be all the more glorious. The Gentile, or Greek, on the other hand, with nothing but natural light, shall find himself judged fairly, although it must needs be a secondary matter under a beneficent government like God’s. For he does not accept the persons of men. He is not influenced in his judgment by personal claims. He puts away the idea of merit in individuals, because all are guilty before him, and bases his judgment upon the one consideration of state, with its resultant outcome, either good works or bad. Now, this was what a Jew found it hard to accept. He thought, as a thorough-bred Jew, he ought to be accepted. It must have been a great humiliation to have to take up a position beside ordinary men, and have no store set by his person at all.
V. GOD‘S JUDGMENT WILL BE ACCORDING TO THE LAW, WRITTEN OR UNWRITTEN, WHICH EACH MAN HAS RECEIVED. (Mat 25:12-15.) The Gentiles shall not be held accountable for an outward and written revelation which has never come into their hands, but only for that law of conscience which God has written on their hearts. For this law revealed in their nature, and the use they made of it, they shall be justly held responsible. Nor shall the tracing of the law of conscience to utilitarian or animal sources in the least degree diminish human responsibility. The question is notHow has this inward law and monitor come into existence? butWhat use has each man made of it, come as it may? And so the heathen shall be beaten, though with few stripes, for their neglect of the inward law. They shall in many cases perish, even though they had not the privilege of a written law. Conscience has had a Divine source, no matter how long it has taken to develop; and God will call all men into judgment for the use of it. On the other hand, those who have had the Law written and delivered shall be judged by it. For the Scriptures come to reinforce the conscience, and to reveal the mercy, of the Lord. In such circumstances it is surely just that those who receive “the oracles of God” should be held responsible for the use and profit they have made of them. If they have been a dead letter to them, then God will justly punish their neglect of them. Such men shall be beaten with many stripes, because they might have known and ought to have done their Lord’s will.
VI. THE GENERAL JUDGMENT WILL BE CONDUCTED BY JESUS CHRIST. (Mat 25:16.) God the Father will commit to his only begotten Son the duty of judgment. And here we see the wondrous equity of the Divine Being. This Second Person of the Trinity has added to his Divine knowledge a human experience. He has been in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin. He knows the human problem experimentally. He can consequently enter into our case more thoroughly than if he had never assumed our nature. And so he does not judge from above, or from outside, but from within, and can enter into the secrets of the human heart. Hence this general judgment is to be upon the most equitable principles, and by the most capable of judges. How important, then, that we cultivate the acquaintance of him who is to have us at his judgment-bar! Not that we may bribe him, but that he may prepare us for that thorough investigation which lies before us. If we make a “clean breast” of all to him, if we acknowledge our sin and shortcoming, if we ask him for a clean heart and a baptism of his Holy Ghost to enable us to live for his glory and our fellows’ good, then he will help us to a better life, and enable us, so far from dreading his judgment-bar, to “love his appearing.” May the day of judgment break brightly on us all, for his own Name’s sake!R.M.E.
Rom 2:17-29
The Jewish world.
In our last section we saw how the apostle takes the Jewish critic through the leading principles of the Divine judgment. In doing so, he had a practical end in view. He meant to bring home to the Jewish heart the fact of sin and danger, and thereby to lead the censorious, self-righteous Jew to humiliation and salvation through Christ alone. The present section contains the pointed application of the principles to the Jewish ease. And here we have to notice
I. THE POSITION ASSUMED BY THE JEWS AS THE DIVINELY ENLIGHTENED LEADERS OF MANKIND. (Rom 2:17-20.) The apostle states the Jewish assumption admirably. They were proud of their name: “Thou bearest the name of a Jew” (Revised Version). But this was because they had received the Law; and so they “rested in” or “upon the Law;” they made their possession of the Law the basis of their confidence and tranquility. Their notion was that men entrusted with such a literature had nothing in the world to fear. Moreover, it was from God, and why should they not regard them- selves as his favourites, and “make their beast” about him? And the book did not remain unread; they sought from it a “knowledge of his will;” were able, consequently, to exercise judgment “regarding things that differed” ( ), and received a general enlightenment through the Law. Not only so, but they believed in their mission; they were to be guides of the blind, lights to those in darkness, correctors () of the foolish, teachers of babes, having at least the form () of knowledge and of truth in the Law. In short, the Jews set themselves at the head of humanity as the qualified leaders and instructors of mankind. Now, it is a great assumption for any men to make. Yet the Jews were not singular in their assumption. It is made daily by men with far less reason, perhaps, than they. The leaders of thought, “the men of light and leading,” who profess to know how much is given us to master, and how much remains “unknowable and unknown,” must accept of the reasonable judgment of their less pretentious fellows, and, as superior persons, must be amenable to morals. By their fruits we shall know them. By their lives we shall be able to estimate the value of their principles. If they are benefactors of their species, if they promote the real welfare of mankind, well and good. If they are hindrances, then they cannot resist being condemned. It is this line the apostle adopts in this passage.
II. THE PRETENTIOUS TEACHERS WERE, AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE GREAT HINDRANCE TO THE DISSEMINATION OF DIVINE KNOWLEDGE. (Rom 2:21-24.) The first fact Paul dwells on is that these Jews preached too little to themselves. They fell into the error of teaching others what they did not feel inclined to practise themselves. And so he catalogues certain sins of which he knew them to be guilty. It would seem that they stole, committed adultery, were guilty in heathen temples of sacrilege, and, in short, led such unworthy lives as to make God’s Name a reproach and ground of blasphemy among the Gentiles. The morality of the teachers thus became the great hindrance to the acceptance of Divine truth. Now, there can be little doubt that the crimes of professed Christians constitute in heathen lands today a chief obstacle to the reception of the gospel; missionaries meet this difficulty constantly. But we ought to apply the canon to the pretentious teachers of our time, and it will be found that their lives are morally defective when judged by the standard of the gospel they affect to despise. The morality of a George Eliot, a G. H. Lewes, or a J. S. Mill, who affected to be moral teachers of their time, will not bear any very close inspection; and even those of the same school, whose lives are outwardly blameless, fall far beneath the self-sacrificing enthusiasm which Christianity fosters, and in multitudes of cases secures. The test is sure and infallible. Men and women that are morally easy-going, that are practically selfish and indifferent in large degree to the circumstances and suffering of their fellows, are unfit to be the teachers of their generation. And their teaching is as sure to prove a failure in the end, as the teaching of Judaism was among the Gentiles.
III. THE JEWS HAD A FALSE CONFIDENCE IN THE RITE OF CIRCUMCISION. (Rom 2:25.) Their notion was that circumcision constituted something like the” hall-mark” on real silver, and distinguished them from all the mere electro-plating of the Gentiles. They thought that immoral conduct could not obliterate the value of the fleshly rite. This is the mistake made by all who lay undue emphasis upon rites and ceremonies. They fancy they have a value altogether independent of moral states and moral living. The apostle has consequently to draw attention to the fact that circumcision only profited one who kept the Law. It was then a sign of the covenant, and was taken along with the perfect obedience to the Law which had been rendered. But if a circumcised person turned out a Law-breaker, the circumcision really passed into uncircumcision. In other words, the Jew could break the covenant seal by breaking the Law of the covenant. This is a very solemn and weighty truth. It has its application to the covenant signs of the Christian dispensation. It is perfectly possible for persons who have become members of the visible Church, by a course of reckless living to break their covenant sign, and to be in God’s sight disfranchised. Let no undue value be assigned to rites and ceremonies. They cannot be separated from moral states and conditions.
IV. THE JEWS IGNORED THE POSSIBILITY AND EXISTENCE OF THE CIRCUMCISED IN HEART. (Rom 2:26-29.) If a circumcised person may forfeit his position as in covenant with God by breaking the Divine Law, on the other hand, an uncircumcised person, a Gentile, may so keep God’s Law as to be entitled to a position in covenant with him. His uncircumcision in such a case, Paul maintains, should be counted or “reckoned for circumcision.” Here the apostle is contending for the admission of Gentiles to the visible Church without the necessity of circumcision. Many a Gentile, like Cornelius, or like the centurion in the Gospels, put to shame the less earnest and less devout Jews. The high morality of such men was a standing condemnation () of the pretentious Jew. Accordingly, Paul proceeds to affirm that the circumcision of the heart, not the mere circumcision of the flesh, is the all-important matter. There is a circumcision of the heart which checks the unholy tendencies within, and secures the reality, of which outward circumcision is but the type. Of it God, the Searcher of hearts, is the true Judge. He rejoices in it, and regards those who have submitted to it as his true people. The circumcised in flesh may secure praise from men, but the circumcised in heart look for approbation to God only. It is for us all to seek the inward and spiritual circumcision, the true sign of membership in God’s invisible kingdom.R.M.E.
Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary
Rom 2:1. The representation of the moral state of the heathen world, in the foregoing chapter, is a proof of the necessity of the Gospel, or of a further dispensation of grace or favour, for the salvation of mankind: and how rich the favour wherewith God visited the world! To have destroyed the race of the apostate rebels who had abused their understandings and every gift ofa bountiful Creator, would have been justice; to have spared them, lenity and mercy: but to send his only-begotten Son from heaven to redeem us from all this iniquity and ungodliness by his own blood, is the most wonderful and exuberant favour. Rightly is the doctrine which teaches it called Gospel, or glad tidings: according to its true nature it should have filled the whole world with transports of joy: however, one would think it could not possibly have met with opposition from any part of mankind. But the Jew opposed it: he abhorred the Gentile, and contradicted the grace which honoured and saved him. The Apostle pleads and defends our cause: his business is, to confound the Jew, and to prove that we have as good right as he to all the blessings of the Messiah’s kingdom; and by the description of the vicious state of the Gentiles in the former chapter, he has delicately availed himself of the prejudices of the Jew. He endeavours, from the beginning of the epistle, to court his attention; but nothing would please him more than a discourse, in which the Gentiles were reduced to such a vile and abject state. Thus the Apostle rouses his contempt of the Gentiles, and gives him occasion to condemn them:but it is, that he may the more effectually humble him in this chapter; in which he proves, that the Jews, having in an aggravated manner despised the goodness and broken the law of God, were as obnoxious to his wrath as the Gentiles. How could they,with any conscience or modesty, arrogate all the divine mercy to themselves; or pretend that other men were unworthy of it, when they had done as much, or more, to forfeit it than others? Must they not exclude themselves from being the people of God under the Gospel, by the same reason that they would have the Gentiles excluded? This, however, was an argument highly ungrateful to the Jew: and it would be very difficult to fix any conviction upon his mind: therefore the Apostle first addresses him in a covert general way, thou art therefore inexcusable, O man! &c. not giving out expressly that he meant the Jew, that the Jew might more calmly attend to his reasoning, while he was not apprehensive that he was the man. Secondly, Most judiciously, and with irresistible force of reasoning, he turns his thoughts from his present superior advantages to the awful day of judgment (Rom 2:5-16.), when God, in the most impartial equity, will render to all mankind without exception according to their works. Thusthe Apostle grounds his following argument very methodically and solidly on God’s equal regards to men in all nations, who fear him and uprightly practise truth and goodness; and his disapproving, and at last condemning all men in any nation, however privileged, who live wickedly. This is striking at the root of the matter, and demolishing, in the most true and effectual manner, the Jew’s prejudices in favour of his own nation, and the unkind thoughts that he had entertained of the Gentiles. For if a Jew could be convinced, that a sober virtuous heathen, fearing God and working righteousness, might, through the infinite merit of the Messiah and the secret influences of the Holy Spirit, be blessed with eternal salvation, he must be persuaded that it was no such shocking or absurd matter, that believing Gentiles should be pardoned and taken into the visible church. Thus the Apostle advances with great skill and with the justest steps in his argument; insinuating himselfby degrees into the Jew’s conscience. This passage is also well adapted to encourage the Gentile, humbled by the dismal representationin the foregoing chapter; for he would here see, that he was not utterly abandoned of God; but might, upon good grounds, hope for his mercy and kindness. We may just observe farther, that what St. Paul says of the Jews, in the present chapter, answers to what he had charged on the Gentiles in the first. Forthere is a secret comparison of them one with another, running through these two chapters; which, as soon as it comes to be considered, gives such a light and lustre to St. Paul’s discourse, that one cannot but admire the skilful turn of it, and look on it as the most soft, the most beautiful, and most pressing argumentation; leaving the Jews to say for themselves, why they should have the privilege continued to them under the Gospel, of being alone in a national sense the people of God. See Locke, and on Rom 2:29.
That judged ‘ , the judger, is here very emphatical; and the more so, as it is repeated in the latter part of the verse. It denotes more than simply judging: it implies assuming the character, place, and authority of a judge; which would be seen more clearly, if the verse were rendered thus; Therefore, thou art inexcusable, O man! whosoever art a judger; for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou, the judger, doest the same things. There will need no remark, to those who read this epistle with the least attention, to prove that the judging which St. Paul here speaks of, refers to that aversion which the Jews generally had to the Gentiles: insomuch that the unconverted Jews could not bear the thought of a Messiah who admitted the heathen equally with them into his kingdom; nor could the converted Jews be easily brought, for a considerable time, to admit them into their communion, as the people of God, now equally with themselves; so that they generally, both one and the other, at that time judged them unworthy the favour of God and incapable of becoming his people any other way than by circumcision and an observance of the ritual parts of the law;the inexcusableness and absurdity whereof St. Paul shews in this chapter. Dr. Doddridge observes, that there is a greater delicacy in the Apostle’s transition here, than most commentators have imagined. From what he had before said, to prove the wicked and abandoned among the heathens inexcusable in their wickedness, he justly infers, that the crimes of those who had such knowledgeof the truth as to condemn the vices of others, were proportionably yet more inexcusable. This was eminently the case with the Jews. But he does not directly speak of them till the 9th verse; drawing the inference at first in such general terms, as might also comprehend Gentiles, philosophers, and all others who contradicted the moral instructions which they themselves gave. Though the black detail of vices enumerated in the preceding chapter is such as cannot fail to shock the thinking mind; yet whoever will take the trouble to search into the state of religion and virtue among the Jews at the same period will confess, that the Apostle is rather tender than rigid in his accusations. See Joseph. Jewish War, b. 5. 100. 13 b. 7. 100. 8 and Whitby.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Rom 2:1 . ch. Rom 3:20 . Having shown, ch. Rom 1:18-32 , in the case of the Gentiles , that they were strangers to the , Paul now, ch. 2 3:20, exhibits the same fact with reference to the Jews, and thus adduces the second half of the proof as to the universal necessity of justification by faith . Naturally the Apostle was chiefly concerned with this second half of the proof, as the of heathenism was in itself clear; but we see from ch. 2 that the detailed character of that delineation of Gentile wickedness was intended at the same time as a mirror for degenerate Judaism, to repress all Jewish conceit. Comp Mangold, p. 102.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
Rom 2:1 . ] refers back to the main tenor of the whole previous exposition (Rom 2:18-29 ), and that indeed in its more special aspect as setting forth the moral condition of heathenism in respect to its inexcusableness . This reference is confirmed by the fact, that is said with a manifest glancing back to Rom 1:20 ; it is laid down by Paul as it were as a finger-post for his . The reference assumed by Reiche, Fritzsche, Krehl, de Wette, and older writers, to the proposition in Rom 1:32 , that the rightful demand of God adjudges death to the evil-doers; or to the cognizance of that verdict, in spite of which the Gentiles were so immoral (Philippi, Baur, Th. Schott, Hofmann, Mangold), has against it the fact that this thought formed only a subsidiary sentence in what went before; whereas here a new section begins, at the head of which Paul very naturally has placed a reference, even expressly marked by , to the entire section ending with Rom 1:32 , over which he now throws once more a retrospective glance. The connection of ideas therefore is: “ wherefore ,” i.e. on account of that abomination of vice pointed out in Rom 2:18-29 , “ thou art inexcusable ,” etc.; “ for ” to exhibit now more exactly this “ wherefore ” wherein thou judgest the other, thou condemnest thyself, because thou doest the same thing . In other words: before the mirror of this Gentile life of sin all excuse vanishes from thee, O man who judgest, for this mirror reflects thine own conduct, which thou thyself therefore condemnest by thy judgment. A deeply tragic de te narratur! into which the proud Jewish consciousness sees itself all of a sudden transferred. A proleptic use of (Tholuck) is not to be thought of; not even is so used in the N. T. (see on Joh 4:44 ), and neither in the N. T. nor elsewhere.
] Just as Paul, Rom 1:18 , designated the Gentiles by the general term , and only brought forward the special reference to them in the progress of the discourse; so also he now designates the Jews , not as yet by name (see this first at Rom 2:17 ), but generally by the address , which however already implies a trace of reproach (Rom 9:20 ; Luk 12:14 ; Plat. Prot. p. 330 D, Gorg. p. 452 B, and the passages in Wetstein, Ellendt, Lex. Soph. I. p. 164), while at the same time he makes it by his sufficiently apparent that he is no longer speaking of the class already delineated, but is turning now to the Jews contrasted with them; for the self-righteous judging respecting the Gentiles as rejected of God (Midr. Tillin f. 6, 3; Chetubb. f. 3, 2; and many other passages) was in fact a characteristic of the Jews . Hence all the more groundless is the hasty judgment, that this passage has nothing whatever to do with the contrast between Jews and Gentiles (Hofmann). Comp Rom 2:17 ff. And that it is the condemning which is meant, and not the moral capacity of judgment in general (Th. Schott) and its exercise (Hofmann) (comp on Mat 7:9 ), follows from the subsequent more precisely defining its import. Consequently the quite general interpretation (Beza, Calovius, Benecke, Mehring, Luthardt, vom freien Willen , p. 416) seems untenable, as well as the reference to the Gentiles as the judging subjects (Th. Schott), or to all to whom Rom 1:32 applied (Hofmann), or even specially to Gentile authorities (Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact, Oecumenius, Cajetanus, Grotius).
Regarding the nominative as further ethical epexegesis of the vocative, see Bernhardy, p. 67, Buttmann, Neut. Gr. p. 123.
] either instrumental: thereby, that , equivalent to (Hofmann); or, still more closely corresponding to the : in which thing , in which point. Comp Rom 14:22 . The temporal rendering: eodem tempore quo (Kllner, Reithmayr), arbitrarily obscures the moral identity, which Paul intended to bring out. The however is not facto condemnas . (Estius, van Hengel), but the judgment pronounced upon the other is a condemnatory judgment upon thyself, namely, because it applies to thine own conduct. On the contrast between and comp Rom 2:21 ; 1Co 10:24 ; 1Co 10:29 ; Gal 6:4 ; Phi 2:4 .
] the same sins and vices , not indeed according to all their several concrete manifestations, as previously described, but according to their essential moral categories; see Rom 2:17-24 . Comp on the idea Joh 8:7 .
] with reproachful emphasis.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
Rom 2:1-16
1Therefore [Wherefore] thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another [the other, thy neighbor, ], thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.2But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them3which [those who] commit such things. And [But] thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do [those who practise] such things, and doest thesame, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? 4Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and long-suffering; not knowing [not considering] that the goodness of God leadeth [is leading] thee to repentance?5But, after thy hardness and impenitent heart, treasurest up unto [for] thyself wrath against [in] the day of wrath1 and Revelation 2 of the righteous judgment of God;
6, 7Who will render to every man according to his deeds: To them [those] who by patient continuance in well-doing [by endurance in good work] seek for glory and honour and immortality [will he render, , Rom 2:6], eternal life:38But unto them that [to those who] are contentious [self-seeking, or partisans], and do not obey [disobey] the truth, but obey unrighteousness, [shall be rendered]indignation and wrath [wrath and indignation],4 9Tribulation and anguish, [omit,] upon every soul of man that doeth evil [is working out to the end the evil, ], of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;10[Greek.] But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good [is working the good, ], to the Jew first, and also to theGentile [Greek]. 11For there is no respect of persons5 with [before] God.
12For as many as have [omit have] sinned without law shall [will] also perish without law; and as many as have [omithave] sinned in [under] the law shall13[will] be judged by the law; [.] (For not the hearers of the law6 [of law] are just [righteous] before God, but the doers of the law [of law] shall [will] 14be justified [declared righteous]. For when [whenever] the [omitthe]7 Gentiles, which have not the law [Gentiles having no law, ], do8 by nature the things contained in the law [the things of the law, , i.e., the things pertaining to, or required by, the law], these, having not the law [not having15(the) law, ],9 are a law unto [to] themselves: Which [Who] shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) [their thoughts between one another, oralternately, ,accusing or also, , excusing.]10 16In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by [through] Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Summary.These are the parts of this highly important section: 1. Every judgment pronounced on another becomes the self-condemnation of the one judging; for he is in the same condemnation with the one who is judged by him. Herein the sin of the Jews is already presupposed (Rom 2:1-5). 2. The righteousness of God is exalted above all partial righteousness; and in its retribution it distinguishes between men who earnestly long after righteousness, and those who obstinately resist; between men who constantly look toward things eternal, and those whose principle of life is contention and party spirit (Rom 2:6-11). This opposition constitutes a higher ideal and dynamic opposition between pious and ungodly people above the historical antagonism of Jews and Gentiles, and independently of it, so that, on the day of the declaration of the gospel, Jews may appear as Gentiles, and Gentiles as Jews (Rom 2:12-16).
First Paragraph, Rom 2:1-5
Rom 2:1. Wherefore thou art inexcusable. It may be asked, To what does , wherefore, refer? 1. To the fundamental thought of the whole section of Rom 1:18-32 (Meyer, and others). 2. refers back to the in 2:32 (De Wette, Philippi [Alford, Hodge]). 3. points proleptically to the sins of the Jews (Bengel, Tholuck). We need hardly mention Bullingers explanation: It is continuationis particula; prterea. We here find a definite reference to Rom 1:32. The indicates chiefly the climax of Gentile corruption; but Gentile and Jewish corruption meet together at this climax. Gentile corruption culminates in the approval of evil, and Jewish in judging. But their common corruption is the perfect moral self-contradiction: sin against better knowledge and conscience. Therefore , inexcusable, are not merely those who contribute aid to evil-doers, but those also who pronounce sentence on them. In other words, not the , but 2:32 is proleptic, especially in connection with the in 2:31.
O man, whosoever thou art. To whom is this address directed? 1 To the Gentiles, especially Gentile authorities (Chrysostom); their better-minded ones (Olshausen, Melanchthon); their philosophers (Clericus). 2. The Jews (De Wette, Rckert, and others). Meyer: Judging the Gentiles as rejected by God (Midr. Tillin f. 6, 3; Chetubb. f. 3, 2, &c.) was a characteristicum of the Jews. [Alford: The Jew is not yet named, but hinted at.P. S.] 3. All men, without distinction (Beza, Calovius). 4. All men, but with a special reference to the Jews (Tholuck).11 The last interpretation must be rendered more definite by the consideration that the merciless among Jews and Gentiles are meant. But, in reality, every one is meant who makes himself guilty of condemnatory judgment (for this is the sense of , here, as in Mat 7:1; Mat 25:35). See Rom 2:9-10. The Gentiles, too, were heartless judges. We need call to mind only Roman politics. Tholuck recalls the corruption of Jewish life at that time under Herod, and even among their scribes. , wherein, is explained in Rom 2:21 sqq., and hence must not be understood as instrumental, by which means, whereby; still less eodem tempore quo, at the time when (Kllner), but in that wherein, in the matter in which (Luther [E. V., Meyer, Alford], and others). [Thou that judgest doest the same things, . Uncharitable judging is itself a grave offence against the law which enjoins humility and charity as the very soul of virtue and piety. Besides, even the most moral men carry in themselves the seed of all vices, and if kept from open transgression, it is either by the grace of God preventing them, or by (Pharisaic and Stoic) pride, which is itself a sin against God, the sin of Satan and the fallen angels.P. S.] The addition of , with reproachful expression (Meyer).
Rom 2:2. But we are sure, . Who? 1. The Jews, as knowers of the law (Rosenmller, and others).12 2. Universal human knowledge (Rckert, Meyer, Philippi [Hodge]). 3. Jewish-Christian knowledge, with reference to Rom 3:19; Rom 7:14 (Tholuck). 4. Yet the consciousness here declared is the specifically Christian one, which is, however, anticipated by the better universal consciousness in forebodings of the common misery of sin.
According to truth. , not [revera. truly] (Raphel, Kllner, it is real), but [as in E. V.] according to truth (Tholuck, Meyer [Alford]); that is, corresponding to the internal and real relations of guilt [according to justice, without error, without respect of persons]. The condemnatory judgment of God on those who judge is according to the relations of truth, by which judgment they are the most condemnable who, without knowing it, pronounce judgment on themselves. Therefore they are hypocrites. [ belongs not to , as the predicate of the sentence, but to , as adverb: it proceeds according to truth, or the judgment of God, which is according to truth, is against those, &c.P. S.]
Rom 2:3. And thinkest thou this, O man. According to Meyer and Tholuck, Rom 2:2 is the propositio major in relation to what here follows. If the Apostle had designed such a conclusion in Rom 2:5, the minor proposition of Rom 2:3-4 would have been otherwise expressed. We have here the beginning of the conclusion from the premise in Rom 2:2. Thinkest thou that, . Reference to the strange supposition that God will become, by way of exception, a partisan for him. Therefore also the is emphasized. Meyer: In opposition to Jewish conceit. Mat 3:7; Luk 3:7. Yet the expression here must not be limited to the Jews.That thou [, thou thyself, thou above all others, thou because a Jew] shalt escape. Not by acquittal (Bengel [Hodge]), but by exemption. So Meyer: Only the Gentiles shall be judged, according to the false opinion of the Jews (Bertholdt, Christologie, p. 206), but all Israel shall have part in the Messiahs kingdom as its true-born children (Mat 8:12). [Comp. Mat 3:7; Mat 3:9; Joh 8:33.] The expression escape refers at the same time to an approaching actual judgment which will overtake every guilty person.
Rom 2:4. Or despisest thou. This is a different case from the preceding. [ introduces a new error or objection.P. S.] In what does the difference consist? Thou regardest thyself either exempt from punishment, because thou believest thyself a favorite of the Deity, and that thou shalt escape at the coming judgment; or thou dost wickedly regard the riches of Gods goodness in delaying the punishment as a sign that the general judgment will never come to pass at all. Paul frequently uses as an expression for great fulness [Rom 9:23; Rom 11:33; Eph 1:7; Eph 1:18; Eph 2:7; Eph 3:16; Col 1:17. It is not a Hebraism, but found also in Plato and other Greek classics, to denote abundance and magnitude.P. S.].His goodness. The is, more specifically, mildness, beneficent goodness, in contrast with penal justice. It may be asked whether we should read: His goodness () and forbearance () and long-suffering (), or whether the is here divided by -, as well, as also, into the idea of forbearance and long-suffering. We accept the latter, since the Apostle subsequently groups all again in . The Apostle Peter uses the same expression, , for the two ideas: forbearance toward the weakness of friends, and long-suffering toward the opposition of enemies [slowness in the infliction of deserved punishment]. But Paul distinguishes between patience or forbearance, Rom 3:25, and long-suffering, Rom 9:22, according to the relation already indicated. The is about equal to the , Col 1:11, and the , Col 3:12.Compare , Col 3:13; . It is thus natural that one idea should sometimes run into the other. Tholuck: The word of Christ (Luk 19:41; Matthew 24.) would cause the expectation of a judgment on Israel, which really occurred about twenty [ten] years after this Epistle. Here Paul may naturally have had this in view.. The translation Not knowing is too weak. [Dr. Lange translates : Indem du misskennst, wilfully ignoring; while Grotius, Tholuck, Wordsworth, al., render it: not considering.P. S.] Meyer opposes the interpretation of as wishing not to know (De Wette [Alford], and others). Yet wilful and culpable ignorance is certainly meant here (comp. , Eph 4:18).Is leading thee to repentance. means, at all events, not only the objective intention of God (Philippi), but also the real determination of Divine goodness. [Bengel: Deus ducit volentem duci; ducit suaviter, non cogit necessitate. Wordsworth: The word , leads, intimates the will of God, but also the will of man. God leads, but man may refuse to be led. To this Dr. Hodge assents, but adds, from his strict Calvinistic standpoint: Who gives the will to be led? Is there no preventing grace [gratia prveniens]? Does not God work in us to will, as well as to do? Surely there is such a thing as being made willing without being forced. There is a middle ground between moral suasion and corcion. God supersedes the necessity of forcing, by making us willing in the day of His power. The Apostle, however, is not here speaking of gracious influence, but of the moral tendencies of providential dispensations.P. S.]
Rom 2:5. But, after thy hardness [ ]. Evidently not a continuation of the question (Lachmann [Alford]), but antithesis. The hardened one mistakes the benign purpose of Divine government, and by this means transforms the same into a judgment. The question can therefore not be one of mere frustration. [ is taken by some, in proportion to, so that the degree of punishment corresponds to the degree of hardness and impenitence; but by most commentators in the sense of secundum, i. e., as may be expected from thy hardness, agreeably to its nature.P. S.]And impenitent heart. This takes away from the idea the harsh appearance of a fatalistic compulsion. The hardness is voluntarily continued and magnified by impenitence of heart.Thou treasurest up for thyself [thou for thyself, not God for thee.P. S.] The verb is used in the wider sense of, every accumulation, and denotes also ironically the heaping up of evils and punishments. It here stands in striking opposition to the of Gods goodness. The despising of the riches of Gods goodness in forbearance and long-suffering is the heaping up of a treasure of wrath. Unto thyself indicates voluntary guilt as well as completed folly.In [or on, ] the day of wrath. The construction is not , &c. (Luther [E. V., against], Tholuck), and also not an which will break out on the day of wrath (Meyer [Alford, Hodge]). But the meaning is, that the day of wrath is even now ready to burst forth, and that that furious and senseless still continues; comp. Jam 5:3; . Every catastrophe of judgment which succeeds a period of longsuffering is designated a day of wrath (Eze 22:24; Zep 2:2). But each of these judicial catastrophes is a prelude to the last day of consummated wrath.And revelation [manifestation] of the righteous judgment. The (in the New Testament, , and but seldom elsewhere).13 The righteous judgment of God proceeds in an emphatic way through all periods of time; but it has special epochs of its . The whole contemplation of different judicial catastrophes consists in the certainty that the time of final decision is introduced with the coming of Christ. Tholuck cites Klopstocks lines:
Among the ways of men
God walks, with quiet tread, His unseen path;
But drawing near the goal, He rushes on,
Decided as the gleaming thunderbolt.
Second Paragraph (Rom 2:6-11)
[It may aid the reader in the exegesis of this paragraph to have in view the following parallel arrangement in lour stanzas of three lines each, which we adopt from the Analysis of Forbes, with some changes in the translation:
6.
Who will render to every man according to his deeds;
7.
A
To those who by endurance in good work
Seek for glory, and honor, and immortality,
Eternal life:
8.
B
But to those who are self-seeking,
And disobey the truth, but obey unrighteousness,
Indignation [shall be] and wrath:
9.
B
Tribulation and anguish
Upon every soul of man that worketh evil,
Of the Jew first, and also of the Greek;
10.
A
But glory, honor, and peace,
To every man that worketh good,
To the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
The first two stanzas, A and B, and the last two stanzas, B and A, are antithetically parallel in each of their lines, which indicate: (1) The character of the two opposite classes to be compared; (2) their respective pursuits; and (3) the appropriate rewards. In another point of view the four stanzas are introversively parallel, the first corresponding with the fourth, and the second with the third. The glorious reward of the righteous is put first and last in order to stimulate and encourage the reader. The lines in each stanza are also introversively parallel, as is made apparent to the reader by the typographical arrangement.P. S.]
Rom 2:6. Who will render to every man. The negative form of this declaration, see Rom 2:11. The righteousness of God is far above the partisan righteousness of man, and also above that partisan justice which believes that Gods government is restrained by the historical difference between Judaism and heathendom. The decision stated by the Apostle is pronounced by the fundamental law of the entire Scriptures, of all Christendom, and of all religion (comp. Psa 62:12; Isa 3:10-11; Jer 17:10; Mat 7:21-24; Mat 12:36; Mat 16:27; Mat 25:35; Joh 5:29; Rom 14:10; 2Co 5:10). The supposition that there is a great difficulty here, and an apparent contradiction between this sentence and the doctrine of justification by faith, is a remarkable indication of an inadequate view of works on one hand, and of justification by faith on the other. Tholuck gives an account of the question in discussion, p. 88 sqq. Solutions of the imaginary difficulty: 1. The Apostle speaks here only hypothetically of the judgment of believers, as God would judge them, apart from the standpoint of the gospel (Melanchthon, &c.). Tholuck: Here, and in Rom 2:16, the Apostle regards only the Divine valuation placed on men, apart from redemption. [So, substantially, Alford and Hodge.P. S.]. 2. He speaks of the final judgment, when faith will be proved to be the absolute fulfilment of the law (Olshausen). This is adopted by Philippi, but under the restriction: That the will remove the deficiency in the works of the regenerate. Gerhard: Opera adducentur in judicio non ut salutis merita, sed ut fidei testimonia et effecta. 3. Fritzsche: The Apostle is inconsistent, and here opens a semita per honestatem near the via regia of justification. 4. Luthardt: The new vital form of faith must be regarded as the product of a previous direction of life; the are perfected in faith (Studien und Kritiken for 1852, No. 2, p. 368). [This view seems inconsistent with the Scripture doctrine of regeneration as a new creation, and of the new life as the reverse of the old (Rom 6:4; Rom 6:19 ff.), and with the personal experience of Paul. But see Dr. Langes remarks below, and consider the remarkable concession of Peter, Act 10:34-35, where a disposition to fear God and to work righteousness is supposed to exist before conversion, even among heathen, and to qualify them for acceptance with God.P. S.] 5. Cocceius and Limborch: The faith in Christ must also be included as the highest work (). This view is undoubtedly correct; and Tholucks explanation, that must not be included here (with reference to Rom 4:5; Rom 11:16; Rom 10:6), obscures the whole question. The passages cited by Tholuck plainly relate altogether to a life in the works of the law. But in Joh 6:29 Christ calls faith a work of God which believers should exercise. Paul also calls faith a good work (), Php 1:6; viewing it, however, as the operation of God. In 1Th 1:3, he speaks of an ; also in 2Th 1:11. He means in these passages, of course, such a faith as proves itself by works. But it follows, nevertheless, most decidedly, that he distinguishes just as positively two kinds of works, just as James distinguishes two kinds of faith. We must therefore distinguish a two-fold conception of works with the Apostle, if we would escape the confusion made by a timid species of orthodoxy. The direction of faith as well as of unbelief has, according to Paulas Luthardt has properly remarkedits antecedens in the antithesis of the fundamental tendencies which he describes in Rom 2:7-8. The one class are, in their inward frame of mind, , striving soulstherefore men of longing and aspiration, poor in spirit [Mat 5:3]. Their good works constitute a unity of effort, ; their aim is the , , (goodly pearls; precious pearls, Mat 13:45). The other class are, in their mental disposition, , contentious, even when they confess an orthodox form of faith. They are men animated by the bigotry of party spirit, and therefore wantonly rebelling against the truth, while they are the narrow-minded slaves of the unrighteousness of party spirit. But the retribution of both classes will be determined by the respective degrees of virtue and vice which they reach. As seekers, they find faith and justification by faith, which, according to chap. iii., proceeds also from righteousness. As believers, they strive for the treasure of their heavenly calling, and strive after those things which are before them, until they reach the goal of perfection. But there they do not appear with works of the law, nor with a mixture of perfect justitia imputata and imperfect works. In the kingdom of perfect love the antagonism of merit and grace disappears in a higher unity of both. It is observable that, with the Apostle, all the ideas of the Old Testament become more profound, and are made perfect: 1. The law becomes the law of the Spirit; 2. work becomes the work of faith; 3. righteousness becomes justifying righteousness; 4. retribution becomes free, rewarding love. The observation of Meyer, that we have here the law of the Jews only, and with it the natural law of the Gentiles as the medium affecting the decision, does not relieve the matter. He indeed also adds, that Paul had good reason for this statement, since the Christian, toobecause he is to be judged according to his conductmust be judged according to the law (comp. the doctrine of the tertius usus legis), and according to the introduced by Christ [Mat 5:17; Mat 25:31 ff.; Rom 13:8-10]. He justly rejects the opinion of Reiche, that the doctrine of justification by faith implies a partial abrogation of the moral order of the world.14
Rom 2:7. To those who by endurance (or perseverance) in good work [ , an adverbial qualification of the verb ], &c. Where the different works are only one good work, and where there is this perfect endurance of life and effort, the direction toward higher and eternal things can only be meant. The genitive is genit. subj. (not obj.; Meyer); that is, the endurance which is peculiar to the truly good work. [Comp. , 1Th 1:3.P. S.]. It may be asked, whether the Apostle here uses the words , , and , in the specifically Christian sense, or in the more general sense. If the former be the case, they mean future salvation in its glory (2Co 4:17; Mat 13:43), in the honor connected with it (for it is the reward of victory, 1Co 9:25; joint heirship with Christ, Rom 8:17; reigning together with Him, 2Ti 2:12), and in its incorruptibility (1Co 15:52 sqq.; Rev 21:4; 1Pe 1:4). But then it must be said that the passage refers to a seeking whose object (goodly pearls, Matthew 13) is, at the beginning, more or less concealed from the seekers themselves (comp. Act 17:23). It seems more natural, however, to interpret the above ideas as stages of the development of noble seeking; the first aim is , spiritual splendor of life, ideality; then , integrity, honorableness of character; then , deliverance from corruption. The , as the grace and gift of God, is very nearly related to this last object of . The restless dissatisfaction, and further striving, until the object is reached, here or there(Matthew 5, the first beatitudes; Acts 17) remains the key-note. Other constructions: 1. cumenius, Luther: [to be supplied from Rom 2:6] is connected with the accusatives , , .; and with [i.e., Who will give glory, honor, and immortality to those who, by patience in good works, seek eternal life]; 2. Reiche [Ewald]: [to the one] () [ as apposition to ]. 3. Bengel [Fritzsche] and others: . (), , &c. () [i.e., to those who persevere in good work, seeking glory, &c., He will give eternal life]). Beza suggests still another and very dogmatic construction: Qui secundum patientem exspectationem qurunt boni operis gloriam. Our construction has most expositors in its favor [Vulgate, Calvin, Grotius, Tholuck, Olshausen, De Wette, Meyer, Philippi, Alford, Hodge, &c.]; also the clearness of the parallel, in consequence of which, righteous retribution constitutes the conclusion both times., not patience, but perseverantia (Erasmus). , not collectively (Tholuck [Hodge] ), but dynamically. [The singular indicates the general course and habit of life, or the moral character as a unit, as distinct from isolated resolutions and actions, comp. Gal 6:4; 1Th 1:3; Jam 1:4, &c. The E. V., patient continuance in well-doing, though not literal, is well expressed.P. S.] , , , are the phases of the manifestation of the for those who have from afar been striving for salvation. The matter is inverted in the case of believers: Power of life, worth of life, glory of life.15 Tholucks remark is strange, that the Apostle characterized here the striving of the better class of unbelievers in such a manner as he could hardly expect to find it by any possibility among them. But Paul had become acquainted with such men as Gamaliel, Sergius Paulus, Gallio, and others.
Rom 2:8. But to those who are self-seeking partisans.16 [Literally, those of self-seekinga periphrase of the subject, indicating the origin (, out of, as from a root) and moral character; comp. , the legalists; , the believers; , the circumcised, &c., and the cognate use of and .P. S.]. On , compare Tholuck and Meyer. We must not, with the elder commentators, derive it from or [from which it is distinguished, 2Co 12:20; Gal 5:20.P. S.], and therefore not identify it with , contentiousness (Vulgate: Qui sunt ex contentions, die Streitschtigen); but it comes from , a hireling; , to work for wages, to act selfishly. Its first meaning is greediness, then trickery, partisanship. Aristotle, Polit. v. 2, 3, &c.; see Fritzsche, Excursus on Rom 2:17 Meyer: The latter signification [Rnkesucht, Parteitreiberei] must be retained in all passages of the New Testament; 2Co 12:20; Gal 5:20; Php 1:16; Php 2:3; Jam 3:14; Jam 3:16. The succeeding words also establish this explanation. [The opposite of is , Php 1:16-17. Ignatius, Ad Philad. 8, opposes to .P. S.] Tholuck: The Apostle has here in view those Jews who surpassed the Gentiles in opposition to the gospel. He recalls to mind the intrigues of the Zealots, and supposes that the popular sense has extended to the meaning of contention, probably on the ground of the supposed derivation from . Remember the contentious spirit of the Talmudist Jews. In point of fact, the party spirit is always united with the love of contention. But the is a corruption, which exists in Gentiles and Jews alike. There are only two kinds of men: Men who are of the truth, whose ethical principle of life is the truth (the upright; Pro 2:7; Joh 3:21), and who, being such, do not lose themselves in grasping after temporal objects; and men whose ethical principle of life is a contentious spirit, that is, the spirit of any bad temporal object, and who for this very reason seditiously oppose the truth as partisans, and are subject to unrighteousness, as slaves to party. In this direction every temporal form of divine things can be converted into a party affair, and destroyed by party spirit; just as the Jews of that period made even an out of the Old Testament religion. Nevertheless, the definite idea is obliterated, if is made to mean, without qualification, ungodliness, or vileness (Kllner, Fritzsche).Disobey the truth. ; the truth has the right of a king, and Christ is King, as King of the truth. Therefore, to strive against the truth, involves not only religious opinion, but moral misconduct. Such revolters against what is high are necessarily slaves to what is low; they bow before unrighteousness (Rom 1:18).Wrath and indignation. The nominative is supplied by , or , as constructio variata.18 as excandescentia enhances the idea of . The historical form of the judgment pronounced on the self-seeking party spirit is therewith intimated; and of the party spirit are judged by and of an opposite kind; and therein the and of the Lord are revealed. (See the history of the destruction of Jerusalem, Mat 18:33-34).[The majority of philologists and commentators make express the permanent feeling and settled disposition (comp. Joh 3:36; the wrath of God abideth on him); , the momentary impulse or actual outbreak of wrath on the day of judgment. Ammon.: , . (Gemth) is the mind as the seat of the emotions, and hence denotes vehement affection, anger, fury. According to the correct reading, it fitly follows after , as its execution and outbreak; ir excandescentia (Cicero, Tusc. iv. 9). is the heat of the fire; is the bursting forth of the flame.P. S.]
Rom 2:9. Tribulation and anguish ( ). Rom 2:9-10 repeat the same thought of retribution, but in greater precision and increased force: 1. The retribution of evil and good does not merely stand as the limit at the close, but it is ordained from the beginning, and follows man like a shadow; 2. it does not only overtake all in general, but will visit every individual; 3. it reaches to the soul; 4. it comes also as punitive retribution, first to the Jews, and then to the Gentiles. The same may be said also of the reward of the righteous. Punishment goes from without inwardly; the external tribulation, or oppression, becomes an internal anguish, or agony, from which the burdened soul knows no escape.19Every soul of man [ ]. is not merely a circumlocution of (according to Grotius, Fritzsche). [It expresses the idea that the soul, and not the body, is to suffer the penalty, according to Rckert, Meyer, Fritzsche. But rather denotes the whole person, as in Rom 13:1.P. S.]
That worketh out the evil. The must be regarded as a strong form. It is the consistent consummation. [Alford: , to commit, is more naturally used of evil, while , to work, is used indifferently of both good and evil. But is also used of the good; Rom 5:3; Rom 15:18; Php 2:12. As distinct from the simple , it signifies, to work out, to bring to an end, to consummate. Comp. Meyer on Rom 1:27 (p. 77).P. S.]
Rom 2:10. But glory and honor and peace. Instead of , we have here [here in its highest and most glorious sense] as the subjective enjoyment of , by which the expression is supplied (Rom 2:9).Of the Jew first, and also of the Greek. Greek represents the Gentile, as i. 16. As the Jew is first in privilege and opportunity, so he is first in responsibility and guilt. Comp. Luk 12:47-48, and Exeg. Notes on Rom 1:16. It becomes now evident that the second chapter refers especially to the Jews, as Rom 1:18-32 to the Gentiles.P. S.]
Rom 2:11. For there is no respect of persons. This conclusion reproves especially the exclusive party spirit of the Jewwho thought himself under the particular favor of Godby reference to a parallel expression in the Old Testament, Deu 10:17; see Gal 2:6. The expression, to respect the person (to accept the face),20 is used in the Old Testament in a good as well as bad sense; but in the New Testament it occurs only in a bad sense, because it is here employed always in combating the conceit of Jewish bigotry, which changed God into a partisan.
Third Paragraph (Rom 2:12-16)
Rom 2:12. For as many as sinned without law. Tholuck: The Apostle here mentions the judgment only on its condemnatory side, because, according to his purpose in Rom 3:20, it was not necessary that he should take a broader view here. But he also wishes to prepare for the doctrine of justification by faith. Thus, Rom 2:12-13 establish Rom 2:9; and, on the other hand, Rom 2:14-16 establish Rom 2:10.Without law, ; that is, without the knowledge and norm of the Mosaic law (comp. Rom 5:13)that is, without a definite consciousness of definite transgression (1Co 9:21). [ and throughout here refer to the written or revealed law of Moses, as the expressed will of God concerning our moral conduct. The heathen are called , not absolutelyfor they have the unwritten law of consciencebut as distinguished from the Jews, who were . therefore is equivalent to .P. S.]Shall also perish without law. Meyer: is the opposite of the in Rom 1:16, of the in Rom 1:17, of the in Rom 2:7, of the , &c., in Rom 2:10. Comp. Joh 3:15; Rom 14:15; 1Co 1:18. Since the has its degrees (comp. Mat 11:22; Luk 12:48), Meyer should not deny that (as Chrysostom, Theophylact, cumenius assert) there is something alleviating in the . The external consequences of sin could be similar, yet the internal consequences could be different, according to the different degrees of the knowledge of transgression; and is accordingly a stronger expression than . We should all the more reject the barbarous view of Dodwell, Weisse, Billroth, and others, by which the is made to express the aunihilation of those who do not possess the Christian principle (see Tholuck, p. 99). It is evident that also the must not be understood absolutely (see Rom 2:15). They only do not possess the law in the clearness and fulness of the Mosaic code. [The passage certainly teaches, 1. That the immoral heathen will not escape punishment, since they, too, are inexcusable, having the light of Gods general revelation in nature (Rom 1:20), and in their conscience (Rom 2:14-15); 2. that they will be judged i.e., not with the rigor of the written law, as the disobedient Jews and unfaithful Christians, but impartially, and hence more mildly, according to the common law of reason and of conscience. The unfaithful Jews will fare worse than the Gentiles, and the unfaithful Christians worse than the Jews. The severity of punishment corresponds to the measure of guilt, and the measure of guilt depends on the amount of opportunity. The Bible plainly teaches different degrees of punishment; comp. Luk 12:47-48; Mat 11:21-24; Mat 12:41-42. In the interpretation of this passage, moreover, we should not overlook what Paul says immediately afterward of the better class of heathen, Rom 2:14-15; Rom 2:26-29; comp. the Notes below.P. S.]
And as many as sinned in the law, shall be judged by the law. They shall be condemned, according to the law. , even without the article, signifies here the Mosaic law. The De Wette: in the law; Tholuck, Meyer: in the possession of the law. The sense of the word seems to require a stronger expression. See Rom 7:8. [ signifies the status, under the law.P. S.] This sentence verifies Rom 2:9 : first upon the soul of the Jew, in contrast with the presumed righteousness of the Jew. Peter institutes a similar law for the Christian Church (1Pe 4:17).
Rom 2:13. For not the hearers of the law. Griesbach and Reiche parenthesize Rom 2:13-15; Koppe, Rom 2:13; Lachmann, Meyer, Baumgarten-Crusius, Rom 2:14-15. All these parentheses disturb the connection. Rom 2:13 proves the damnableness of those who sinned against the law (see Rom 2:17, and Jam 1:22), and accordingly constitutes the transition to what follows.Not the hearers. Because the Mosaic law was known to the majority only by being read to them; Gal 4:21; Mat 5:21; Jam 1:22; Joh 12:34. Josephus, Antiq., 5. P, &c., Meyer.But the doers of the law shall be justified. Philippi: corresponds to of the first member of the sentence: They shall be just before the judgment-seat of Godpronounced just by God. , like the Hebrew , as this passage already proves, is terminus forensis: to declare just, not to make just; for the doers of the law are already just, and need not be made just by God. , from , according to the analogy of (to make blind), and other verbs in derived from adjectives of the second declension, means properly, it is true, according to the etymology, = to make just. Yet, as the Septuagint and the New Testament usage shows, we must supply, by declara ion. then is, originally, to make just, on the part of the [right, righteousness, also the goddess of righteousness], and according to its tribunal; that is, to acknowledge just, which has throughout a forensic, but never an abstractly forensic sense; as means also, in the classic sense, to think or esteem just, according to the tribunal of personal opinion. Therefore the innocent man also, when once he stands at the tribunal, must be declared just; and the guilty one, who is declared just in the tribunal of grace, receives with this declaration the of Christ in his faith, without which he could never be pronounced just according to Divine truth. See the Bible-Work on Jam 2:21 [p. 66 of the German, p. 85 of the Amer. ed.]. Even the punishment, according to the classical use of the term, becomes a , because the punished one, by punishment, becomes again conformable to the . According to Meyer, the Apostle has here only set forth the fundamental law of God judging in righteousness. According to Philippi, the are here only placed as the true rule, in opposition to the false rule of the Jews, that the should be just before God, apart from the question whether there are such ; but the whole argument of the Epistle to the Romans proves, that no man is by nature such a . This construction does not coincide with Rom 2:14-15. We should rather observe here the deeper idea of [ ] in Rom 2:10, and of in Rom 2:14; and, at the same time, with Tersteegens view of Gods different tribunals, we must acknowledge that the Apostle can also use here the in the wider sense. Comp. 1Co 4:4. The connection of this passage with the following verses cannot be destroyed by a dogmatizing exegesis.21
Rom 2:14. For when Gentiles [, without the article, meaning some, not all]. The confirmation of Rom 2:10 is introduced by what the Apostle has already said. The expositors seem here to have thoroughly wandered from the proper path, and to be influenced by a common misunderstanding of Rom 2:16. 1. According to Bucer, Calvin, Tholuck [Hodge], and others, Rom 2:14 refers to the first half of Rom 2:12. While there the question is concerning those who shall perish without law, the objection here to be met is, that there is only condemnation where a is present; in consequence of this, Koppe regards Rom 2:13 as parenthetical. Yet not only is the against this view, but also the . 2. Philippi: The Apostle refers to the first half of Rom 2:13. Not the hearers of the law are just before God, for the Gentiles have also a law; the Gentiles are also . But this was not the case in the opinion of the Apostle. 3. According to Meyer, he refers to the second half of Rom 2:13. The Gentiles possess a certain substitute for the Mosaic law. Therefore they are also subject to the rule: . . . But the fundamental rule is adduced only hypothetically by the Apostle, and not in the sense that the Gentiles actually are doers of the law. The deduction of Rom 2:14-15 will evidently establish the proposition of Rom 2:10, But glory, honor, &c., and also to the Greek, after Rom 2:12-13 have established the proposition of Rom 2:9. The fundamental thought is, that also the Gentiles can obtain eternal life; for it was not necessary that he should first prove this in reference to the Jews. This thought is mediated neither by the first half of Rom 2:13 alone, nor by the second alone, but by the whole rule: Not the hearers of the law are already just before God, but the doers of the law, in the sense of Rom 2:7. The , as poor in spirit, who are penitent, shall be justified in the new economy of salvation.For when. supposes a case whose frequent occurrence is possible: in case when, whenever, as often as (Meyer [who refers to Khner, ii. p. 535 f., and Matthi. 1195]).Gentiles, , without the article. The rule might refer, as hypothetically expressed, to the whole body of the Gentiles (according to De Wette, Reiche [Philippi, Alford, Hodge], and others); but as it is too evident from the first chapter that this case did not really occur, there is very properly no article; and the supposition that there is really an election of such Gentiles thereby gains greater probability. [Comp. Meyer in loc., and Hofmann, Schriftbeweis, i. p. 567, who likewise press the absence of the article, and justly reject the reference to Rom 3:29; Rom 9:30; 1Co 1:23 (quoted by De Wette, Alford, and Hodge, in favor of the other view). On the other hand, is not identical with , but indicates a species or class of Gentiles.P. S.]
Who have no law, . The absence of the article means not only that they have not the Mosaic law, but that they have no revealed religious law whatever.Do perchance by nature. By nature () must not, with Bengel and Usteri, be referred to the preceding. For also the Jews do not have the law by nature. Nature is here the original nature, as it proves itself active, especially in the noble fewin the impulse or tendency toward the noble.The things of the law. It is the material substance of the religious and moral law, apart from the formal definitions of the Mosaic code. The exposition of Beza and others is dogmatizing: Qu lex facit (lex jubet, convincit, damnat, punit; hoc ipsum facit et ethnicus, &c.; Cappell). [Hodge: There are two misinterpretations of the phrase . The one is, that it means, to fulfil the law; the other, to do the office of the lawi.e., to command and forbid. The former is unnecessary, and is in direct opposition to the express and repeated declaration of the Apostle, that none, whether Jew or Gentile, have ever fulfilled the law. To do the things of the law, is indeed to do what the law prescribes (comp. Rom 10:5; Gal 3:12); but whether complete or partial obedience is intended, depends upon the context. The man who pays his debts, honors his parents, is kind to the poor, does the things of the law, for these are things which the law prescribes. And this is all the argument of the Apostle requires, or his known doctrine allows us to understand by the phrase, in the present instance. This being the case, there is no need of resorting to the second interpretation mentioned above, which was proposed by Beza, and adopted by Wetstein, Flatt, and others. Though might mean to do what the law does, prescribe what is good, and forbid what is evil, it certainly has not that sense elsewhere in Pauls writingssee Rom 10:5; Gal 3:12and is especially out of place here, in immediate connection with the phrase , in the sense of the doers of the law.P. S.]
These, not having (the) law, are a law to themselves, is emphatic with approbation, , in distinction from , indicates want. Meyer: Their own moral nature supplies in them the place of the revealed law (see the classical parallels in Meyer). Philippi distinguishes between. [Rom 2:13, or , Rom 2:27] and . They perform what belongs to the law; they observe only single outward commands of the law, one man this, another that. Therefore they do not observe the law in its spirituality or deep inner meaning.22 An utter perversion of the proper relation. Without knowing the laws of Moses, they observe the essential part of the law, . Rom 2:26, , that is, performing it according to its defined purpose, Rom 2:27.
Rom 2:15. Who shew, &c. is not explaining or proving, but emphasizing, recommending (see the antithesis in Rom 2:1). What and how do these prominent Gentiles show? They show, or exhibit, the work of the law; that is, the work required by the law. Not the law itself (Wolf, Koppe, &c.); for the Ten Commandments are not formally written in their heart, but the essential meaning of their requirement. Meyer: The conduct corresponding to the law. More properly expressed, the conduct intended by it. Luther: The contents of the law; likewise Seiler and Baur. According to Meyer and Tholuck, the singular stands collectively instead of . As Rom 2:7 (Tholuck). But Rom 2:7 rather means that the are only good when they proceed from the unity of a . In the higher aspiration of the Gentile there was this analogy to Christian faith: that it consisted really in the unity and consistency of sentiment and life.
Written in their hearts. The adjective (supply ) is stronger than the participle . [It implies the idea of permanency.] Evidently a contrast to the Mosaic record of the law on the tables of stone. See 2Co 3:7; Jer 31:33. Therefore a higher order of Judaism, similar to the New Testament life, is exhibited in its essential features in these chosen Gentiles (see the history of the Centurion at Capernaum). [The Greek poet Sophocles speaks of the unwritten and indelible laws of the gods in the hearts of men; and the Platonic philosopher Plutarch speaks of a law which is not outwardly written in books, but implanted in the heart of man.P. S.]
Who shew, . And how do they exhibit or prove this? (see Rom 9:17; Rom 9:22.) 1. By the doing of the law (Zwingli, Grotius, and the majority of recent commentators; De Wette, Meyer). 2. By the mark of their better endeavors in many ways (in a certain measure, Calvin; but better Cocceius, tom. v. p. 46. Yet both are biassed by the Augustinian view). 3. By the law of conscience. Tholuck (according to Theodoret and Erasmus): Who, indeed, bear the impress of the judgment of the law in themselves, and in correspondence therewith their consequent conscience assumes in them the office of judge. For where we find the exercise of the judicial power in man, we must also presuppose the legislative power. But this view is inconsistent not only with in (for the extended treatment of this question, see Tholuck, p. 105, and Meyer [p. 98, ed. iv., the note] ), but also with . Here the language is concerning proofs of conscientiousness becoming outwardly manifest. Numbers 1, 2 are to be united, since the well-doing, according to Rom 2:7, is only the perseverance in a noble endeavor (under the gratia prveniens) , which attains its object only in Christianity.
Their conscience also hearing witness [ ]. It gives witness with, in connection with their better manner of action. Both bear witness to the belief that they are a law to themselves, in their natural spontaneity. De Wette: is neither equal to (Grotius, Tholuck), nor una testari, with reference to the (Meyer, Fritzsche, &c.) But the , like con in contestari, refers in part to the relation of the witness to him for whom he testifies; and in part, as in itself, to the inner relation of the consciousness.23 But as the is a consciousness in man which is both objective and subjective, and hence independent of his merely subjective consciousness, so is the an independent witness of the right, which, in the case before us, corresponds with the witness of man in his deed. It is the Gentiles cheering and often even joyous consciousness of his right direction; as, for example, of the Wise Men from the East under the guidance of their star.
And between one another their thoughts accusing or also excusing. [Dr. Lange translates: Indem zwischen ihnen die Gedankenurtheile anklagende oder auch entschuldigende sind. He refers, with Meyer, to the heathen, not to the thoughts.P. S.] Different expositions: 1. Their thoughts inwardly accuse each other (Luther, Calvin, Tholuck [Alford, Hodge] ). There are different views on : at a future time, of judgment (Koppe); post rem actam (Vater); between (two portions of time), at the same time, meanwhile (Kllner [E. V.] ). But we must observe, on the contrary, that Paul does not speak of the inner facts of the consciousness, since these facts here fall under the conception of the historical . 2. The accusations and defences which were conducted between Gentiles and Gentiles (Storr, Meyer). Against this interpretation Tholuck raises the question: How can , without a more special indication, refer to any other subject than the one whose witness of conscience has just been mentioned? But if the refers to the intercourse between Gentiles, then the following must have the meaning: since the judgments of their thoughts are throughout accusing or excusing; that is, therefore, moral judgments, which refer to the origin of an immanent moral law. The accusing thoughts come first here, because the language refers first of all to the nobler Gentiles, whose opinions are related to the ordinary popular life as judicial ideals. But also in their excusing they often appeal from barbarian legal practices to the unwritten law (see Sophocles, Antigone). In short, the whole intercourse between the nobler heathen is a kind of moral dialectics, a continual moral process of thought. [Paul describes the moral process which takes place in the heart of man after a good or bad act; the conscience, , sits in judgment, and pronounces the sentence in Gods name according to the law; the are the several moral reflections and reasonings which appear as witnesses testifying and pleading in this court of conscience, and are often conflicting, since the sinful inclinations and passions interfere and bribe the witnesses; the object of the , or , is the moral action which is brought before the tribunal of the conscience. The indicates that the conscience finds more to accuse than to excuse. This judicial process, which takes place here in every mans heart, is a forerunner of the great judgment at the end of the world.P. S.]
Rom 2:16. In the day. The commentators seem here to overlook the obvious, proper meaning, because they suppose that the on which God will judge the secrets of men, must be referred to the day of final judgment. But, in the first place, the connection does not support this view, and hence an artificial connection has been variously constructed (the Gentiles show that on the day, &c.). Calvin explains as , unto or until the day. [Others modify this by making to include until and on that day.P. S.] Tholuck fills up the apparent chasm between Rom 2:15-16 by supposing that the Apostle probably had in mind a transition such as , and this especially, with the remark: This view has now become the general one.24 Others have helped themselves by parentheses. So Stuart inclines to unite Rom 2:16 with Rom 2:11; Beza, Grotius, Reiche, &c. connect it with , Rom 2:12;25 Vatabl., Pareus, and Lachmann, with , Rom 2:13. Meyer also, with Lachmann, parenthesizes Rom 2:14-15, and not, with Beza, and others, Rom 2:13-15. [Alford refers Rom 2:16 to the affirmation concluding with Rom 2:10, and regards Rom 2:11-15 as a series of quasi-parenthetic clauses, , assigning the reasons for the great retribution on the last day. Ewald goes back even to Rom 2:5.P. S.] Secondly, the declaration that God shall judge according to my gospel, pronounces against the reference of to the day of final judgment. Meyer passes over this difficulty with the remark of Calvin: Suum appellat ratione ministerii. His quotation of 1Ti 2:8 does not argue any thing for his interpretation. On the opinion that, according to a number of the Fathers, the gospel of Paul must be understood to be the gospel of Luke, compare the quotation in Meyer. But the Scriptures take cognizance not merely of one day of judgment. The day on which God judges the secrets of men according to the gospel of Paul, is the day when the Apostle preaches the gospel to them. On this day, in this time of decision, it becomes manifest that there are Gentiles who are a law to themselves; that there is another opposition than that of external Judaism and paganism; that there are Gentiles who must be counted for the circumcision, and Jews whose circumcision must be counted for uncircumcision (see Rom 2:26-27). It is a thought whose root is found already in the Old Testament, that the time of the appearance of Christ and of the preaching of the gospel is a time of judgment. See Joe 3:6-7, and in other places; Mal 3:2 ff. In Joh 3:19, even the appearance of Christ is relatively called the judgment. Joh 5:25 : The hour is coming, and now is. The time of perfect faith is denoted a day (Joh 16:23; Joh 16:26). Also, in Romans 13., Rom 2:12 connected with Rom 2:13, the language cannot relate exclusively to the day of final judgment. The same applies to in 1Co 3:13. Comp. 2Co 6:2, . The Apostle mentions this day without the article, without a solemn addition. He marks the day as the day when God shall judge the secrets of men. He uses the same word as in Rom 2:29, . He says mennot merely the Gentilesbecause the gospel, according to chaps. 911, manifests Gods judgment not only on the Gentiles, but also on the Jews; and this is a judgment pronounced on their internal good conduct or misconduct toward the internal nature and spirit of the law. In this relation the gospel of the Apostle was the real medium and measure of the judgment (see 1Co 1:18); and Jesus Christ was the real judicial authority. See Joh 3:16; Act 17:30-31; 1Co 4:5, and other places.On the day of the promulgation of the gospel the better Gentiles manifested their ordination to salvation, just as the majority of the Jews made manifest their hardness of heart.
[According to my gospel. The is to be either understood, ratione ministerii (Calvin, Meyer), or better, the gospel of free grace for the uncircumcision, which was especially committed to Paul, as the gospel for the circumcision was to Peter, Gal 2:7. The same expression occurs Rom 16:25-26.Through Jesus Christ, as the appointed Judge of the world; Act 17:30-31; 1Co 4:5; 2Co 5:10; Mat 25:31; Joh 5:27, &c. While favors Dr. Langes interpretation of , the . seems to refer rather to the future judgment; yet Christ has His hand in all the preparatory judgments of the history of the Church.P. S.]
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. The common characteristic in the condemnable condition of the Gentiles and Jews is their religious and moral self-contradiction. In this self-contradiction Paul (Rom 1:21) discovers the beginning of the offence of the Gentiles, whom he represents as inexcusable (). The same self-contradiction is consummated, on one side, in the man who approves sin against better knowledge and conscience (Rom 1:32,), and, on the other side, in the man who condemns the sinner, and yet is guilty of weighty offences himself (Rom 2:1). Therefore the expression inexcusable () is also repeated here. The judgment of God is ever also a self-judgment of man. See Mat 12:37; Mat 18:23; Mat 25:26-27. In the one who judges, the self-contradiction is completed as falsehood of the inner life in the very strongest degree. The sincere man, on the other hand (we can by no means speak of sincerity as absolute, but yet as gradually predominating), by looking into his own heart and life, arrives at that , in relation to human sin and misery, which is akin to compassion, and points not to the judgment of condemnation, but to the saving judgment of the gospel.
2. The condemnatory judgment pronounced by the sinner on the sinner does not only condemn him in form, but transposes him also actually to a condition similar to condemnation. Fanaticism is never more unhappy than when it would compel, by measures of deceit and violence, those who think differently to adopt its pretended forms of happiness (Jam 2:13).
3. The one who judges, says Paul (Rom 2:3-4), has always a false idea of God. He either regards himself as the favorite of a partial God, on account of His conformity to theocratical, ecclesiastical, or legal forms, or he is inwardly vicious and wicked, and despises the real manifestations of God (see Psa 50:16-21). An atheistic element is common to both classes.
4. The long-suffering of God, or the forbearance of Gods justice toward the sinner, stands in reciprocal action with the wrath of God. Both denote the polar antagonism in the government of absolute justice, which is no rule of abstract law, but has a living, pedagogic form corresponding to the relation of the Divine personality to the human personality. See my Positive Dogmatics, p. 119. Gods forbearance and clemency, no less than His wrathful judgment, looks to the working of repentance.
5. The unbeliever and hardened one, by his own deeds, transforms the works of Gods forbearance and goodness into the preliminary conditions of His wrathful judgment, and accumulates for himself, out of the riches of God which he has experienced, a store of destruction.
6. The day of the rejected gospel is to man a day of inward judgment, as is proved by the destruction of Jerusalem. See the Exeg. Notes on Rom 2:5. But all judgments are prophecies and preludes of the last day of wrath. It is a narrow view, to suppose that the conception of historical periods excludes epochs, or that single epochs exclude the final catastrophe. This may also be applied to the idea of judgments. Just because the worlds history is the worlds judgment, the former pursues its course toward the latter.
7. The embarrassments of commentators on the sense of Rom 2:6-10 give evidence of timid and narrow views on the doctrine of justification. The passage gains its true light from the biblical doctrine that there is a gratia prveniens over the Gentile world, which even Augustine did not yet wholly ignore, but which, through his influence, was lost sight of in the orthodox theology of the Middle Ages, and, indeed, of more recent times. The seekers who are portrayed in Rom 2:7; Rom 2:10 will never think seriously of relying upon their works before God, because they are in a gravitation toward the Eternal, which will find rest only when they see God in Christ, either in this or the other world. But the opposite classwhose principle of life is party spirit, and reliance upon temporal associationwill ever place their confidence in their own achievements, even when they vigorously reject the doctrine of the meritoriousness of good works. For, besides the righteousness of works (Werkgerechtigkeit), there is also a righteousness of doctrine, of orthodoxy (Lehrgerechtigkeit), a righteousness of the letter (Buchstabenge echtigkeit), a righteousness of negation and protest (Negationsgerechtigkeit), which have, in common with the righteousness of works, the fundamental characteristic of party righteousness (Parteigerechtigkeit), and may be the more dangerous forms as they are the more subtle. On the salvation of the heathen, comp. Tholuck, Comm., pp. 92 ff.The doctrine of justification cannot conflict with the doctrine of Gods righteousness, by virtue of which He will reward every man according to his works.
8. Glory and honor and immortalityprecious pearls; eternal lifethe goodly pearl. See Mat 13:45-46.
9. It is the character of all party spirit to be a rebel upwardly against the royal right of truth, and, on the other hand, a slave downwardly to the tyrannical and terrifying spirit of party.
10. Because God, as the Righteous One, looks at the substance of personal life, He does not regard the person according to its external and civil conception, nor according to its external appearance and estimate.
11. In Rom 2:12, different degrees of punishment are evidently indicated. See the Exeg. Notes.
12. On , comp. the Exeg. Notes on Rom 2:13 [also Rom 1:17, and Rom 3:21-31]. Likewise the Bible-Work on Jam 2:20 ff. Since , even according to the idea of making just, can only mean to declare just, because the question is always concerning justification in some legal tribunal, the supposed exceptions where in the Scriptures is made to signify to make just, should be investigated anew. The passage, Isa 53:2, can really not otherwise be explained, than that He will, by virtue of his knowledge as the righteous servant of God, declare many just; and this because He shall bear their iniquities. The passage in Daniel, Rom 12:3, must by all means be explained thus: That the subject is the judgment of the world, in which, according to the biblical representation, the righteous shall take part (1Co 6:2); and even if refers to this life, it no more means one who makes just, than means one who makes wise. The reading, , Rev 22:11, cannot be sustained against the more strongly credited rendering, . See more on this subject ad Rom 3:26.
13. On the occurrence of a fulfilment of the law among the Gentiles, see Tholuck, pp. 101, 102. The author, following the older theologians, very justly opposes Flacianism [i.e., that sin is a substance, a revival of the old Manichan heresy, by Flacius Illyricus, the editor of the Magdeburg Centuries, and a Lutheran controversialist of the 16th century.P. S.]. To speak of virtues of the heathen, is liable to misunderstanding, unless we mean thereby a search after the Infinite. As heathen virtues, they can only be virtues of progress toward poverty in spirit (Mat 5:3), under the guidance of the gratia prveniens, or fundamental forms of the development of a desire after salvation. The attempt, in Rothes Ethik, part ii. p. 398 [1st ed.], to explain this class of virtues, is not very clear.
14. The three objective forms of seeking higher attainments in the Gentile world are: The state, as the expression of the search after righteousness in the conscience, or in the will; philosophy, as the expression of the search for an intelligent comprehension of the truth; and art, as the expression of the search for ideal contemplation, and the representation of life by means of the sentiments.
15. The three subjective forms of search for higher attainments in the Gentile world are: 1. Works of magnanimity. 2. The conscience, especially the cheerful impulses of the moral consciousness. When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceeding great joy. 3. An intercourse of moral judgments, of either an excusing or accusing character. [Bishop Sanderson, as quoted by Wordsworth: Paul teaches here (Rom 2:15) that every man, however unholy, has a conscience, though depraved; and that, at the fall of man, conscience itself was not lost, but its rectitude and integrity were impaired; and that, when we are born again in baptism, we do not receive the infusion of another conscience, but our conscience, which was before unclean, is washed by the blood of Christ, and is cleansed by faith, and is enlightened by the Holy Spirit, in order that it may please God.P. S.]
16. On the day of the crisis which the gospel brings to pass, it will appear that many Gentiles are really Jews, and that many Jews are really Gentiles. Likewise, many Christians of the Middle Ages were essentially believers of evangelical truth, while many so-called evangelical persons whose righteousness consists of works, and others whose righteousness consists of doctrines, and still others whose righteousness consists of their Protestantism, are, after all, only Roman Catholics at heart. Ideal dynamical antitheses, which the day of the Lord will bring to light, predominate over the historical antitheses, which possess very great significance. On the day mentioned here, see the Exeg. Notes.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
Gods impartial righteousness is shown: 1. He does not give preference to the Jews, although they possess the law; 2. He is not prejudiced against the Gentiles, although they are without the law; but, 3. of one, just as of the other, He asks whether they have done good or evil (Rom 2:1-16).Because others are black, we do not become white (Rom 2:1).Judging our neighbor is the worst depravity, because: 1. We are blind toward ourselves; 2. we are unjust toward our fellow-men (Rom 2:1).By our judgment of others we fall under the judgment of God pronounced on ourselves (Rom 2:3).What does the celebration of a day of fasting and prayer require us to do? 1. Not to despise the riches of Gods goodness, patience, and forbearance; but rather, 2. to remember that His goodness should lead us to repentance (Rom 2:4).Gods goodness regarded as the pure source of repentance (Rom 2:4).Treasure not up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath (Rom 2:5).Dies ir, dies illa, solvet scla in favilla (Rom 2:5-6).What will God give to every man according to his works? 1. To some, glory and honor and immortality, together with precious peace; 2. to others, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish (Rom 2:6-11).What it is to continue patiently in well-doing for eternal life (Rom 2:7).Gods indignation! 1. Not unmerited, but deserved; 2. not temporary, but eternal (Rom 2:8).Gods wrath: holy displeasure, not unholy anger.No one is without law. For, 1. God has given His law to the Jews by Moses; 2. he has written the substance of it upon the hearts of the Gentiles (Rom 2:12-16).The universal revelation of God in the conscience (Rom 2:14-15).The conscience, and human thoughts in their relation to each other. This relation is such, that, 1. The witness of the former testifies of the work of the law; 2. the latter, in the presence of such witness, accuse or excuse one another (Rom 2:14-15).Impossibility of preaching the gospel among the heathen, if they were deprived of conscience.The revelation of God in the conscience, on the one hand, not to be despised; and, on the other, not to be overvalued.Conscience regarded as the connecting link for every missionary sermon among the heathen.
Luther:26 The little word law must not be understood here after a human fashion, that it teaches which works are to be done, and which are to be left undone; as is the case with the laws of men, which can be obeyed by works, without the feeling of the heart. God judges according to the intent of the heart, and will not be satisfied by words; but all the more punishes as hypocrisy and lying those works which are done without the feeling of the heart. Therefore Paul says that nobody is a doer of the law by the works of the law (Rom 2:15).
Starke: The ungodly are as the swine, which do not look at the tree whose acorns they gather up. Thus, with all their enjoyment of temporal mercies, they do not look up to God, who gives them richly to enjoy every good thing (Hos 2:7; Isa 1:3; Jer 5:24); for by every morsel of bread He seeks their improvement (Rom 2:4).He who does not grow better, will grow worse by Divine goodness (Rom 2:5).As the labor, so the reward; and each one must reap what he has sown (Rom 2:6).The pious will gain in perfection in the kingdom of glory that which they had sought in the kingdom of grace (Rom 2:10).Hedinger: To censure others, is the same as to condemn ones self. He who therefore loves to judge, pronounces sentence upon himself (Rom 2:1).Blindness! Delay produces deception. Security follows Divine forbearance. Take care! The longer the storm gathers, the greater its devastation. The one who has received the long loan, has not therefore received it as a gift (Rom 2:4).Every sin will receive its due reward. Who will trifle with it? (Rom 2:8.)A greater measure of knowledge brings only greater condemnation, and no excuse. This much a Gentile knows of the will of God, that he may be condemned to death justly; much more may the Christian be justly condemned who can and should know perfectly the will of God in the law (Rom 2:14).Nova Bibl. Tub.: The sinner can persuade himself, and by many kinds of misconception stupefy himself, so as to believe that his sins will go unpunished. Ah, how common is this deception! (Rom 2:3.)Eternal life is a jewel for which we should strive, a crown for which we should fight, a gift which we should accept, hold, and keep until the end. He who perseveres, will be saved. The question at the judgment-day will not be one of words, but of deeds (Rom 2:7).No one is without law! If it is not written in stone, it is nevertheless engraved upon the heart. Every one knows by nature what is just and what is unjust, what is good and what is evil (Rom 2:4).Cramer: God must be truly in earnest for human salvation, which He seeks by prosperity and adversity. When words cannot avail, He punishes, and waits with great forbearance and patience until the sinner is converted (Rom 2:4).The law of nature is a source of the written law of God, embraced in the two rules: Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them; and what you would not have them do unto you, do not unto them (Rom 2:14).No one can sin so that his sins shall remain concealed; for, if they are not revealed before, they will be brought to light at the last day (Rom 2:16).Wrtemb. Bibl.: Works are witnesses of faith. We must therefore do good works, not in order to be saved, but in order that with them we may testify of our faith, and by faith may inherit eternal life (Rom 2:7).Lange: Abandon all the excuses of age, or condition, or other personal circumstances, that you, with your want of honest Christianity, bring forward; for you can derive no advantage from them before Gods judgment-seat (Rom 2:11).The law of nature must be of great advantage, and be written very deeply on the hearts of all men, since its wilful transgression brings upon men so great guilt, and punishment or condemnation (Rom 2:12).
Bengel: As long as man does not feel the judgment of God, he is apt to despise His goodness, Mat 28:18. Mark here the antithesis of the richness of Divine goodness despised, and the accumulated treasure of wrath.
O. v. Gerlach: The goodness of God is manifested in the exhibition of blessings; His patience, in bearing with the sinner; and His long-suffering, in withholding from punishment (Rom 2:4).Christianity is not something lately discovered among men; but its Founder, the Son of God Himself, is the King and Judge not only of Christians, but likewise of Jews and Gentiles, whom He, in His preparatory households of gracethe former in His Fathers house, the latter by an awakened longing for the sameis seeking to train up for His kingdom, though now they are far distant from home (Rom 2:16).Lisco: Merely external honesty is also punishable (Rom 2:1).Glory, splendor, instead of lowness, honor instead of contempt, and immortality instead of the mortal condition (1Co 15:53-54), are the reward of patience, of the continuous striving for eternal life in spite of all impediments and difficulties (Rom 2:7).
Heubner: Gods judgment is righteous: 1. Objectively: in accordance with sacred laws; not arbitrarily or capriciously, without regard to the person; 2. subjectively: according to the true character of the man, taking each one for his internal and external worth (Rom 2:2).The dealing of God toward sinful men is simply this: He first tries each with goodness, before He pronounces punishment; it is our salvation to acknowledge this goodness, but it is our ruin to despise it (Rom 2:4).The hardened heart is accusable: its operation is not that of nature, but of its own degeneration. How is it first hardened? 1. By frivolity; 2. by obstinacy and pride; 3. by actual, continued sinning (Rom 2:5).The righteous impartiality of God. God does not judge: 1. By outward advantages, form, birth, pedigree, power, respect, wealth; nor, 2. by gifts of mind, acquisitions, skill; nor, 3. by external performances as such, by merely external works, external piety;but by the whole inward sense, by the simplicity and clearness of the heart; by faith and fidelity. He has regard to what is given to each man (Rom 2:11).
The Pericope (Rom 2:1-11) for 10th Sunday after Trinity (Memorial of the destruction of Jerusalem), instead of 1Co 12:1-11 : The impenitent sinner has no excuse before God.: 1. Proof; 2. application.Man before the Divine judgment: He must, 1. Acknowledge himself guilty; 2. regard Gods judgment righteous and inevitable; 3. take refuge in Gods goodness, and listen to its call to repentance; 4. fear the future; 5. listen to revelation.We should see ourselves reflected in the example of the impenitent Jews.
Daniel Superville: The sovereign equity of God (Rom 2:11).Menken: The universal equality of men before Gods judgment.
Spener: The whole law was written on the heart of the first man, for his soul was an image of Gods perfect holiness and righteousness. But after this complete law had been erased from the heart, there remained, so to speak, only some of the larger letters, some portion of the knowledge of the manifest evil and good (Rom 2:15).Conscience is nothing else than a voice of God (Rom 2:15).Roos: Conscience is the consciousness or the judicial declarations of the law (Rom 2:15).
Besser: From mans knowledge of Gods law written on his heart, there arises conscience, which testifies to him, as Luther excellently describes, the power with which conscience presses its judicial witness upon man (Rom 2:15).To the question, What disease is killing you? the poet Euripides makes a matricide answer: Conscience; for I am conscious that I have done evil (Rom 2:15).
J. P. Lange: The judgment of men in the judgment of God.The sources of judgment (Rom 2:4-5).How the sinner changes the treasures of Gods goodness into treasures of wrath.The great judgment-days in the worlds history, especially the destruction of Jerusalem.Justification and Gods righteousness: 1. Apparent contradiction; 2. perfect unity.Two kinds of men perceptible: 1. In two purposes; 2. two kinds of seeking; 3. two results (Rom 2:7-10).God does not regard the person because He looks at it: 1. He does not regard it in a worldly sense; 2. He regards it according to its spiritual significance.The gospel reveals the thoughts of the heart: 1. As a savor of death unto death; and 2. as a savor of life unto life.But this does not apply to every form of Christianity.
[Burkitt: On the day of judgment as the time when Gods character and dealings shall be displayed, Rom 2:5.It will be a day when His righteousness shall be universally manifested and magnified; when all His attributes shall be glorified; His wonderful clemency sweetly displayed; His exact justice terribly demonstrated; His perfect wisdom clearly unfolded; all the knotty plans of Providence wisely resolved; all the mysterious depths of His counsels fully discovered; and His injured honor and glory elearly repaired, to the joyful satisfaction of all good men, and to the dreadful consternation and confusion of the wicked and impenitent world.On Rom 2:16 : Here, 1. A doctrine is boldly asserteda coming day of judgment; and 2. its proof and confirmationaccording to my gospel.
[M. Henry (condensed) on the whole passage, Rom 2:1-16 : The Apostle, 1. Arraigns the Jews for their censoriousness and self-conceit; 2. asserts the invariable justice of the Divine government; 3. draws up a charge against the Jews; 4. describes the measures by which God proceeds in His judgment; and 5. proves the equity of all His dealings with men when He comes to judge them.
[Macknight: Paul distinguishes between meritorious and gratuitous justification; the former being that which is unattainable by works of the law, the latter that which is attainable, as James says, not by faith only, but by works also.
Rom 2:15 : That there is a natural revelation made to the heathen, is proved by Paul by three arguments: 1. By many virtuous acts performed by the heathen; 2. by the natural operation of their consciences; 3. by their reasonings with one another, by which they excused or accused one another.
[Jortin: These suppositions agree both with Scripture and reason: 1. All men can do all that God requires of them; 2. all who do the best they can, derive help from God as far as is needful; 3. they all have Christ as their Redeemer, though. He was never revealed to them.Who knows whether the lot of the savage be not better than that of the philosopher, and the lot of the slave than that of the king? But this much we know, that every one ought to be contented with that state in which his wise and good Creator has placed him, and to conclude that it will be the best for him if he makes the best use of it. Upon this supposition the Divine impartiality stands fully justified.
[Timothy Dwight: 1. Our eternal life is in itself an immense good; 2. eternal happiness consist in eternal disinterestedness and its consequences. (See sermon on Consistency of Benevolence with seeking Salvation, in which Lord Shaftesburys celebrated theory, that disinterestedness is virtue, and the only virtue, is controverted.)
[John Foster: To the present hour in each life, the series of the Divine goodness may be counted by the succession of a mans sins. Not one sin, small or great, but immediately close by it were acts and proofs of this goodness. If this had been realized to thought, what a striking and awful admonition! Every sin a testimony, a representative of good; and the wonder is that the goodness goes on!
[Annot. Parag. Bible (London): The question is not (Rom 2:14-15) whether any of the Gentiles have actually attained to eternal life without a Divine revelation, but whether they had the law of nature or conscience. They had this; and by it they shall be judged.Taylor: Note Pauls wisdom in appealing to Jew and Gentile: 1. If the Jew could be convinced that a right-minded Gentile might be blessed with eternal salvation, why should he not now be pardoned, and taken into the visible Church? 2. the Gentile, made despondent by the representations of his guilt in the last chapter, here finds himself placed with the Jews, and entitled to hope in Gods mercy.
[Hodge: The principles on which the Apostle assures us all men are to be judged, are, 1. He who condemns in others what he does himself, ipso facto condemns himself; 2. Gods judgments are according to the real character of men; 3. the goodness of God, being designed to lead us to repentance, is no proof that He will not punish sin; 4. God will judge strictly according to works, not profession; 5. men shall be judged strictly according to their knowledge of duty.Further Remarks by Hodge (condensed): 1. The deceitfulness of the heart strikingly exhibited in the different judgments they pass on themselves and others; 2. ask yourself, How does the goodness of God affect me? 3. genuine repentance produced by discoveries of Gods mercy, legal repentance by fear of His justice; 4. any doctrine that tends to produce security in sin, must be false; 5. how vain the hopes of blessedness founded on Gods partiality, or forgetfulness of sin; 6. to escape our guilt, we must seek the Saviours righteousness; 7. He who died for the sins of men, will sit in judgment on sinners.
[Rom 2:16. Barnes: On the propriety of a day of judgment, when all the thoughts of the heart will be revealed: 1. It is only by revealing these that the character is really determined, and impartial judgment administered; 2. they are not judged or rewarded in this life; 3. men of pure motives and pure hearts are often basely caluminated, and overwhelmed with ignominy; while men of base motives are often exalted in public opinion. It is proper that the secret principles of each should be revealed.J. F. H.]
[Rom 2:7. By patient continuance in well-doing. Barrow: No virtue is acquired in an instant, but by degrees, step by step; from the seeds of right instruction and good resolution it springs up, and goes forward by a continual progress and customary practice. Tis a child of patience, a fruit of perseverance, and, consequently, a work of time; for enduring implies a good space of time.
Rom 2:9. Adam: Every sin, when newly committed, amazes and terrifies the soul, though the sense of it soon wears off. How shall we bear the anguish of all our sins together, when conscience, which forgets and extenuates none, brings them to our remembrance?
Rom 2:14. A law unto themselves. Bishop Pearson: Every particular person has a particular remembrance in himself, as a sufficient testimony of his Creator, Lord, and Judge. That man which most peremptorily denieth Gods existence, is the greatest argument to himself that there is a God. Let Caligula profess himself an atheist, and, with that profession, hide his head or run under his bed, and when the thunder strikes his ears, and lightning flashes in his eyes, those terrible works of nature put him in mind of the power, and his own guilt, of the justice of God; whom, while in his wilful opinion he weakly denies, in his involuntary action he strongly asserteth. So that a Deity will either be granted or extorted, and, where it is not acknowledged, it will be manifested.
Rom 2:5; Rom 2:16. Bishop J. Taylor: There are two great days in which the fate of all the world is transacted. This life is mans day, in which man does what he pleases, and God holds His peace. But then God shall have His day too, in which He shall speak, and no man shall answer. If we do the work of God in our own day, we shall receive an infinite mercy in the day of the Lord.
Rom 2:16. My gospel. The gospel: 1. A voice of love (vox amoris); 2. a voice of challenge (vox contestationis); 3. a voice of certainty (vox certitudinis); 4. a voice of persuasion and invitation (vox invitationis); 5. a voice of decision and judgment (vox judicii).P. S.]
Footnotes:
[1]Rom 2:5.[ , i.e., wrath which will be revealed in the day of wrath. It belongs to , not to . The E. V. confounds with , which is inadmissible, unless we take it as a constructio pregnans, so that includes .P. S.]
[2]Rom 2:5. after is nowise sustained either by the Codd. or by the connection. [Probably inserted to relieve the number of genitives. Meyer: The would make the sense: the appearance of God and His righteous judgment. But the term is unusual. Paul speaks only of the . , 1Co 1:7; 2Th 1:7.P. S.]
[3]Rom 2:7.[On the different constructions see the Exeg. Notes.P. S.]
[4]Rom 2:8.The rec. . [The reverse order is intrinsically preferable and sustained by . A. B. D *. G. Vulg. Syr., &c., and adopted by the critical editors. The change in the construction from the accusative (), Rom 2:7, to the nominative ( or ), Rom 2:8, is no doubt intentional; God gives eternal life, and wills all men to be saved; but condemnation is mans own guilt and comes, so to speak, Deo nolente. Comp. cumenius, Wordsworth, Hodge, and Forbes in loc. Bengal, on Mat 7:24, says: Salutaria Deus ad se refert; mala a se removet.P.S.
[5]Rom 2:11.[Literally, acceptance of faces. For , several Codd. (A. D. G. and Sinaiticus) read , with an , and this reading has been adopted by Lachmann, Alford, and others here and elsewhere (Act 10:34; Jam 2:9). The insertion of a is probably Alexandrian usage, and due to a vicious pronunciation of and ..P. S.]
[6]Rom 2:13.The article [before in both cases, which is found in the text. rec.] is wanting in A. B. D. E. [and in Cod. Sin., and is probably inserted to indicate that the written law of Moses is meant here. Nevertheless the article before law may be properly retained in the E. V. Alford proposes to omit the article before hearers, and doers, since in both cases is generic. and form properly one word: Gesetzeshrer, Gesetzesthter, law-hearers, law-doers.P. S.]
[7]Rom 2:14.[, not . The omission of the article is important to avoid the appearance of conflict with the general moral depravity of the heathen, as taught Rom 1:22 ff.P. S.]
[8]Rom 2:14.[Dr. Lange translates: etwa thun, and so renders the force of the subjunctive , which is better attested (. A. B.) than the indicative , and is adopted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Alford. Others read the singular with reference to the neutral plural (Meyer, Wordsworth).P. S.]
[9]Rom 2:14.[There is, as Meyer remarks, a difference of emphasis between . and .; the first denies the possession of the law, the second the possession of the law. This difference can perhaps best be rendered in English by: having no law, and, not having the lawP. S.]
[10]Rom 2:15.[The inward monitor of the heathen condemns or acquits their moral conduct. The after is concessive, and implies that the acquittal is the exception, the condemnation the rule. must not be separated, and is to be taken not as adverb, as in the E. V. , but as preposition, inter se, between one another, invicem, alternately; comp. Act 15:9 : ; Mat 18:15 : . The may refer either to the , as the preceding (Meyer, Lange), or to the following , i.e., thought against thought in inner strife. See Exeg. Notes. Omit the parenthesis Rom 2:13-15 (E. v.), or of 14 and 15 (Lachmann, Meyer), which only disturbs the connection. See Exeg. Notes on Rom 2:16.P. S.]
[11][Similarly Hodge: Though from what follows it is plain that the Jews are here intended, yet the proposition is made general. Wordsworth: Paul uses instead of , because the proposition is of universal application, and because he would approach the Jew with gentleness, and not alienate him by an abrupt denunciation.P. S.]
[12][Wordsworth: We who are Jews and have the Scriptures. The Apostle charitably and wisely identifies himself with the Jews to convince them from the conceded ground of the O. T.P. S.]
[13][In the writings of Justin Martyr and other fathers. See Meyer in loc.P. S.]
[14][Of the English and American commentators, whom I have consulted, Dr. Hodge is the only one who takes some pains to solve the dogmatic difficulty presented by this apparent contradiction of the doctrine of retribution according to works, and the doctrine of justification by faith. I quote the substance of his remarks: First, notwithstanding the doctrine of gratuitous justification, and in perfect consistency with it, the Apostle still teaches that the retributions of eternity are according to our works. The good only are saved, and the wicked only are condemned. * * * The wicked will be punished on account of their works, and according to their works; the righteous will be rewarded, not on account of, but according to their works. Good works are to them the evidence of their belonging to that class to whom, for Christs sake, eternal life is graciously awarded; and they are in some sense and to some extent, the measure of that reward. But it is more pertinent to remark, in the second place, that the Apostle is not here teaching the method of justification, but is laying down those general principles of justice, according to which, irrespective of the gospel, all men are to be judged. He is expounding the law, not the gospel. And as the law not only says that death is the wages of sin, but also that those who keep its precepts shall live by them, so the Apostle says, that God will punish the wicked and reward the righteous. This is perfectly consistent with what he afterwards teaches, that there are none righteous; that there are none who so obey the law as to be entitled to the life which it promises; and that for such the gospel provides a plan of justification without works, a plan for saving those whom the law condemns. He is here combating the false hopes of the Jews, who, though trusting to the law, were by the principles of the law exposed to condemnation. This he does to drive them, from this false dependence, and to show them that neither Jew nor Gentile can be justified before the bar of that God, who, while He promises eternal life to the obedient, has revealed His purpose to punish the disobedient. All, therefore, that this passage teaches is, that irrespective of the gospel, to those who either never heard of it, or who having heard, reject it, the principle of judgment will be law. This is a combination of the interpretation of Tholuck with that of Olshausen, enumerated above as Nos. 1 and 2. Stuart: There is some real goodness in the works of the sanctified; and this will be rewarded, imperfect as it is, not on the ground of law, but on the ground of grace. Very unsatisfactory. Dr. Wordsworth says not a word on this difficulty, but gives a long extract from Jeromes work against Pelagius in explanation of Rom 2:5.P. S.]
[15][Tholuck makes the condition, the recognition, the unbroken continuance of the blessedness of the saints. Hodge: The manifested excellence or splendor of the future condition is expressed by , the honor due such excellence by , and the endless nature of blessedness by . Similarly Meyer.P. S.]
[16][Lange renders , die vom Parteitreiben her sind.P. S.]
[17][Fritzsche renders the word malitiosi fraudum machinatores. This derivation was first suggested by Rckert and is now generally adopted; also by Alford, Wordsworth, and Hodge, although Hodge renders the word contentious, and gives it in the present case a wider meaning, like De Wette and Tholuck. Conybeare and Howson: seems to mean selfish party intrigue conducted in a mercenary spirit, and more generally, selfish cunning is used for intriguing partisans by Aristotle (Polit. Rom 5:3). The history of the word seems to bear a strong analogy to that of our term job. Moses Stuart adheres to the old derivation from ; Robinson adopts the correct derivation from , , but gives it the same meaning as , party-strife, faction, contention.P. S.]
[18][The change of construction is a delicate adjustment in the Greek, to express the nice distinction that God is directly the Author and Giver of eternal life, but not strictly and primarily of eternal punishment, which is the necessary result of the sinners own conduct. A similar distinction is intended by the change of construction from the active to the passive , Rom 9:22-23 : The vessels of mercy God Himself had before prepared unto glory, but the vessels of wrath are filled, or have fitted themselves, for perdition. Comp. Textual Note4.P. S.]
[19][Meyer and Alford: signifies more the outward weight of objective infliction, the subjective feeling of the pressure. They are often associated, Rom 8:35; 2Co 4:8; 2Co 6:4. The latter is the stronger term, and hence it always follows by way of climax.P. S.]
[20][ , to lift up, or accept the face of some one, i.e., to be favorable or partial to him from personal considerations. In the N. T. the terms , , (in some Codd. written with an before ) always denote the unjust partiality, and are denied to God and forbidden to man.P. S.]
[21][On the meaning of the terms , , , the reader is referred to the Exeg. Notes, chap. i. 17, and iii. 2131. Dr. Hodge holds to the strictly forensic view, and agrees here with Philippi. To be just before God, he says, and to be justified, are the same thing. They are both forensic expressions, and indicate the state rather than the character of those to whom they refer. Those are just in the sight of God, or are justified, who have done what the law requires, and are regarded and treated accordingly; that is, are declared to be free from condemnation, and entitled to the favor of God. In obvious allusion to the opinion, that being a Jew was enough to secure admission to heaven, the Apostle says, It is not the hearers but the doers of the law that are justified. He is not speaking of the method of justification available for sinners, as revealed in the gospel, but of the principles of justice which will be applied to all who look to the law for justification. If men rely on works, they must have works; they must be doers of the law; they must satisfy its demands, if they are to be justified by it. For God is just and impartial; He will, as a judge administering the law, judge every man, not according to his privileges, but according to his works and the knowledge of duty which he has possessed. On these principles, it is his very design to show that no flesh living can be justified. Similarly Melanchthon: Hc descriplio est justiti legis, qu nihil impedit alia dicta de justitia fidei. But the real difficulty consists in the apparent conflict of Pauls doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith, and his doctrine of judgment by works, as taught not only here from the standpoint of the law, but elsewhere from the standpoint of the gospel as well, 2Co 5:10; Rom 14:10; Gal 6:7; Eph 6:8; Col 3:24-25; Mat 12:36; Mat 25:31-46; Joh 5:29. Comp. the comments on Rom 2:6, p. 96 ff.P. S.]
[22][Forbes, p. 148, fully adopts this distinction of Philippi, and thinks it essential to the proper understanding of the whole passage.P. S.]
[23][Similarly Alford: Confirming by its testimony, the signifying the agreement of the witness with the deed, as con in contestari, confirmare; perhaps also the may be partly induced by the in referring to the reflective process, in which a man confers, so to speak, with himself.P. S.]
[24][Wordsworth also adopts this connection with Rom 2:15, and quotes from Bishop Pearson (Art. VII. on the Creed): Conscience is a witness bound over to give testimony for or against us at some judgment after this life to pass upon us.P. S.]
[25][So do the editions of Griesbach and Knapp and the E. V., who parenthesize Rom 2:13-15.P. S.]
[26]Long-suffering is a virtue which is slow to become wrathful and to punish wrong. Patience is that which bears misfortune in property, body, or reputation, whether it happen justly or unjustly. Goodness is temporal reciprocal beneficence, and a friendly nature (Rom 2:4).
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
CONTENTS
Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. (2) But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things. (3) And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? (4) Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? (5) But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; (6) Who will render to every man according to his deeds: (7) To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life: (8) But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, (9) Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; (10) But glory, honor, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: (11) For there is no respect of persons with God.
The Apostle having shewn in the foregoing Chapter, the sad State of all Men by Nature, he shews with equal Proofs arising from human Depravity, the total Inability of the Law to bring Sinners to God: and from hence, as in the former Instance, manifests the Necessity and Importance of the Gospel, of Christ.
Rom 2:1-11 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. (2) But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things. (3) And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? (4) Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? (5) But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; (6) Who will render to every man according to his deeds: (7) To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life: (8) But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, (9) Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; (10) But glory, honor, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: (11) For there is no respect of persons with God.
Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. (2) But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things. (3) And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? (4) Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? (5) But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; (6) Who will render to every man according to his deeds: (7) To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life: (8) But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, (9) Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; (10) But glory, honor, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: (11) For there is no respect of persons with God.
Within the compass of those verses the Apostle enumerates very-many things, which are, and must be confessedly plain and universally received truths, not only founded in revelation, but common sense and reason. But on these we need not dwell. Paul’s evident intention in the introduction, of them, is only in a way preparatory, to shew the inability of the Law of Moses to justify sinners before God. The great design of this Chapter is to set this forth in the fullest colors, and, in the example of the Jew, to manifest that the law never did, neither was it ever designed, to bring sinners to God. And therefore he begins with stating common principles of right and wrong. All judgment proceeds upon this standard of equity. The Jews had a law. They brake it. And yet, while breaking it themselves, they condemned others who brake it also. Now, saith the Apostle, is it possible for you to suppose, that a law which you have broken can justify you? Can you think that a broken law can be your justification before God? Are you so senseless as to plead what becomes your very condemnation?
Such views of the subject contained in those verses, will serve to explain the several expressions made use of in the Apostle’s reasoning. The goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance. What repentance? Not that repentance which Christ is exalted as a prince and a Savior to give, Act 5:31 . God’s gift cannot be man’s merit. But the repentance here alluded to, is that natural sorrow which conscience will still excite in the heart, notwithstanding its present benumbed state, and as we see it doth in the worst of men, when their sins bring sorrow, and their crimes are followed by punishment. The vilest sinner alive is led to this natural repentance when judgment taketh hold of him. But this sorrow differs wholly from godly sorrow and true repentance, wrought in the heart by sovereign grace.
This natural sorrow is wholly of man, the other is wholly of God. Natural repentance is excited by the dread of affliction: gracious repentance is awakened by the Holy Ghost, when convincing of sin. And while that of nature only acts as long as a fear of punishment hangs over the conscience, and the heart remains the same as it was before: that of grace brings with it a thorough change, and the life is reformed. The Apostle himself so describes it. Godly sorrow (said he) worketh repentance to salvation, not to be repented of; but the sorrow of the world worketh death, 2Co 6:10 .
In like manner, when it is said in those verses, that the Lord will render to every man according to his works, and that there is no respect of persons with God: those expressions must not be accepted contrary to the general tenor of holy scripture, God hath no respect of persons, considered as to their own personal worth or doings. He hath no respect of persons, as to their place of birth, or relations from whom they are descended in the Adam – nature of generation, where the whole stock is from the original apostacy, all alike corrupt. Neither hath the Lord respect of persons, as some have ventured to suppose from foreseeing what should arise in them, or be done by them, in the after circumstances of their life. For all the good that is done upon earth, the Lord doeth it himself Upon all these accounts, nothing can be more plain and evident than that God is no respecter of persons. There is, there can be nothing in the creature in a way of merit, which can act as a cause in the sight of the Lord to induce this respect. But it is equally certain, that while God respects no man’s person, on either of the grounds here mentioned, yet the whole Church, and every individual of that Church, chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, the Lord hath had respect to, on Christ’s account, and highly distinguished everyone of their persons, as they are one with Christ, and hath accepted and beloved them in Him. And to the same amount, and on the same ground, the reward that the Lord is here said to render to every man according to his deeds; the sense is, not that the merit of every man, considered in himself, and without an eye to Christ, will form the standard of retribution. For, alas! if this were the case, everlasting condemnation must alike fall on all, for all the world; in the Adam-nature of an unregenerated, unrenewed state, become guilty before God, Rom 3:19 . But the meaning is, (and indeed the verses which follow explain it,) as men are accepted in Christ, or as they reject Christ in their own souls. They (saith the Apostle) who seek for glory, and honor, and immortality, eternal life; that is, they seek those things in Christ. Indeed, nowhere else can they be found. Christ himself is eternal life. And they who have Christ, have eternal life in Him, and all the blessings connected with it, Joh 3:36Joh 3:36 . But to them that are contentious, that is, contend against Christ as the whole of salvation, and stand upon the bottom of their own works, either in whole or in part, there will be indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil. Hence this scripture is in this way very fully established. The Lord will render to every man according to his deeds. Here are the deeds of faith, and the deeds of works. And the issue is as might be expected. Reader! ponder well the subject. Think what a mercy it must be in that final day of account, which Paul calls, the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, to have a perfect, complete, and all-sufficient righteousness to stand in, for the justification of our persons before God. Thai can only be found in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. And if it be blessed then, so must it be now. Have you ever made it the subject of examination? Will you try it in the present moment? Put your hand upon your heart. Judge it yourself with a strict scrutiny, as it will be done in the hour when weighed in the balance of the sanctuary. And as a discovery of its workings will bring up proofs of its deceitfulness, Jer 17:9 , listen to what the Holy Ghost speaks of Christ’s all-sufficiency, in the blood of the everlasting covenant. And if the Lord the Spirit shews you, that there is more in Jesus to save, than in sin to condemn, sweet will be the consolation that will follow. And depend upon it, if the Lord speaks peace now, he will not speak condemnation then. He is of one mind, and who can turn him? Job 23:13 . God will not unsay what he hath once said. Deliver him from going down to the pit, I have found a ransom, Job 33:24 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Judgment
Rom 2:5-6
I. Belief in a Judgment is part of our faith in the sanity of the universe. Judgment is not an arbitrary enactment but an inevitable process: the sequel and corollary of our sense of responsibility. If goodness and right are anything more than words, there is Judgment to come out of all that is done on earth. Daniel Webster, the American, when asked what was the greatest thought that ever occupied his mind, replied, ‘My personal accountability to God’. And I know of nothing so essential to the definition of a man as that sense of responsibility. Eliminate that, and man is not So delicate are the tablets of our soul, which we call memory, that nothing howsoever slight can ever be razed from them. Nothing dies from out the memory. When God says, ‘Son, remember!’ the memory will give up its dead, an unerring transcript of life. Was it not Plato who said that each judge of the dead ‘will, with his naked soul, pierce into the other naked soul?’ The idea is one with that which St Paul has enshrined in the text which the Revised Version has so transfigured: ‘We must all be made manifest before the Judgment-seat of God’. We must be shown openly: each man discovered to himself. In that awful day of revelation each soul will know itself, and go to its own place, as if driven by inner necessity. For each soul seeing itself will, in the eternal light, judge itself by the standard of its own capacities.
II. As we ‘reason of judgment to come,’ there is another illuminating idea in the New Testament, which I dare not omit; God hath committed all judgment to the Son of Man. Before Him we are to stand. We are to stand before One who knows what is in man: One who was bound up with mankind in all things: One who was tried in all points as we are. He will judge us with that human pity, mercy and love which make Him to our hearts the Christ. It will be Christian judgment.
III. Finally, there is quite another side to the Judgment. That apostolic text, ‘Whatsoever a man soweth that shall he also reap,’ is generally read, I am afraid, as a menace, that nothing in heaven or hell can exempt a man from the harvest of his misdeeds. But it is a promise too a promise for the encouragement of right-doers; and the pledge of God is behind that promise. Ah! behind all the error and pain, passion and failure of life, there is that refuge the Judge of all the earth will see right done.
B. J. Snell, The All-Enfolding Love, p. 161.
References. II. 6, 8, 9. H. S. Holland, Christian World Pulpit, vol. liii. p. 65. II. 6-12. Expositor (6th Series), vol. iii. p. 129.
The Grand Quest and the Lowly Path
Rom 2:7
I. The grandeur of the Quest. ‘Seek for glory and honour and incorruption.’ What thrilling words these are when taken with their great meanings! Some would eliminate them from the vocabulary, and shut us up to more modest language. But take these words, properly understood, out of the vocabulary, and what will be the effect on character? The noblest character, the strongest and most beautiful life are impossible without the large ideas and hopes expressed in these terms. Take these great words out of the vocabulary, and what will be the effect on experience? Can the spirit within us live without them? ‘No,’ says the secularist: ‘the spirit of man will not be content without these words: but glory, honour, and incorruption are found within the worldly life’. Axe they? ‘Glory’ have we that? Glory means solidity, reality, durability, and certainly we know nothing of these in the temporal sphere. ‘Honour’ have we that? When the soul is denied, we become like the beasts which perish, and the honours of life’s short day are golden shoes, purple saddles, jingling bells. ‘Immortality’ have we that? Yes: fame. Fame! a death’s-head crowned with a fading wreath. The fact is, we have not these things, only these words, if we are without faith in God, the spirituality of our own nature, and the eternal world.
II. The simplicity of the Pathway. ‘To them that by patience in well-doing seek.’ There is something quite startling between the grandeur of the aim and the homeliness of the condition. ‘Welldoing.’Not brilliant strokes in trade, war, or scholarship, but well-doing in ordinary life. What a blessing to know that God recognises patient merit, and that He reserves the major prizes for dutiful souls faithful unto death! (1) Heaven recognises the greatness of simple character. It is easy to overlook great character in humble guise, yet it is clearly seen by Him who appreciates it the most. We have all heard of the man who spoke prose for forty years without knowing it; but a fact of far greater interest is that scores of men speak poetry without knowing it nay, act splendid poetry without knowing it; and God shall surprise them with glory, honour, and incorruption beyond their most glowing dream. (2) God recognises the greatness of simple duty. In a lowly post, entrusted with commonplace offices, called daily to discharge the most menial service, we may express the noblest conscientiousness, the most exquisite feeling, sublimest principle and behaviour. (3) God recognises the greatness of simple suffering. Gordon flashed a splendid figure on the imagination of the world, but many such heroes are hidden in obscure life. Obscure life conceals illustrious heroism, known only to God, but it is known to Him, and shall not lose its recompense of reward.
Let us not despise lowly station and the humdrum life. Let us believe in high truths, and at the same time in the divinity of fag.
W. L. Watkinson, The Ashes of Roses, p. 198.
References. II. 7. J. Edwards, Preacher’s Magazine, vol. x. p. 276. D. C. A. Agnew, The Soul’s Business and Prospects, p. 400. O. Bronson, Sermons, p. 33. Expositor (4th Series), vol. i. p. 203; ibid. vol. ii. p. 424. II. 8. Ibid. (5th Series), vol. v. p. 452. II. 8, 9. Ibid. vol. ix. p. 439. II. 9. Ibid. (7th Series), vol. v. p. 495. II. 11. J. F. Crosse, Sermons, p. 154.
Rom 2:13
‘Preach to these men as one may,’ thundered Savonarola to the Florentines, ‘they have got into the habit of listening well and yet acting ill. This habit has become a second nature, and they contrive to listen without obeying. And it is as hard to change this course of things as to change the course of the waters. Thou hast made a habit of always hearing the command? Then do justice, do justice Else thou wilt become like a rook on the steeple, that, at the first stroke of the church bell, takes flight and is scared, but afterwards, growing accustomed to the sound, perches quietly on the bell, however loudly it be rung.’
Reference. II. 13. P. McAdam Muir, Modern Substitutes for Christianity, p. 33.
Rom 2:14
The text of Butler’s two sermons on ‘The Natural Supremacy of Conscience’.
References. II. 14. Bishop Butler, Human Nature and other Sermons, p. 28. Expositor (6th Series), vol. v. p. 429; ibid. vol. x. p. 176. II. 14, 15. Ibid. vol. vi. p. 267; ibid. vol. xi. p. 201.
Rom 2:15
As Jowett, in his introduction to the Gorgias, observes, ‘Men are not in the habit of dwelling upon the dark side of their own lives; they do not easily see themselves as others see them. They are very kind and very blind to their own faults; the rhetoric of self-love is always pleading with them on their own behalf. Adopting a similar figure of speech, Socrates would have them use rhetoric, not in defence but in accusation of themselves….
‘Under the figure there lurks a real thought, which, expressed in another form, admits of an easy application to ourselves. For do not we too accuse as well as excuse ourselves?… In religious diaries a sort of drama is often enacted by the consciences of men “accusing or else excusing them”. For all our life long we are talking with ourselves.’
References. II. 15. N. D. Hillis, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lvii. p. 328. Archbishop Magee, Sermons at St. Saviour’s, Bath, p. 146.
Rom 2:16
In a much-criticised passage in his Enigmas of Life, Mr. Rathbone Greg attempts to describe one of the retributive pangs falling to the sinful soul, which belong to the nature of the future world, namely, ‘the severance from all those we love who on earth have trod the narrower and better path’. ‘What,’ he asks, ‘can be more certain, because what more in the essential nature of things, than that the great revelation of the Last Day (or that which must attend and be involved in the mere entrance into the spiritual state) will effect a severance of souls an instantaneous gulf of demarcation between the pure and the impure, the just and the unjust, the merciful and the cruel immeasurably more deep, essential, and impassable, than any which time or distance or search or antipathy could effect on earth? Here we never see into each other’s souls; characters the most opposite and incompatible dwell together upon earth, and may love each other much, unsuspicious of the utter want of fundamental harmony between them…. But when the great curtain of ignorance and deception shall be withdrawn “when the secrets of all hearts shall be made known” when the piercing light of the spiritual world shall at once and for ever disperse those clouds which have hidden what we really are from those who have loved us and almost from ourselves, when the trusting confidence of friendship shall discover what a serpent has been nourished in its bosom, when the yearning mother shall perceive on what a guilty wretch all her boundless and priceless tenderness has been lavished, when the wife shall at length see the husband whom she cherished through long years of self-denying and believing love revealed in his true colours, a wholly alien creature; what a sudden, convulsive, inevitable, because natural separation will then take place! One flash of light has done it all. The merciful delusions which held friends together upon earth are dispersed, and the laws of the mind must take their course and divide the evil from the good.’
References. II. 16. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxi. No. 1849. Expositor (4th Series), vol. ii. p. 260; ibid. (6th Series), vol. ix. p. 91. II. 17-25. Ibid. (5th Series), vol. v. p. 325.
Rom 2:21
Perhaps some of the most terrible irony of the human lot is this of a deep truth coming to be uttered by lips that have no right to it.
George Eliot.
Charles Lamb, writing of his cousin James, observes: ‘It is pleasant to hear him discourse of patience extolling it as the truest wisdom and to see him during the last seven minutes that his dinner is getting ready. Nature never ran up in her haste a more restless piece of workmanship than when she moulded this impetuous cousin and art never turned out a more elaborate orator than he can display himself to be, upon his favourite topic of the advantages of quiet, and contentedness in the state, whatever it may be, that we are placed in.’
Contrast the picture of the poor parson in Chaucer’s Prologue:
This noble ensample to his shepe he yaf,
That first he wrought, and afterward he taught…
Christes lore and his apostles twelve
He taught, but first he folwed it himselve.
‘His life,’ says Macaulay of Steele, ‘was spent in sinning and repenting; in inculcating what was right and doing what was wrong. In speculation, he was a man of piety and honour; in practice he was much of the rake and a little of the swindler.’
Persons blessed with Mrs. Crookenden’s description of temperament are not easily convicted of sin. Reproof usually presents itself to them rather as the result of an impertinence upon the part of somebody else, than as the result of misdoing on their own. Conscience, indeed, in them is magnificently altruistic active merely in respect of others. In respect of their own conduct it is finely tranquil.
Lucas Malet.
Rom 2:21
The world smiles when we complain of Russian aggression. The Asiatic subjects of the Queen of England are two hundred millions. The Asiatic subjects of Russia are forty millions. The right on both sides is the right of conquest.
Froude’s Beaconsfield, p. 244.
Seneca’s fame as a moralist and philosopher was due, perhaps, in the first instance to his position about the Court, and to his enormous wealth. A little merit passes for a great deal when it is framed in gold, and once established it would retain its reputation, from the natural liking of men for virtuous cant Those lectures to Lucilius on the beauty of poverty from the greatest money-lender and usurer in the empire! Lucilius is to practise voluntary hardships, is to live at intervals on beggars’ fare, and sleep on beggars’ pallets, that he may sympathise in the sufferings of mortality and be independent of outward things. If Seneca meant all this, why did he squeeze five millions of our money out of the provinces with loans and contracts?
From Froude’s Essay on The Norway Fjords.
Reference. II. 21-23. Expositor (4th Series), vol. vii. p. 420.
Rom 2:24
This I well remember, that though I could myself sin with the greatest Delight and Ease, and also take pleasure in the vileness of my companions; yet, even then, if I have at any time seen wicked things by those who professed goodness, it would make my spirit tremble. As once, above the rest, when I was in the height of my Vanity, yet hearing one to swear that was reckoned for a religious Man, it had so great a stroke upon my Spirit that it made my heart ache.
Grace Abounding, sec. 2.
Religious ideas have the fate of melodies, which, once set afloat in the world, are taken up by all sorts of instruments, some of them wofully coarse, feeble, or out of tune, until people are in danger of crying out that the melody itself is detestable.
George Eliot.
References. II. 24. J. H. Jowett, The Examiner, 12th July, 1906, p. 676. II. 26, 27. Expositor (4th Series), vol. ii. p. 384. II. 28. A. G. Mortimer, The Church’s Lesson for the Christian Year, pt. i. p. 92. II. 28, 29. D. Martin, Penny Pulpit, No. 1602, p. 215.
Rom 2:28-29
On the occasion of his momentous visit to Ulverstone and Swarthmore, George Fox describes his visit to the local church, where ultimately he was moved to speak. ‘The word of the Lord to them was, He is not a Jew that is one outwardly, but he is a Jew that is one inwardly, whose praise is not of man but of God.’ The text, which may be termed one of the Quakers’ texts in the New Testament, was often upon Fox’s lips.
Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson
The Gospel According to Paul
Rom 2:16
You have heard of the Gospel according to Matthew, of the Gospel according to Mark; these are familiar expressions with Christians. They speak of the Gospel according to Luke without any surprise; they refer to the Gospel according to John. Have you ever heard of the Gospel according to Paul? Is there any book in the New Testament which bears that title? The title is not always on the surface of the letter. The preacher is sometimes at a loss to give a title to his own sermon. Every word of the sermon is his, but how to sum up the whole discourse under one brief expressive title is often more difficult than to conceive and to utter the entire essay. There is no book in the New Testament which bears upon its face the title “The Gospel according to Paul”; yet there are words in the New Testament exactly similar to, may we not say precisely identical with, these. Where are they? They are used especially in the Epistle to the Romans, where ( Rom 2:6 ) we read “According to my gospel.” Was that a slip of the pen? It is singular that if it were a lapse of the pen it occurs again in Rom 16:25 : “According to my gospel.” Is there food enough in Paul’s gospel to be going on with? Will he lack bread who sits at Paul’s table? The Apostle was always intensely individual, so much so that persons who do not understand the exact definition of the terms have relieved their minds (pardon the irony) by describing Paul as egotistical. Some persons ought not to know even that much elementary Latin; it is dangerous to trust some speakers with even the alphabet of a dead language. The Apostle Paul had a gospel; he hesitated not to call it “my gospel.” In very deed, every Christian believer must have his own gospel; every worshipper must have his own God: that is to say, his own conception of the Gospel, his own conception of God, his own peculiar and incommunicable experience of Divine life in the soul. I live, said Paul, yet not I: it is my Gospel, yet not mine; it is my God, yet no invention or creation of my imagination. Thus does he intensely and usefully personalise the abstract; thus does Paul appropriate the riches of history, and turn them into the available treasures of the immediate day.
It will be interesting to read the Gospel according to Paul. The other Gospellers are always telling stories, relating incidents or anecdotes, recording miracles, and the like; until John comes, who, being a man of another altitude and quality of mind, takes a course peculiarly his own, so spiritual, intuitional, penetrating, divine. He is succeeded by Paul, the only man who could succeed him. He must be a very skilful speaker who follows the Apostle John; it will be easy after such a writer to perpetrate an anti-climax. To some men conclusions properly belong. They must have no successors on the immediate occasion; it is theirs by, as it were, Divine prescription to utter the climacteric word. Whenever John might have come, even chronologically, he comes in the right place after the three Synoptic narrators; and Paul comes in the right place after John. Paul was excelled in nothing. Whatever the subject was, Paul is chief. Once with supposed egotism he says, “I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles.” How true that is is not a matter of personal testimony, but a matter of literary criticism. Here are the words of Matthew and Mark, Luke and John, Peter and James, and here are the words of Paul, and they tower out above them all, as the steeple rises above the whole church Is it a great argument? who can reason like Paul? Is love the favourite theme of John’s contemplative and gentle spirit? John himself might have stood amazed, divinely stunned, when Paul took up his own theme and showed him that he had not yet begun to realise all the mystery of its beauty.
It will, therefore, I repeat, be interesting to know what Paul’s gospel is, how Divine things strike a mind like that, four-square, yet circular; looking everywhere, and yet taking all the interstitial points as if they were main coigns. Paul is as grand in interstitial speech as in the main substantive groundwork of his argument. You should study the parentheses of Paul. The Apostle could put great gospels within brackets. He had a gift of condensation. A touch of that finger made the whole creation vibrate. Some fingers have no life. Let us hasten to this new speaker. How will he put things? We can only touch his gospel here and there, at some salient point, or in some out-of-the-way and overlooked line. We cannot pretend to exhaust what Paul himself only introduced. When Paul looked back upon all he had done, to him it was but alphabetic, the meanest element; the infinite apocalypse belonged to eternity. We cannot be great where Paul himself trembled under a sense of incompetency and failure. Yet here and there we can see light. We can see a long way through a small window. Who ever looked through a whole window? We always look through one pane. We could do without a good deal of the window for the mere matter of seeing; through one little leaded pane we could see Lebanon and Bashan, and the blue lakes of the Holy Land. So through many a little sentence of Paul’s we can see what he wants to be at. It is grand to see such a soul in travail. Paul was a Calvinist before Calvin. No; if ever there was a man who was not Calvinistic, it was the Apostle Paul. Yet he has been dragged over to that fellowship; they would make him a member of that Church; they have proposed, seconded, and carried unanimously that he be entered upon the register. They have entered him, and kept him, and misinterpreted him, and endeavoured to do much mischief through him.
Let us hear some great speech from those great lips. First of all Paul will lay down a doctrine respecting God’s action that shatters everything like bigotry, partiality, and meanness of soul. Saith Paul, “There is no respect of persons with God (ii. 11). We must believe that such music came from heaven. There are persons who have a great Creator, and a very limited Redeemer. They will have it that God created all; they will not have it that God redeemed all. Thus we degrade, bring down step by step, the Deity. If you set before certain minds that God made every star, every little star, all the clusters of starry dust needing to be clustered and festooned or they would have no visibleness; if you set before them that God made every grassblade and every insect, they will say, Surely that is so; if you set before them that God made all men, they would instantly assent: but when it is suggested to them that the Redeemer is built on the same lines as the Creator, that Omnipotence can never shrink into partial strength; then they speak of mystery, and inscrutable decrees, and awful judgments of Providence, always taking care that they themselves are well in near the centre, while they bemoan the possibility that somebody else is not in, and that God is to be held accountable for their exclusion. Paul, speak to us; great heart, say something to us that will leave nobody out! Here is his answer: God is no respecter of persons “there is no respect of persons with God.” Peter said the same thing in presence of Cornelius; the whole Scripture bears evidence to the same sublime inclusiveness of the Divine love. Then, have you to make yourself an outsider? On what do you base the reason of your exclusion from Divine mercy and pity and tears? Not upon Paul’s gospel; there is not a word in all Paul’s writing, which, being interpreted in the Pauline spirit that is the vital point excludes any man from the possibility of salvation.
But, say some, Paul was an Antinomian before the time. The Antinomian is supposed to believe that he is all right; a favourite of eternity, a darling of heaven; and that do what he may it all goes for nothing in the matter of degrading him; he may commit all possible sins, and yet they will not be accounted to him for unrighteousness: he is in grace and cannot be displaced. Does Paul say anything about this? What is the Gospel according to Paul? “For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified” (ii. 13) rectified, made straight up, perpendicular men. Where now your sleek Antinomian who wants to pray in the morning, and sin all day, and pray again at night as if nothing had happened? Paul will have the law done. The law is nothing until it is transferred into life. Is this the man whom they put against James, as if Paul and James differed from one another; James being the ethical teacher, who will have all his men working night and day, and Paul being the Antinomian teacher, so to say, who will have his men believing speculatively and trusting to God’s grace and not to their own works? There is no discrepancy between the apostles. Between apostles sent from God there never can be any discrepancy. Whatever appears to be discrepancy is only in terms, is only on the surface, is only incidental: when you; come to put all the speech and revelation together it totals up into one melody. Here, then, the Gospel according to Paul is a gospel of doing, a gospel of obedience, a gospel of discipline.
Paul has been represented as one who excluded everybody but the few; as regarding the heathen as more or less given over to judgment and final loss; they had no Gospel, they had no prophets, they had no Divine Scriptures. This would be indeed a misrepresentation of the apostolic mind and heart. What about these “Gentiles which have not the law?” He says, they may “do by nature the things contained in the law.” We do not always know what we are doing; the sources of our inspiration cannot always be traced. There are Christians who have never confessed Christ. The Gentiles, saith Paul, “having not the law, are a law unto themselves.” How so? Because, saith Paul, they have “the law written in their hearts.” Have Gentiles hearts Pagans, heathens, far-away people, whom we are afraid almost to think of, have they hearts? Yes, in the great interpretation of human nature. When the real Gospeller comes he will find men in brutes, sons of Abraham in discarded ruins. What saith Paul? “their conscience also bearing witness.” Have Gentiles conscience? Is conscience possible apart from the Bible? Is a moral experience or a moral law possible apart from a written standard? Paul says it is. What is it that guides the Gentile mind, restrains or impels? Paul answers, “their thoughts the meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another.” What, does he give the Gentiles hearts, consciences, thoughts? What then is our duty towards men who have not yet realised, as we Gentiles have done, that they belong to our race? Our duty is to go out into all the Gentile world and preach the Gospel to every creature: tell the blindest idolater that he is not far from the kingdom of God; tell the poorest groping soul at the invisible door of heaven that, if he will put out his hand one inch further, he will touch heaven’s own portal, and it will fall back, and he will be in before he fully realises his position. Treat men as men: assume the soul. Never go forward and tell a man that he has a soul: assume it; talk to him as a mother, address his immortality, and he will quicken into a new consciousness, and say, No man ever spoke to me after this manner: what may I not be, after hearing such music, such argument, such appeal? then I myself must be more than I thought I was. When you give man consciousness of access of manhood, you draw him so much nearer God, and prepare him by so much to hear the broadest and profoundest revelations of truth.
But Paul was a ritualist. Paul was such a keeper of the law that if a man had passed through certain mechanical processes all would be right with him. What is the Gospel according to Paul on this subject? Here are men who have been circumcised; they carry the brand upon them, they point to this Jewish stigma and they say, This is our proof: what further need have we of witness or testimony as to our own personal excellence? Paul looks upon the circumcision-mark and says, “Circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.” A very profound and all-judging word! If the light that is in thee be darkness, behold how great is that darkness! Not only is a man’s religion, so to say, credited as no religion, it is taken and put on the other scale and made an aggravation. We are the worse for the false religion which we profess; or if our religion be not seconded by conduct, then our evil conduct is reckoned against us as an accumulated transgression. It is not a first offence, it is not an incidental blunder, it is not a mere intellectual error; it is something tied round our neck like a millstone, we have plunged into the depth of the sea. You think you are a Christian because you are born in England. The greatest heathen in the world may be born within the sound of the church-going bells. It is possible to live under the shadow of the sanctuary without ever having seen its God. But if a man has been baptised, how then? Nothing, unless the baptism has led up to its meaning. The type is nothing, only the fulfilment of the type counts. Yet, if a man has been baptised, the presumption is against him if his conduct be bad. The very fact that some religious attention has been paid to him, and that he has had opportunities of becoming religious, will tell against him if his conduct be unsound. You have been baptised, and yet you may take the baptismal water down to hell. Do not imagine that because you have been circumcised or baptised or confirmed, or admitted into a visible masonic body of Christ, therefore you are right. You are only right when you do right. We are only believers when we are doers. We are in grace when we are in obedience.
Paul is so sublimely inclusive in all his reasoning that he makes us all Jews if we will be Jews. He says the Jew now is altogether a new element in life. Once, only he who could trace himself lineally to Abraham was a Jew, now all that goes for nothing! “he is a Jew, which is one inwardly” (ii. 29): he is a child of faith therefore who is a child of Abraham. “Circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter.” You may have been cut with the very knife by which Abraham himself was circumcised, and yet you may be at an immeasurable distance from the gate of heaven. Learn this Gospel according to Paul. He will not have us in the Church because of what somebody else has done; he will have us in God’s Church because we are in God’s spirit.
Now there is a doctrine that is quite discarded by some advanced persons. What they are advanced in it is not now my purpose to attempt to determine. But they are marked very largely by what I may term the characteristic of negation. They have got rid of inspiration, and they have got rid of the devil would God they had! and they have got rid of miracles, and they have got rid of the supernatural, and they have specially got rid of the doctrine of what is termed original depravity; they have a special hatred of that doctrine, they will not for a moment allow that there is such a thing as original sin. What is the Gospel according to Paul? Paul’s Gospel is in chap. Rom 3:23 “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” Who are we that we should contradict Paul? He did more for the race than we have ever done; he did not write critical articles against other people’s charity: he spent and was expended for Christ; he said “For me to live is Christ.” If men get into their subjects by passion and sacrifice and intense and burning sympathy with them, then Paul was in Christ. No man studied Christ so completely, obeyed Christ so lovingly, and served Christ with so faithful a constancy. He was not a student of the letter, he was a companion of the soul of Christ: and this man says, “All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” In other words, all men need a Saviour, all men need their very righteousness to be helped or completed. When we have done our utmost, we are still immeasurably far from God, and therefore God himself must do the rest, carrying up our purposes to a blessed and everlasting fruition.
But Paul was a discriminating theologian. He classified the nations, giving some to God, and leaving some out of God. He partitioned the globe according to his own theological imagination or conviction, so that God was here but not there; God spake one language, but not another. Never! It is exactly the contrary that Paul does. He was a Jew: he was not ashamed of his lineal descent; yet this same man says, “Is he the God of the Jews only?” (Rom 3:29 .) How can you have a larger charity? How can there be a nobler catholicity? “Is he not also of the Gentiles?” and understand by “Gentiles” ourselves, those counted heathen, Pagan, alien, outcast. “Yes, of the Gentiles also: seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.” Who will now make Paul a partisan? Who will venture in face of such declarations as these to make Paul a bigot? If ever there was a man who wanted to show that redemption was as large as creation, it was Paul. If ever there was a man who did show that where the horizon ends grace only seems to begin, because of its infinite abundance, it was Paul. If ever there was a man who looked at the sun so as to see its real dimensions or magnitude, and so looked at grace to see that it was not a geometrical term, having cubic dimensions and proportions, it was Paul; for, said he, “Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound,” as an ocean abounds over a streamlet, as the sky over-domes the earth. Paul was therefore a believer in universal departure from God, and in the possibility of universal return to God.
Yet the Apostle will not have faith abused. He says, I see plainly that some of you think you would be easily released from duty if it were a mere question of faith; you are prepared to believe anything: faith is easier to you than obedience: but in talking so recklessly and wantonly, you are misunderstanding the very meaning of faith; you do not know what the word “belief” covers: “Do we then make void the law through faith?” are we making the gate wider that leads into heaven? “God forbid: yea, we establish the law.” When a man becomes really conversant with the whole mystery of grace, he will go back to the law, a more willing scholar, a more obedient slave; he will take up the whole round of duty, and God’s statutes shall become his songs in the house of his pilgrimage. And thus Paul’s gospel rolls on. Yet it was interrupted by some who misunderstood it. They took occasion to say, If this metaphysical conception of things is all, why then we are released from moral obligation; if we are called upon to cudgel our brains and get hold of some intellectual conception of God and his kingdom, that will be better; we thus get rid of the Decalogue, and we get rid of the whole law, that scheme of regulation and restraint and penalty and reward within which we have been living: I think we shall go over to this metaphysical conception of things. And the Apostle, with that wonderful interrogative power of his, in which he makes the mark of interrogation do the whole work of an argument, shouts, “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid.” It is so true that every great offer of grace is also a great temptation to the evil spirit that is in man. Man cannot receive God’s love without trying to make it an open door into possible disobedience; he says, If the love be so great, what does it matter what I do? If the grace is so infinite in proportion to the sin, what does my little iniquity amount to? What does it matter whether I am a John the Divine, or a Judas Iscariot, in the presence of this infinite abundance of grace? Paul says, Shall we continue in sin, that we may tempt the grace of God, try it, and challenge it, whether it be not greater than our sin; shall we study and graduate to become Judas Iscariots, that we may prove to the world how great and grand is the grace of God? The Apostle’s answer is, “God forbid.” There is no grander answer. He implores God to save souls from such blasphemy.
This is the Gospel according to Paul. It is the same as all the other Gospels. These are all extracts from one grand concerted piece of music. A wondrous concert: here a solo, there a single chord; here a chorus, and yonder a trembling note that can hardly live we think, but that must live because it belongs to eternity. And when these are brought together, what have we but the old Bible, grandest of books, treasure-house of God; having in it all things we want, a wheatfield, a vineyard, a garden of delights, a fountain of life. O Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, it is thy Gospel, yet not thine: for all good news starts from heaven.
Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker
XI
THE UNIVERSAL NECESSITY OF SALVATION (CONTINUED)
Rom 2:1-16
We have in the previous chapters shown: 1. The great theme of the letter to be (Rom 1:16-17 ) God’s plan of salvation, and we have analyzed and defined the terms of the compound proposition which embodies it.
2. We have found that this plan contains a revelation of God’s righteousness as the only ground of salvation.
3. We then in the last chapter commenced to study the necessity for this salvation as found in a revelation of God’s wrath, which stands over against the revelation of his righteousness.
4. We found in part just how this revelation of wrath is made both in us and out of us, to wit: (a) In the very constitution of our being, “The spirit of a man being the lamp of the Lord.” (b) In the operation of the conscience, either accusing or excusing, (c) In the order of the material universe which discloses the deity and power of the Creator. (d) In God’s continual government of the universe by his providence evident in the recurring seasons, (e) In the appeal of all men to God’s judgment for unrighted wrongs and the invocation of his wrath upon the wrongdoer, (f) In the social order of men established everywhere, whatever the form of government, through which men define and punish wrong. (g) In the worship of all men everywhere in which by sacrifice in some form they seek to placate the offended deity and appease his wrath, (h) In their very idolatries, by which they seek to lower the deity to their own level and even beneath their level, and in their veiling their pollutions under the cover of worship, they yet bear testimony to deity and their amenability to his judgment, (i) In that their lives showed that nature’s light, whether external, internal, or providential, has no power to regenerate or sanctify, and no power to propitiate or justify. It could alarm and condemn, but could not save. It was sufficient, but not efficient. Hence the necessity of a plan that would have the power unto salvation.
Here I want to insert the contrast between the light of nature and the light of the gospel, both of them being very brilliant, but one of them sufficient and the other efficient. In Psa 19 , which has already been quoted in part, we have this language: The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament showeth his handiwork. Day unto day uttereth speech, And night unto night showeth knowledge. There is no speech nor language; Their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out through all the earth, And their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, And rejoiceth as a strong man to run his course. His going forth is from the end of the heavens, And his circuit unto the ends of it; And there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.
This is an abundance of light, and a sufficiency of light, but notice the contrast: The law of Jehovah is perfect, restoring the soul; The testimony of Jehovah is sure, making wise the simple (Nature’s light cannot help the fool). The precepts of Jehovah are right, rejoicing the heart: The commandment of Jehovah is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of Jehovah is clean, enduring forever: The ordinances of Jehovah are true, and righteous all together. More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold ; Sweeter also than honey and the droppings of the honeycomb. Moreover, by them is thy servant warned.
Here it is the design of the psalmist to put in contrast the light of nature and the light of God’s word. In one of them the knowledge is sufficient, in the other the light is both sufficient and efficient. As bearing upon the sufficiency of that light I wish to cite the comment of an old Puritan preacher, who says:
Now the preaching of the heavens is wonderful in three respects: (1) As preaching all the night and all the day without intermission (Rom 2:2 ). One day telleth another, and one night certifieth another. (2) As preaching in every kind of language (Rom 2:3 ). There is neither speech nor language, but their voices are heard among them. (3) As preaching in every part of the world, and in every parish of every part and in every place of every parish (v. 4). Their sound is gone into all lands, and their words unto the end of the world. They be diligent pastors, as preaching at all times; learned pastors, as preaching in all tongues; and catholic pastors, as preaching in all towns.
Let us compare the words of this old Puritan with what Paul says in this very letter to the Romans: In Rom 10 he quotes it and we see how he uses it, showing that if man was not a sinner he could learn in nature the way to nature’s God. He says, “Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in him whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without the preacher? and how shall they preach, except they be sent? even as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that bring glad tidings of good things. But they did not all hearken to the glad tidings.” Then he quotes Isaiah and also this very psalm: But I say. Did they not hear? Yea, verily, Their sound went out into all the earth, And their words unto the ends of the world.
The last verse of chapter I affirms that there was sufficient knowledge so that God’s ordinance made such deeds as were enumerated worthy of death, and yet it declares that they themselves wilfully disobeyed and consented to disobedience in others. I ask the reader to note particularly that it is very far from the apostle’s thought to belittle the light of nature. He boldly avows its sufficiency, but in that it lacks efficiency there is necessity for another light which is “the power of God unto salvation.”
Our present discussion continues the argument on that necessity as follows: Having this light, sinners are “inexcusable” because they, as individuals and as society, pass judgment on others, not excusing them, therein condemning themselves in all wrongdoing. He starts out with the declaration (Rom 2:1 ) that whenever the individual man passes judgment on a fellow man for alleged wrongdoing, and whenever organized society passes judgment on a member of society, that proves that they are inexcusable if they do wrong, since by their judgment they have established the principle of judgment. And in Rom 2:2 he advances to a new thought: “And we know that the judgment of God is according to the truth against them that practice such things.” What is that judgment of God that we know so confidently? How do we know it? What is the knowledge? The knowledge there is the knowledge that comes from nature. His argument demands that from the light of nature in us and outside of us we know that God’s judgment on such things as are enumerated in chapter I is according to truth that the things there enumerated are wrong, and that when God punishes them the punishment is just.
In Rom 2:3 he asks this question: “Reckonest thou this, O man, who judgest them that practice such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?” On what kind of reasoning shall a man who lives entirely apart from the Bible, and yet does claim light enough to pass judgment on the wrongdoer, escape the judgment of God? If the wrong is done to him by organized society, whether tribe or clan or nation or republic or a limited monarchy, no matter what the government is, that government holds some things to be wrong and assesses punishment worthy of death. “Now,” he says, “do you suppose that you will escape the judgment of God? You certainly cannot.” We have no hope from such light as is in nature, because in nature every violation of law receives a just recompense of reward every one, whether we know the law of nature or not. If a man puts his hand into the fire it will burn him. If he takes poison it will kill him. Confining our judgment to the law of nature, any hope that we may indulge and with which we may solace ourselves is foolish, since we cannot escape the judgment of God.
He advances in the argument: “Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering?” The thought there is that God doesn’t punish every week that in the moral government of the world a long time sometimes elapses between the commission of a crime and its exposure, and in multitudes of cases exact justice is never rendered in this world. Paul asks that question because of God’s method of delay in his final punishment. What is the reason of the delay? He says that it is from “the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering.” God is good; God is patient; God bears a long time before he strikes. “Now are you going to despise that?” As the apostle says, “Not knowing that the goodness of God was designed to lead thee to repentance.” There you get at the real reason of God’s delay in punishing in his moral government. There was no delay in the case of Adam. When he sinned God made the inquisition. He called him to his bar at once. Since that time why doesn’t he do that? Because that very day grace intervened, and man was put upon a grace probation, and the gospel was preached that day in that the Seed of the woman should bruise the serpent’s head. And the throne of grace was set up that day. On the east side of the garden dwelt God with the cherubim to keep open the way to the tree of life. This delay comes from his goodness, his forbearance, and his longsuffering. And the reason for that goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering was to give the man, though guilty and worthy of instant death, the opportunity to repent) not through anything in him, but through grace. What Paul there says, Peter affirms. In 2Pe 3 he answers the question, What construction shall be put upon the long delay of God in punishing men? What is meant by it? He says, “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise [that is, that he will come and judge the world] as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to youward, not wishing that any should perish, but that ‘all should come to repentance.” That is his motive. The apostle asks a question: “Is it because you see that God doesn’t strike the very minute that the sin is committed, is it because you despise that goodness and that forbearance, that delay, or is it ignorance of the motive of that delay that his goodness in that respect shall lead you to repentance is that the reason?” We are told in the Old Testament, “Because sentence against an evil deed is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil” (Ecc 8:11 ). They despise the goodness, and they ignore the motive of the delay.
He then in Rom 2:5 makes this statement: “But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up for thyself wrath in the day of wrath.” “Thou dost treasure up wrath.” The wrath of God is cumulative. If God waits to punish and a man despises his waiting and ignores his motive, then he has added to the cause of wrath, i.e., the wrath accumulates.
It is more important that we as preachers should understand this reason of God’s delay, which is the idea of cumulative wrath, than to know anything else in the Bible except the very heart of the gospel itself.
I will illustrate that thought so that it may be clear. One Puritan preacher said that man’s despising of the delay of God’s punishment of sin reminded him of a foolish fellow that comes into an inn because he can buy things on credit, and ignores the fact that behind the door the innkeeper is scoring up, charging, charging, charging, for the pay day that will come. Another preacher has illustrated it this way: A man comes to a tiger’s den when the old tiger is away and picks up a little cub and marches off with it, perfectly serene and unconscious that stealthy feet are following him, and at a turn in the road, with a scream that frightens him, the tiger springs upon him and rends him. Another preacher has used this illustration: A house had been built below a huge rock dam in a river, and a family had lived there for some time in security, and as day after day passed their sense of security became more confirmed and more formidable, and they were wilfully ignoring the fact that up above the stream was rising, that the water was increasing, that it was accumulating in volume and accelerating in speed, massing up, and after a while in one moment the dam split and the overwhelming water destroyed the hapless family.
Peter presents the same thought in the passage that I cited, but I did not conclude. In this he presents that cumulative thought: “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief [that is, they will not be looking for it] ; in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, . . . and the earth and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing that these things are thus, all to be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy living and godliness?” The day is deferred, but God is not slack as men count slackness. With him one thousand years is as one day, and one day is as one thousand years, but the day will come, and when it comes it will be as a thief in the night.
Take another illustration: God explained to Abraham how his descendants could not immediately take their territory. He says, “The measure of their iniquity is not yet full.” Once in preaching on that I drew on a piece of canvas two vessels of equal size, one of them, the vessel of opportunity and the other the vessel of iniquity. As the vessel of opportunity empties, the other one fills up. As the opportunity grows less the iniquity measure grows larger. Whenever the vessel of opportunity is empty and the vessel of iniquity is full, God strikes.
Another preacher has used this illustration: A man buys a long rope and stakes out his horse. The horse prances around and grazes about as if he were a free horse, but other horses come by that are not staked, and he tries to go off with them, but he can only go to the end of his tether, and that rope measures the diameter of the circle in which he can graze. As he keeps running about, the rope winds round the stake, and every time he goes round, the rope gets shorter, and after a while his head is right up to the stake.
But the most forceful illustration of this thought is a sermon of Jonathan Edwards in New England. He took this text: “Their feet shall slide in due time.” His discussion runs as follows: “They are rejoicing that they have sometimes kept their foot-hold when they walked over slippery ground and over ice. They have a vain confidence that they can stand, but in due time their feet will slide. The sinner’s feet did not slip from under him last week, when he committed a sin. He was terribly frightened that first day, and the next day he was less frightened, and by the third day still less, until finally he forgot it, but in due time his feet will slip; God has appointed the time.” He is really, as Jonathan Edwards pictured, walking on an incline plane as slick as glass, and when the right time comes it isn’t necessary to push him his feet will slip themselves, and at the other end of that plane are the depths of hell.
Hence judgment is, that in order for law to restrain crime there must be a certain punishment. As long as the transgressor in civil or criminal matters can think of escaping punishment or devising some expedient by which he shall not be punished, it has no restraining power over him, but when it is absolutely certain that whether it be soon or late every evil deed shall receive a just recompense of reward whenever he gets that conviction on his mind, that restrains him. When God makes inquisition of faults he remembers, and when he holds up the light of revelation to the sinner’s heart, he will make the man remember. When this light bores into his very soul, he will see the slime of every foul thought, every beastly act, every vile sin. God will make him remember.
We come now to a thought concerning this wrath that we must not forget, viz.: that this revelation of God’s wrath is not immediate. It is a wrath to come. There are temporary judgments on man and on nations, and there are chastisements of God’s people here on earth, but when we talk about the wrath of this text, it is the wrath of a certain, inexorable, definite day. It is the day of wrath. Hence Paul at Athens, while explaining how God has delayed to punish these heathen, and that God has overlooked the times of ignorance, i.e., passed over them temporarily, but now he calls upon all men to repent, because he has appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he has ordained. And isn’t it strange that when the Bible so many times speaks of that awful day in the future speaks of it as a set day, and connects it indissolubly with the second advent of Jesus Christ, that men will talk about the advent of Christ being imminent, liable to come at any time?
It is not liable to come at any time. It can come but at one time, and that time is not a sliding scale. It is an appointed day, and as at his first coming he could not come till the fulness of time, so his second advent, as Paul says, cannot be until all these other things take place.
Not to make a mistake about that day, let us see what Paul further says about it. In 1Co 3 he says that this day will be revealed in fire, and that that revelation of fire will try every man’s work, saint and sinner, and in 2 Thessalonians he expressly declares as follows:Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God…. if so be that it is a righteous thing with God to recompense affliction to them that afflict you, and to you that are afflicted rest with us, at the revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ from heaven with the angels of his power in flaming fire, rendering vengeance to them that know not God, and to them that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus: who shall suffer punishment, even eternal destruction from the face of the Lord and from the glory of his might, when he shall come to be glorified in his saints.
That shows that that day is to be revealed with fire, and the last book of the Old Testament closes with the declaration:
For, behold, the day cometh, it burneth as a furnace; and all the proud, and ail that work wickedness, shall be stubble; and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith Jehovah of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. But unto you that fear my name shall the sun of righteousness arise with healing in its wings.
The next point about the judgment is that it will be universal on that day. It is not broken up into a series, the righteous judged, and one thousand years after that the wicked judged. Hence in Mat 12:41 our Lord says, “The men of Nineveh shall stand up in the judgment with this generation,” one saved and the other unsaved, and again in Mat 25:31 he says, “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, . . . then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory.” Then comes the separation. They are all there together, good and bad, and hence in Rev 20:11 John says, “I saw a great white throne and he that sat on it and all the dead, great and small, are gathered before him,” and some are judged out of the book of life and saved; all not in the book of life were cast into a lake of fire.
This day of wrath is here considered apart from the gospel, for he has not come to the gospel yet. This day considered that way is according to works. In Rom 3 he takes up the gospel, but here he is discussing the necessity for the gospel: “Who will render to every man according to his works.”
Let us look at each case: To them that by patience in welldoing seek for glory and honor he will render eternal life. If any man, leaving the gospel out, can show that he has been patient in well-doing, and that he has been seeking glory and honor and incorruption, God will render to him eternal life. Here is the other class: Unto them that are factious, and obey not the truth, but obey unrighteousness, shall be wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish (notice the words, “wrath,” “indignation,” “tribulation,” and “anguish”) upon all without respect to race, the Jew first, also the Greek. But glory and honor and peace to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek, that the judgment shall be without any respect of persons. That is the thought.
What is the extent of that judgment? Let our Lord speak. The extent is soul and body: “Fear him that [after man is dead] hath power to destroy both soul and body in hell,” or as he presents it in Mat 25:46 : “These shall go away into everlasting punishment.” This is the duration of the punishment. The extent is soul and body, the duration “unto everlasting punishment.” Or as he says in another place, “Where the worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched.” Or as he expresses it in yet another place (Luk 16:23 ): “In hell he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and saw a great gulf fixed, that no man could pass over.” And his memory worked: “Son, remember, remember, remember.” It is without discrimination of race. Both Jew and Gentile are included. It is also without respect of persons: “For there is no respect of persons with God.” This judgment is according to the light that a man has. If he has not the law, he perishes without the law. If he has the law of Moses, he perishes under the law of Moses. The last thought is the most stupendous. I will barely state it. When the day of wrath that nature tells about comes, it will be a day of wrath according to the gospel. That shows why the delay, why the punishment does not come at once. When he goes to judge, the judgment will be according to the gospel in order to show the heinousness of despising this delay. Following the motive of that delay, we come to the Judge: “according to my gospel, by Jesus Christ.” God has committed all judgment to him. In all this argument he is laying the foundation for bringing in the plan of salvation. He is showing that the light of nature in us, while sufficient, is not efficient that it cannot save, it cannot regenerate, it cannot sanctify, it cannot justify us.
Let us restate these thoughts with some additions. I first explained what the wrath meant, and then the several ways in which it is revealed. We now come to consider the part of the text which shows where, by whom, and for what this wrath, in the sense of a penalty, is exacted. Our text says, “In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men, according to my gospel, by Jesus Christ.” Let us look at that statement in all of its fulness. From the day that the original penalty due to Adam’s sin was suspended by the intervention of the gospel of Jesus Christ under a probation of grace, all men, whether Jew or Gentile, have been freed from the immediate execution of that divine wrath. There have been earthly judgments on wicked men, and chastisements on Christian men, but the full penalty of the wrath of God has never yet been visited upon man. When a wicked man dies, he goes at once to hell, but if that were counted full execution of the divine penalty that man would not have to leave hell to come and stand before the judgment of God. And if a Christian when he dies goes immediately to heaven, that is not to be considered the full salvation of that man. The reason is that the body is not involved in either case. When this wrath of God is visited upon man it is visited upon both soul and body. We need to fix in our minds clearly the reason of a judgment day at the end of time, instead of ten thousand judgment days all along through time. I have given the first point. The second reason is that in the very nature of the suspension of the penalty under a covenant of grace, space is given for repentance. Peter and Paul both discuss that proposition, Paul here in the chapter where he says, “Not knowing that the goodness of God was intended to lead thee to repentance.” Peter discusses it in his second letter where he says that we must construe the longsuffering of God toward sinners to mean salvation. The third reason is that neither a good man nor a bad man can thoroughly understand until the judgment day the reasonableness of God’s government and be constrained, whether condemned or saved, to admit the righteousness of the sentence pronounced.
No man will realize the exceeding sinfulness of sin, the exceeding richness of God’s forbearance, nor the fulness of God’s grace in fixing the final decision until that day.
We know now only in part) but then we shall know as we are known. The wicked, as quick as a flash of lightning, will see the exceeding sinfulness of all their past sins. In the case of every man before his conversion he realizes that the heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked, who can know it? “I, the Lord.” He is the only one. It is the easiest thing in the world for a man, when he looks at his good qualities, to take a telescope and look through the little end of it and see them more in number and larger in bulk than they really are. But he reverses that telescope to look at his faults, and sees them infinitesimally few and small, and by the same strange power that he sees double in the first group, he sees his faults blend and become fewer in number. He sees one star with the naked eye where there are two, and just a splash in the Milky Way where there are ten thousand distinct worlds. By a kind-of “hocus pocus” he takes up his little handful of evil deeds and begins to apologize for them, and finally stands off and says, with complacency, “Now, Lord, see my record. You can see how my good preponderates over the evil.” Right at that time comes the flashing of the supernal light of infinite holiness upon the scales and presto! what a change.
These good deeds that look so mountainous and multitudinous begin to diminish in size and number and shrink and pulverize until they become like fine dust. One breath of wrath blows them away like powder. On the other side that little infinitesimal group of evil begins to multiply and magnify and swell and tower and blacken until it is a great mountain range, peak after peak, oozing with the putrid poison of that abominable thing which God hates sin.
So in a sense never before, will all then admit that by the deeds of the law no man can be justified.
I am giving the reasons why that final light of judgment is postponed to the last day of time. I want to add another reason.
No man is competent to take account of the evil of his deeds or the good of his deeds until he sees the end of their influence. It is impossible for a man to do anything that terminates in himself, but it will surely touch everybody connected with him, father, mother, brother, sister, friend. Not only so, but after it has cast its gloom over all the circle of those that are nearest to him, by ties of consanguinity, there is that awful power of action and reaction that carries it on till the judgment day.
If we drop a little pebble into a placid lake a stone no larger than the end of the finger by the power of action and reaction the tiny ripples begin to radiate until they strike the utmost shores of that lake. So time is the ocean into which our deeds are dropped and the influence of our deeds in their radiating wavelets in every direction never stops until it strikes the shores of eternity. How then can any judgment inflicted now make that man see? Those that are in hell today don’t see it. Those in heaven today do not see it.
It will take the light of the judgment day to bring out the full realization, and when that time comes there will be one instantaneous and universal dropping upon the knees. Every knee shall bow, all together all the lost in hell and all the saved in heaven, and every tongue shall confess.
When a man is just about to turn around under the “depart” of God’s final condemnation of soul and body and go into hell forever, before he goes he will say, “Lord God, in my condemnation thou art just.”
Judgment of man here upon this earth is based upon uncertain proof. How many times the most notorious criminal is compelled to be acquitted simply from the lack of legal evidence! There is moral conviction in the minds of the judge and the jury that he is guilty, but the proof did not show it in a legal way. In that day all evidence will be in hand, and the law construed and vindicated with even and exact justice. There can be no suborning of testimony, no blindfolding the eyes of the judge with a bribe, no reticence on the part of witnesses as to what they saw or heard. The evidence will be complete, not only to God, but, as I have said, to man. If ever any Christian allows himself to indulge in feelings of pride and thinks that in the partnership between him and God his I is a capital letter and God is spelled with a small g, it won’t be that way up there.
He will know that his salvation is not of works, but from its incipiency in God’s election to its consummation in the glorification of his body, that athwart the whole long extended golden chain of salvation shall be written in the ineffaceable letters of eternal fire, “SALVATION is OF GRACE,” and across the whole dark descending stairway to eternal hell, over every step of it, in letters of fire, “MAN’S DAMNATION is OF HIMSELF.” God wisheth not the death of any man. God does not arbitrarily send any man to hell. The secrets of men! There never yet has been in human breast a heart that did not hide some skeleton secret, not only secrets because he keeps them to himself, but secrets that he is unconscious of through the dimness of his knowledge and callousness of his heart.
A writer has said that in that day, in the flash of an eye, memory will go back over all our past and bring up our sins, not in the glamour and rose color of their commission, but in the beastliness and ghastliness and horribleness with which God views them.
“In the day when God shall judge.” That day is fixed. God has appointed a day, says Paul, talking to the heathen idolaters, in which he will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ. It is strange that in view of the clear statements that the judgment day is just as much fixed and unchangeable as any past event, as to its time, and in view of the fact that it is correlated with the resurrection of the just and the unjust and with the second coming of Christ, that some men conceive that that day may be this evening or tomorrow, like the premillennial view of the second advent. Just as sure as Christ could not come at first until the fulness of time, and until all the preparatory steps had been taken, just so sure the second advent will take place only when all the predictions of coming events have been fulfilled. We don’t know the day, but it is fixed and unalterable, and its penalties inexorable and without remedy.
Now comes another strange thought that judgment in the last day will be, says Paul, “according to my gospel.” The judgment of the heathen will be according to this gospel, and it will be well for him, even if a lost soul, that he be judged according to this gospel. There cannot be a case of a lost man in which it should be better for him to be judged by somebody else than Jesus. Here is a little baby that has never personally committed any sin. It dies one hour from its birth without ever lisping its mother’s name. It has inherited sinfulness of nature. It died, in the sense of condemnation, when Adam sinned. To put it as an extreme case, let us call it a heathen baby. Suppose he was not judged by the gospel. He would be forever lost. But the gospel points to another Head, Jesus Christ the Second Adam. The death of Jesus Christ avails for the salvation of that one whose condemnation is only on account of Adam’s sin and only on account of inherited depravity. If it were not for the gospel that child would perish throughout eternity, because the law could not save him. All the heathen children who die before they reach the years of personal accountability are saved. Take the adult heathen. Even if he be lost, it is better for him that he be judged according to the gospel than merely according to the law of nature. There is never any mercy in the law of nature. In the light of grace, Paul, speaking of the heathen, says: “The times of this ignorance God overlooks.” In Christ he bears with the sins of the heathen in a way that the law could not bear. Let a baby and a man stick their hands into the fire. The fire burns the baby who is ignorant the worst because it is most tender.
But when Jesus judges the heathen, he judges them more kindly, because they lacked knowledge, and though the man be lost forever, there are degrees in hell. Not every man who goes to hell will have the same extent of suffering. It is not like running all the sentences into one mould so that they will all come out alike, as candles, in length and thickness, but according to light and opportunity Jesus will judge. The servant that knows not his master’s will and does it not, shall be punished with few stripes. If there is one principle of the final judgment of Jesus Christ that is transcendently above any other principle it is this principle, that the judgment will be rendered according to the light, the privilege, the opportunity.
There will be discriminations made, based even on heredity. Say that some little child inherited a greater thirst for liquor than another in the same family. The sin of one who is consumed by this hereditary thirst will not be held as heinous as another’s who wilfully acquired it. Then the question of environment enters into it. A little street Arab who was born in a dark alley in a great city and never heard one word of love, never the subject of one act of tenderness, never knew a mother except through her shame, never was in a Sunday school, not only taught but forced to steal. It is impossible that God would visit upon that thief the same degree of punishment that he would visit upon the Sunday school superintendent, whose father and mother were pious, who received a training in the Sunday school, held office in the Sunday school and talked continually and taught holy things, if he should turn thief and transgress God’s holy law. His damnation would be deeper and darker than will be the case of the other. Hear the words of Jesus, “It shall be more endurable in the judgment for Sodom and Gomorrah than for these cities.” Why? Because these had great light; those little light. That is why it is a benefit to a lost man to be judged by Jesus Christ. That is one of the sweetest thoughts that ever creeps into my mind that Jesus shall be my judge. No wonder David, when God put the alternative before him, “Would you rather fall into the hands of your enemies or into the hands of the living God,” said, “Lord God, let me fall into thy hands. Don’t leave my chastisement to be assessed by men.” I never think of God’s judgment except with satisfaction. Even when I am thinking about things I have done that are wrong, I am glad that God is to be the judge.
QUESTIONS
1. By way of review what have we found: (1) As to the theme of this letter? (2) As to the ground of salvation? (3) As to the necessity for this salvation? (4) As to how this revelation of wrath is made in us and out of us?
2. Having this light, why are sinners inexcusable? Explain, “And we know, etc.,” (Rom 2:2 ).
3. What is the force of Paul’s question (Rom 2:3 )?
4. What is God’s method of punishment (Rom 2:4 )?
5. What is the reason for the delay?
6. What is meant by cumulative wrath? Illustrate.
7. When is the “day of wrath?” Give proof.
8. How is it to be revealed? Give proof.
9. Give proof that the judgment on that day will be universal.
10. According to what?
11. What in each case?
12. What is the extent of punishment?
13. What is the duration? Give proof.
14. Show that it will be without discrimination of race.
15. Without respect of persons.
16. What part does the light a man has play?
17. Why a judgment at the end of the world?
18. Give proof that the judgment day is fixed.
19. How is the judgment to be by the gospel of Jesus Christ? Illustrate.
20. What the transcendent principle of the judgment?
21. What are the effects of heredity at the judgment?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
Ver. 1. Therefore thou art inexcusable ] Though thou have no pleasure in them that do evil, as Rom 1:32 , but dost superciliously censure them, being thyself otherwise as bad. Cato is said to have exercised usury, to have prostituted his wife, to have slain himself. God often sets a Noverint universi “let it be known to the whole world” upon the world’s wizards, for the foulest fools.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
1 29. ] Secondly , THE SAME, that all are guilty before God , IS PROVED OF THE JEWS ALSO. And first, Rom 2:1-11 , no man (the practice of the Jews being hinted at) must condemn another, for all alike are guilty .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1. ] The address passes gradually to the Jews. They were the people who judged who pronounced all Gentiles to be born in sin and under condemnation: doubtless there were also proud and censorious men among the Gentiles, to whom the rebuke might apply, but these are hardly in the Apostle’s mind. This is evident by comparing with Rom 2:21-23 , where the same charge is implied in a direct address to the Jew.
, on account of this decreeing death against the doers of these things FOR thou doest them thyself . Therefore thy setting thyself up as a judge, is unjustifiable.
] The Jew is not yet named, but hinted at (see above): not in order to conciliate the Jews (Rckert), but on account of the as yet purposely general form of the argument. This verse is in fact the major of a syllogism, the minor of which follows, Rom 2:17-20 , where the position here declared to be unjustifiable, is asserted to be assumed by the Jew .
] For wherein (not ‘ in that ’), as E. V. i.e. ‘ in the matter in which .’
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Rom 1:18 to Rom 11:36 . ] THE DOCTRINAL EXPOSITION OF THE ABOVE TRUTH: THAT THE GOSPEL IS THE POWER OF GOD UNTO SALVATION TO EVERY ONE THAT BELIEVETH. And herein, ch. Rom 1:18 to Rom 3:20 , inasmuch as this power of God consists in the revelation of God’s righteousness in man by faith, and in order to faith the first requisite is the recognition of man’s unworthiness, and incapability to work a righteousness for himself, the Apostle begins by proving that all, Gentiles and Jews, are GUILTY before God, as holding back the truth in unrighteousness. And FIRST, ch. Rom 1:18-32 , OF THE GENTILES.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Rom 2:1-16 . The Apostle has now to prove that the righteousness of God is as necessary to the Jew as to the pagan; it is the Jew who is really addressed in this chapter from the beginning, though he is not named till Rom 2:9 . In Rom 2:1-10 Paul explains the principle on which God judges all men, without distinction.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Rom 2:1 . : The Jew is ready enough to judge the Gentile. But he forgets that the same principle on which the Gentile is condemned, viz. , that he does evil in spite of better knowledge (Rom 1:32 ), condemns himself also. His very assent to the impeachment in chap. Rom 1:18-32 is his own condemnation. This is the force of : therefore. = in that in which. , not, you do the identical actions, but your conduct is the same, i.e. , you sin against light. The sin of the Jews was the same, but their sins were not.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Romans Chapter 2
The proof of human depravity and need is not yet complete. There is another character of evil contrasted yet connected with the description in the last verse of chapter 1 and most offensive in the sight of God. Men judge others and yet do the same things, and thus condemn themselves. How can this in any way arrest or even mitigate the sentence of God? It was and is common among speculative men, moralists, and the like. In truth it is no small aggravation To say “we see” exposes us, who none the less practise iniquity, to hear from the just Judge of all, that “our sin remaineth.” For the face of the Lord is against them that do evil, and the judging in others what they themselves live in justifies their own righteous doom. Say what they please, God’s sentence is according to truth upon those that do such things. He will, He must, have reality, and conscience knows it. Instead of open sympathy with others who sin, they may judge it as wrong; but if they do the same, how can such moral trifling, or those guilty of it, stand before God?
“Wherefore thou art inexcusable, O man, every one that judgest; for wherein thou judgest the other, thou condemnest thyself, for thou that judgest doest the same things. But we know that the judgment of God is according to truth upon those that do such things. And dost thou reckon this, O man, that judgest those that do such things, and doest them, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness, and forbearance, and long-suffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?” (Ver. 1-4.) The truth is that philosophy knows not God, and so easily forgets His judgment, as it never can conceive His love. It is self-satisfied and has man for its object, not God. Hence His lavish goodness and His patience are despised, and His end in all is a lesson never learnt.
Repentance is the work of God in the soul on the moral side. It is inseparable from the new nature, and flows from the energy of the Spirit as faith in Jesus does; in no way the preparation for faith, but its accompaniment and fruit. Nevertheless, by this I do not mean faith exercised as to the infinite work of Christ. There may be as yet but a looking to Him longingly and hopefully; and, along with this expectation of good from Him according to God’s word, that word turns the eye of conscience inwardly, and the man now converted judges himself as well as his ways before God. This deepens also, instead of diminishing, as the soul grows in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. There was always repentance as truly as faith wrought in souls; and though this may have assumed a legal shape under law, repentance is not in anywise done with now, but is wrought all the more profoundly under the gospel. Different schools of doctrine have drawn a wrong inference, one from Rom 2:4 , the other from 2Co 7:10 . On the one side it is thought that the perception of God’s goodness is repentance; on the other side that it is godly sorrow for sin. Scripture says nothing of the sort in either case, and intimates that, while repentance always supposes a change of mind, it goes much farther, and is a matter of conscience in the light of God, and not a purely intellectual process. As the goodness of God leads to repentance, so sorrow according to Him works repentance. There is such a thing as sorrowing unto repentance, as there is repentance unto salvation. It is thus a far deeper dealing with the soul than many suppose. Self is judged without reserve, and the will goes wholly with the new man. Sorrow according to God may still have a struggle: when one repents truly, the evil is disliked inwardly, and one has got free from it. “Surely after I was turned, I repented; and after I was instructed, I smote upon my thigh; I was ashamed, yea, even confounded, because I did bear the reproach of my youth.” (Jer 31:19 .)
Moralizing without conscience has a peculiarly hardening effect, and the long-suffering goodness of God is then misused to slight His leading. God is not mocked; it is only thou, O man, who thus deceivest thyself. “But according to thy hardness and impenitent heart thou treasurest to thyself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of God’s righteous judgment.” (Ver. 5.) Such is the solemn sanction which accompanies the gospel: not national, earthly, and providential judgments, but divine wrath, wrath already revealed from heaven, to take its awful course in its day when the day of grace is over. The law inflicted its temporal chastisements; with the gospel goes the revelation of “how much sorer punishment,” even eternal; and this most of all when the gospel is refused or abused. For there is a righteous judgment of God, “who shall render to each according to his work: to those that in patience of good work seek for glory, honour, and incorruptibility, eternal life; but to those that are contentious and disobey the truth and obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath.” (Ver. 6-8.) The appraisal and the rendering are individual; and, as we shall see farther on, the secrets of the heart appear.
It is important to note that eternal life is viewed not only as a present possession for the believer in Christ, but as the future issue of a devoted pathway for His name. The Gospel of John develops the former; the other three show us the latter; as our apostle elsewhere in this epistle (Rom 6:22 , Rom 6:23 ) gives us both brought together in the same context. But now, says he of Christians, “being made free from sin and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life. For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” On the other hand, the wages of sin, though death, are not death only, but after it the judgment, as Heb 9 states in accordance with what we have here.
In the next verse the apostle for the first time points directly at the Jew, no less than the Gentile, as obnoxious to divine judgment. We have seen with what consideration he approaches this subject, which, once cleared, is to hold so prominent a place in the epistle. In Rom 1 he had begun with the bright side, and affirmed the gospel to be God’s power unto salvation to every one that believes, both to Jew first and to Greek. Now, in Rom 2 , when handling, not the gospel that saves the lost, but the immutable principles of God’s righteous government, he brings out the alternative – “tribulation and anguish on every soul of man that worketh evil, both of Jew first and of Greek; but glory, and honour, and peace to every one that worketh good, both to Jew first and to Greek; for there is no regard of person with God.” (Ver. 9-11.) Such are His ways. Time, place, people can make no radical difference with Him, save that possession of privileges brings with it a prior responsibility, and this with evident justice. If the man who enjoys religious light works out evil notwithstanding, is he less guilty than his less favoured fellow-sinner? If he heeds the warning and testimony of God, working out that which is good, God will not withhold “glory, honour, and peace;” and neither last nor least stands the Jew thus found in His sight, though, as Peter truly declared on a great occasion, God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation he that fears Him and works righteousness is acceptable to Him. How this is made good in souls every believer knows. It is the fruit of His own grace; for it is not in man to direct his stops, nor in good in him or to be got from him, save when faith enables him to do His good pleasure: without faith it is impossible to please Him. Nor is it for a moment to be allowed that Rom 2 can clash either with Rom 1 or with Rom 3 . Without such grace of God and faith of man there is no good about him: on the contrary, he needs God’s power to save him. But God is here laying down His own inflexibly just ways as dealing morally with man. The believer, no doubt, is the only one who works good, the only possessor therefore of glory, honour, and peace; and while the Jew (as long as he had a place of relationship with God, and even till judgment manifestly closed it) had the precedence, the Gentile is not overlooked, but comes up in gracious remembrance before God, as we see in Cornelius and his house.
But, next, the apostle goes farther, and formally lays down that, while in every instance God will judge righteously, superiority of privilege entails deeper obligations and corresponding strictness in judgment: “for as many as without law have sinned, shall also perish without law; and as many as have sinned under law shall be judged by law (for not the hearers of law are just with God, but the doers of law shall be justified. For whenever Gentiles, which have no law, do by nature the things of the law, these having no law are a law to themselves; who evince the work of the law written in their hearts, their consciences also joining its testimony, and their thoughts one with another accusing or else excusing) in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men, according to my gospel by Jesus Christ.” (Ver. 12-16.) Thus there can be no prescriptive title of exemption to the Jew in the day of judgment, as he fondly hoped. The very standing as God’s witness in the earth, which that people had enjoyed in contrast with the Gentiles, bears with it their liability to a closer scrutiny when God deals, not in external inflictions on the nations, but with the heart and its ways in His sight, however hidden from man. Could even the Jew question the equity of this procedure? He must assuredly abandon his own fatal presumption – that the righteous God would close His eyes to the wickedness of His own ancient people: if he still maintained, as he ought, the special advantage of Israel, he could not deny their augmented responsibility compared with the Gentile.
In other ways also these passages are of great weight and value. Men are apt to reason on this as on other subjects after an abstract sort. From one true God who gave His law, as He had made and shall judge all men, many assume that all alike are under that law, and shall be judged by it, and that no other method is possible without sullying God’s truth, righteousness, authority, and honour. But he who is subject to the word of God, and stands intelligently by faith in His favour, knows that the dogmatism of a Pharisee is no better than the scepticism of a Sadducee, that neither knows the scripture, and that, as the latter denies the power, so the former sets aside His grace and also His righteousness. For the apostle elaborately shows as an incontestable truth here and elsewhere that there were men without law, as certainly as others under law. Who they were is equally clear and sure: Gentiles had not law, Jews had; and this was a main element of the different ground on which they should be tried. In vain would they weaken what the apostle says in verse 12 by that which he adds in verses 14, 15, that Gentiles, having no law, whenever they do the duties of the law, are a law to themselves, spite of having no law. It would be better to seek to understand the latter verses which need a little attention and reflection, rather than to overthrow what is so plain and positive in both; for in these passages, as everywhere, the doctrine is that Gentiles were without law, in contradistinction from Jews who were under law. (Compare Rom 3:19 , 1Co 9:20 , 1Co 9:21 .) In Rom 1 , where Gentile responsibility and guilt are treated, it is not a question of law, but of the testimony of creation and of the traditional knowledge of God they at first possessed. Here, in Rom 2 , the Jewish boast of the law is turned to a serious purpose, as it is the basis of the apostle’s proof that they cannot escape from being judged of God by the higher and fuller standard of His law.
It is argued by some who would neutralize these differences, that Gentiles are said to have the law written in their hearts. Why not look into what the apostle actually says and means, instead of twisting a few words into a contradiction of his express doctrine? It would be strange indeed, and say but little for Christianity, if heathens possessed as such that which the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb 10:15 , Heb 10:16 .) affirms to be one of the grand and distinctive blessings of the New Covenant. This kind of theology teaches that the heathen have already the law written in their hearts. But the apostle does not stultify himself, as this would imply, – does not predicate of the heathen that immense mercy of God which the New Covenant holds out to faith based on redemption in Christ. What he really teaches is that whenever (for indeed it was scanty and rare) Gentiles do by nature the things of the law, they evince the law’s work written in their hearts. He says not that the law, as these uninstructed men assume, but that its work, was written therein. For instance, let a heathen gather somehow the duty of honouring his parents: this, though he may have never heard of the law, is a law to him. So far the work of the law (not the law itself) is said to be written in his heart. His conscience thenceforth accuses or excuses him according to his conduct; and God in judgment will take all fully into account by and by. But this in no way interferes with the opening principle that some sin without being under law and so perish, as others more guiltily sin under law, and so shall be judged; for the question in judgment is not privilege but fidelity according to what we know or may know. Not the law-hearers are just with God but the law-doers shall be justified. This is invariably true; as scripture declares, faith accepts and judgment will display.
Accordingly we have the character of judgment declared in verse 16 conformably to what the apostle calls his gospel. Providential scourges, earthly chastening, or destruction, are true dealings of God and so revealed, not only in the Jewish scriptures, but in the prophecies of the New Testament also. But the judgment of the secrets of men is a different and far deeper truth: and this finds its suited revelation in the gospel as Paul presented it, where man is judged fully, both outwardly and inwardly, in presence of the saving grace of God and the heavenly glory of Christ the risen man, who is the life and the righteousness of the believer. This is Paul’s gospel, and God’s judgment of man (yea, of his heart’s secrets by Jesus Christ in the great day that hastens) is according to that gospel. (Comp. Rom 1:17 , Rom 1:18 .)
The apostle now advances another step in his appeal to conscience. He addresses himself next to the Jew, not classing him with the Gentile alone. Did the Jew value himself on his singular place among men, on his possession of a divine revelation, on the true God as his God, on the knowledge of His will, on his own consequent ability to try the things that differ and hence decide for the more excellent? did he assume a conscious superiority to his Gentile neighbours, through confidence in himself as thus standing on a vantage ground which gave him to look down on the wisest of other nations as but blind, and in the dark, and foolish, and babes, being destitute of that embodiment of knowledge and truth which the law afforded himself? Be it so, but if all this were so, how was it with the Jew in fact? The greater the privilege, the less excusable if he was faithless to the light he had and as bad as the heathen he despised.
“But if* thou art named a Jew, and restest on law, and boastest in God, and knowest his will, and provest the things that differ, being instructed out of the law, and hast confidence that thou thyself art a guide of blind, a light of those in darkness, an instructor of fools, a teacher of babes, having the form of knowledge and of truth in the law: thou then that teachest another dost thou not teach thyself? thou that preachest not to steal, dost thou steal? thou that sayest not to commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? Thou who boastest in the law, through transgression of the law dost thou dishonour God? For the name of God on your account is blasphemed among the Gentiles even as it is written.” (Ver. 17-24.)
*But if ( ) is unquestionably the right reading, not (“behold”) as in the Received Text and Authorized Version, which seems to have been a correction to ease the sense, if not a mere blunder in copying.
Thus severely, but severely because it was with the irresistible force of truth, does the apostle turn to the utter shame of the Jew the very ground on which he had entrenched himself in pride and vain glory. If there was conscience, he must own himself more guilty than the Gentile; if there was none, his insensibility would not make his sin and folly less manifest to all who fear God and estimate man aright. On his own showing his boasted knowledge of the law brought no saving power along with it for himself, whatever fuel it might supply for his arrogant abuse of it in contempt of others. Who, then, more signally dishonoured God? Was it not written even more strongly still in their own prophets? What said Isaiah (Isa 52:5 .)? and what Ezekiel (Eze 36:20-23 .)? No doubt their foreign lords made them to howl; but was it not true that Israel profaned Jehovah’s holy name among the heathen whither they went?
The issue of the reasoning is given in the concluding verses. A religious form cannot cover the contradiction morally of its own spirit; and on the other hand, where the spirit is truly found, God will approve of this spite of the absence (it may be unavoidably) of the form. He will and must have reality in that which concerns men in relation to Himself. “For circumcision indeed profiteth, if thou keep the law; but if thou be a transgressor of law, thy circumcision is become uncircumcision. If then the uncircumcision keeps the requirements of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be reckoned for circumcision; and the natural uncircumcision fulfilling the law, judge thee that in the way of letter and circumcision transgressest law? For he that is outwardly a Jew is not [one], nor is that which is outward in flesh circumcision, but he that is hiddenly a Jew, and circumcision of heart in spirit, not in letter, the praise of whom [is] not of men but of God.” As the principle is clear, so are the persons who alone are acceptable with God. External circumstances cannot over-ride His character and ways and judgment. The apostle does not here enunciate the fundamental truth of either Christianity or the Church in which dispensational differences vanish away in the light of a Christ dead and risen in whom there is neither Jew nor Greek. But it is of deep interest to observe how the profoundly just dealing of God which he is asserting, and which could not but commend itself to the conscience even of him whom it most condemns, fits in with that mighty development of truth, the revelation of the mystery, which it was Paul’s province above all others to make known to us. As on the one hand the mere outward Jew is nothing nor the rite abstracted from its meaning; so on the other hand that only has praise with God which is hidden and heart work, not in letter but in spirit. Such an one, he strikingly adds (in allusion it would seem to the name of Judah and of a Jew) even if his brethren curse, or men hate, shall have his praise of God.
Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Rom 2:1-11
1Therefore you have no excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. 2And we know that the judgment of God rightly falls upon those who practice such things. 3But do you suppose this, O man, when you pass judgment on those who practice such things and do the same yourself, that you will escape the judgment of God? 4Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance? 5But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, 6who will render to each person according to his deeds: 7to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life; 8but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.9There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek, 10but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 11For there is no partiality with God.
Rom 2:1
NASB”you have no excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment”
NKJV”you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are who judge”
NRSV”you have no excuse, whoever you are, when you judge others”
TEV”You have no excuse at all, whoever you are. For then you judge others”
NJB”So no matter who you are, if you pass judgment you have no excuse.”
This is literally “no legal defense” (cf. Rom 1:20). It was placed first in the Greek sentence to magnify its significance. Rom 2:1-16 seem to relate both to the self-righteous Jewish legalists and the Greek moralists. By their judging others they condemn themselves.
This same phrase is used in Rom 1:20, but the pronoun is “they”; here “you.” Obviously Paul is addressing different groupings of sinners/rebels. Of one of the groups he was once a zealous member! There are two problems.
1. rejecting and perverting the knowledge of God
2. turning it into a set of rules and becoming judgmental and self righteous
Also note that the “they” of chapter 1 becomes “you” in Rom 2:1-8. It is universalized from Jews and Greeks into “every soul of man” in Rom 2:9-11. Though there are different groups (either two or three groups) in the end it makes no difference, all are under judgment (cf. Rom 3:23).
Rom 2:2 “we know” This pronoun probably referred to fellow Jews although it could possibly refer to Christians. In Rom 2:2-4, Paul returns to his common technique of a question and answer format, called diatribe (i.e., Rom 2:1-11; Rom 2:17-29), which was a presentation of truth by means of a supposed objector. It was also used by Habakkuk, Malachi, and the rabbis, as well as the Greek philosophers (such as Socrates and the Stoics).
The phrase “we know that” is used several times in Romans (cf. Rom 2:2; Rom 3:19; Rom 7:14; Rom 8:22; Rom 8:28). Paul assumes his hearers have some degree of knowledge, unlike the immoral pagans of Romans 1.
“the judgment of God” The Bible is clear on this truth. All humans will give an account to God for the gift of life (cf. Rom 2:5-9; Mat 25:31-46; Rev 20:11-15). Even Christians will stand before Christ (cf. Rom 14:10-12; 2Co 5:10).
Rom 2:3 The grammatical form of Paul’s rhetorical question expects a “no” answer.
“do you suppose” This is the Greek verb logizomai. Paul uses it often (Rom 2:3; Rom 2:26; Rom 3:28; Rom 4:3-6; Rom 4:8-11; Rom 4:22-24; Rom 6:11; Rom 8:18; Rom 8:36; Rom 9:8; Rom 14:14; Gal 3:6, ten times in I and 2 Corinthians, and twice in Philippians). See notes at Rom 4:3; Rom 8:18.
“O man” This matches the same idiom in Rom 2:1. In Rom 9:20 it refers to Jews.
Rom 2:4 This is also a question in Greek.
NASB”think lightly of”
NKJV, NRSV,
TEV, REB”despise”
NJB”disregarding”
NIV”show contempt”
NET”have contempt for”
By comparing English translations interpreters get a feel for the semantic range of the verb. This is a strong term for willing rejection. See its use in
1. Jesus’ words, Mat 6:24; Mat 18:10
2. Paul, 1Co 11:22; 1Ti 4:12; 1Ti 6:2
3. Hebrews (of Jesus), Rom 12:2
4. Peter, 2Pe 2:10
5. the noun in Act 13:41
“the riches of His kindness and forbearance and patience” Humans have often misunderstood God’s grace, mercy, and patience and have turned them into an opportunity to sin instead of to repent (cf. 2Pe 3:9).
Paul often describes the attributes of God as “the riches of” (cf. Rom 9:23; Rom 11:33; Col 1:27; Eph 1:7; Eph 1:18; Eph 2:4; Eph 2:7; Eph 3:8; Eph 3:16; Php 4:19).
The noun “forbearance” is used only twice in the NT, both times by Paul in this literary unit (Rom 1:18 to Rom 3:31), here and Rom 3:26. Both referring to God’s patience with sinners.
“leads you to repentance” Repentance is crucial for a faith-covenant relationship with God (cf. Mat 3:2; Mat 4:17; Mar 1:15; Mar 6:12; Luk 13:3; Luk 13:5; Act 2:38; Act 3:16; Act 3:19; Act 20:21). The term in Hebrew meant a change of actions, while in Greek it meant a change of mind. Repentance is a willingness to change from one’s self-centered existence to a life informed and directed by God. It calls for a turning from the priority and bondage of self. Basically it is a new attitude, a new worldview, a new master. Repentance is God’s will for every fallen child of Adam, made in His image (cf. Eze 18:21; Eze 18:23; Eze 18:32 and 2Pe 3:9).
The NT passage which best reflects the different Greek terms for repentance is 2Co 7:8-11.
1. lupe, “grief” or “sorrow” in Rom 2:8 (twice), 9 (thrice), 10 (twice), 11
2. metamelomai, “regret” or “after care,” in Rom 2:8 (twice), 9
3. metanoia, “repentance,” or “after mind,” in Rom 2:9-10
The contrast is false repentance (metamelomai) (cf. Judas, Mat 27:3 and Esau, Heb 12:16-17) versus true repentance (metanoe).
True repentance is theologically linked to
1. Jesus’ preaching on the conditions of the New Covenant (cf. Mat 4:17; Mar 1:15; Luk 13:3; Luk 13:5)
2. the apostolic sermons in Acts (kerygma, cf. Act 3:16; Act 3:19; Act 20:21)
3. God’s sovereign gift (cf. Act 5:31; Act 11:18 and 2Ti 2:25)
4. perishing (cf. 2Pe 3:9)
Repentance is not optional!
SPECIAL TOPIC: REPENTANCE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT
Rom 2:5-9 These verses describe (1) the stubbornness of fallen mankind and (2) God’s anger and judgment.
Rom 2:5 “stubbornness” This noun is found only here in the NT. Israel is described in this same way in Exo 32:9; Exo 33:3; Exo 33:5; Exo 34:9; Deu 9:6; Deu 9:13; Deu 9:27 (also note Heb 3:8; Heb 3:15; Heb 4:7).
“heart” See Special Topic at Rom 1:24.
“in the day of wrath” This was called “The Day of the Lord” in the OT (cf. Joel, Amos). This is the concept of Judgment Day, or for believers, Resurrection Day. Mankind will give an account to God for His gift of life (cf. Mat 25:31-46; Rev 20:11-15).
Notice that it is the sinners themselves (“you” and “yourself”) that store up wrath. God simply, at some point, allows this stored wrath to become evident and run its full course.
Wrath, like all human words to describe God, are only analogously (anthropomorphically, see Special Topic at Rom 1:18) applied to deity! God is eternal, holy, and Spirit. Humans are finite, sinful, and corporeal. God is not emotionally angry, as in a rage. The Bible presents Him as loving sinners and wanting them to repent, but also as having a settled opposition to human rebellion. God is personal; He takes sin personally and we are personally responsible for our sin.
One additional thought about the wrath of God. In the Bible it is both in time (temporal, cf. Rom 1:24; Rom 1:26; Rom 1:28) and at the end of time (eschatological, cf. Rom 2:5-8). The Day of the Lord (Judgment Day) was one way the OT prophets warned Israel to repent at the present time so that their future would be blessed, not judged (cf. Deuteronomy 27-28). The OT prophets often took a crisis of their day and projected it into the end-time future.
Rom 2:6 This is a quote from Psa 62:12 (cf. Mat 16:27). It is a universal principle (see note at Rom 2:1-2 nd paragraph) that humans are responsible for their actions and will give an account to God (cf. Job 34:11; Pro 24:12; Ecc 12:14; Jer 17:10; Jer 32:19; Mat 16:27; Mat 25:31-46; Rom 2:6; Rom 14:12; 1Co 3:8; Gal 6:7-10; 2Ti 4:14; 1Pe 1:17; Rev 2:23; Rev 20:12; Rev 22:12). Even believers will give an account of their lives and service to Christ (cf. 2Co 5:10). Believers are not saved by works but are saved unto works (cf. Eph 2:8-10 [esp. Rom 2:14-26]; James and 1 John). A changed and changing life of love, service, and selflessness is evidence of true salvation.
Rom 2:7 “to those who” There is a contrast between the persons described in Rom 2:7 and those in Rom 2:8 (“but to those who”).
NASB”to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality; eternal life”
NKJV”eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality”
NRSV”to those who by patiently doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life”
TEV”Some men keep on doing good, and seek glory, honor and immortal life; to them God will give eternal life”
NJB”For those who sought renown and honor and immortality by always doing good there will be eternal life”
This referred to people like Cornelius (cf. Act 10:34-35). This passage may sound like works righteousness (obtaining righteousness through human effort), but that would go against the major theme of the book of Romans. Remember that either Rom 2:1-16 or Rom 2:1-11 are a paragraph. The theological point of the whole is that God is no respecter of persons (v.11) and that all have sinned (Rom 2:12). If people lived up to the light they had (natural revelation for the Gentiles, special revelation for the Jews, cf. Rom 10:5) then they would be right with God. However, the summary of Rom 3:9-18; Rom 3:23 shows that none ever have, nor can they! A believer’s changed godly life is seen as confirming and validating his initial faith response. A changed life is the evidence of the indwelling Spirit of God (cf. vv.10,13; Matthew 7; Eph 2:8-10; Jas 2:14-26 and 1 John). See SPECIAL TOPIC: THE NEED TO PERSEVERE at Rom 8:25.
“eternal life” This is a characteristic phrase of John’s writings and is used sparingly in the Synoptic Gospels. Paul seems to derive the phrase from Dan 12:2 (cf. Tit 1:2; Tit 3:7), where it denotes the life of the new age, life in fellowship with God, resurrection life. He first uses it in Gal 6:8. It is a common theme in the doctrinal section of Romans (cf. Rom 2:7; Rom 5:21; Rom 6:22-23). It also occurs several times in the Pastoral Epistles (cf. 1Ti 1:16; Tit 1:2; Tit 3:7).
Rom 2:8
NASB”those who are selfishly ambitious”
NKJV, NRSV”those who are self-seeking”
TEV”other people are selfish”
NJB”those who out of jealousy”
The term originally meant “work for hire” (cf. Tob 2:11).
Louw and Nida, Greek-English Lexicon, vol. 2, p. 104, list two usages of this term.
1. “selfish ambition,” using Rom 2:8 noting “wanting to be better than someone else,” which fits this context
2. “hostility,” using Php 1:17 noting “rivalry” as a translation option (see also 2Co 12:20; Gal 5:20; Php 2:3; Jas 3:14; Jas 3:16)
“and do not obey the truth,” The term “truth” (aletheia) was used in its Hebrew sense (emeth) of truthfulness and trustworthiness. In this context, it had a moral, not intellectual, focus. See Special Topic: Truth in Paul’s Writings at Rom 1:18.
Rom 2:9 “for every soul of man” Paul used the Greek term pas translated “all” or “every” so often in these opening chapters of Romans to show the universal implications of both the “bad news” (mankind’s lostness and God’s no-partiality judgment) and the “good news” (God’s offer of free salvation and complete forgiveness in Christ to all who repent and believe).
This context strongly implies a universal judgment and its resulting consequences. This truth demands a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked (cf. Dan 12:2; Joh 5:28-29; Act 24:15).
If Rom 2:6-11 are a chiasma, then Rom 2:8-9 are the key verses which denote judgment or evil doers.
Rom 2:9-10 “the Jew first” This is repeated for emphasis. The Jew was first in opportunity because they had God’s revelation (cf. Rom 1:16; Mat 10:6; Mat 15:24; Joh 4:22; Act 3:26; Act 13:46), but also first in judgment (cf. Romans 9-11) because they had God’s Revelation (cf. Rom 9:4-5).
Rom 2:11
NASB, NKJV”for there is no partiality with God”
NRSV”For God shows no partiality”
TEV”For God judges everyone by the same standard”
NJB”There is no favoritism with God”
Literally this is “to lift the face,” which was a metaphor from the judicial system of the OT (cf. Lev 19:15; Deu 10:17; 2Ch 19:7; Act 10:34; Gal 2:6; Eph 6:9; Col 3:25; 1Pe 1:17). If a judge saw to whom he was administering justice there was a chance of bias. Therefore, he was not to lift the face of the one who stood before him.
SPECIAL TOPIC: RACISM
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Therefore. That is, on account of the decrees of God, Rom 1:32.
inexcusable. Same word as Rom 1:20.
man. Greek. anthropos. App-123.
whosoever, &c. Literally every one judging.
judgest. Greek. krino. App-122.
wherein = in (Greek. en. App-104.) which
another = the other. Greek. heteros. App-124.
condemnest. Greek. katakrino. App-122. The three occurances of krino and one of katakrino give the Figure of speech Paregmenon (App-6).
doest = practisest. Same word as “commit”, Rom 1:32.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
1-29.] Secondly, THE SAME, that all are guilty before God, IS PROVED OF THE JEWS ALSO. And first, Rom 2:1-11, no man (the practice of the Jews being hinted at) must condemn another, for all alike are guilty.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Chapter 2
Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judges ( Rom 2:1 ):
You see, I read this list and I say, “Oh, yes, it is horrible. My, I just don’t know what we are going to do, the world is going so terrible, bad. Terrible that people would do those kind of things, terrible that people would live like that.” Well, you are inexcusable O man whoever you are that judges.
for wherein you judge another, you are condemning yourself; for you that judge are doing the same things ( Rom 2:1 ).
We have got to be careful of this judgment bit. Because if I have the capacity to judge someone else and say, “That is wrong, he should not be doing that.” Then I am condemning myself, because I know it is wrong and if I do it, it is doubly wrong, because I know it is wrong because I said it was wrong. You know, it is amazing how horrible our sins look when someone else is doing them. Let someone else commit my sins, and I can get just all kind of righteous indignation. I can tell you why I did it, I can justify it. But it is horrible when someone else does it. It is terrible. Be careful, O man, whoever you are who judges, you are only condemning yourself because you are testifying to the fact that you know better, when you have done those things yourself.
But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things. [God will have true judgment.] And you think, O man, that judges those who do such things, and that you are doing the same, that you’re going to escape the judgment of God? ( Rom 2:2-3 )
I Corinthians, chapter 5, Paul tells us that we are all to appear before the judgment seat of Christ to receive the things that we have done in our bodies, whether they be good or evil, knowing therefore the terror of the Lord we seek to persuade men. Do you think that you are going to escape the judgment of God? Do you think that you have got some kind of an immunity or a divine dispensation that you can get by with it?
Or do you despise the riches of God’s goodness and forbearance and longsuffering ( Rom 2:4 );
You see, the mistake that many people so often make is the misinterpreting of the long-suffering and the patience of God. God is so forbearing with us. God is so patient with us. God is so long-suffering. He doesn’t immediately smite us and cut us off when we do evil. God has great patience with evildoers. I wouldn’t have that much patience. I would rather God didn’t. I would rather God just wipe them out. When I read of some of these things and I read the guy murders his family up in Chino and you see him in court and you know it will be months of court appearances and you think, “Oh, God. Quick justice, Lord.” But when it is me, “Oh, patience, Lord. I am working on it now and I hope one of these days, Lord, I am going to conquer.” But sometimes I misinterpret that patience of God and that long-suffering as approval or that God really doesn’t or it doesn’t matter to God. Or people actually become so deceived that they believe that God is approving the things they do because they say, “I still have such blessing upon my life.” You know, “If God wasn’t pleased with the way I was doing, then He surely would have taken away the blessings and all from my life.” And because their lives continue to be blessed, they say, “Well, God is approving the things that I am doing.” Not so. Do you think you are going to escape the judgment of God?
Do you despise the riches of His goodness and forbearance and long-suffering?
Don’t you know that the goodness of God is intended to lead you to repentance? But, after the hardness and impenitent heart, you are actually treasuring up for yourself wrath against the day of wrath and the revelation of the righteous judgment of God ( Rom 2:4-5 );
Actually, it is just like a dam holding back this judgment of God, and you are just storing up as you continue in your ways of sin and unrighteousness. It is just storing up and one day the dam is going to be released and the flood of judgment is going to carry you away. Woe, woe, woe to the inhabitors of the earth by reason of the three trumpets which are yet to sound. Then we are reading of the angels warning of the wrath of God that is coming as He pours out the cup of His wrath and fury upon man. Let me tell you something, the earth in which we live is ripening for judgment. In fact, as I look at the world today and the things in the world today, I wonder just how much longer God can wait before He judges. The Bible tells us that God waited a long time while Noah was building the ark, but the judgment did come.
God’s judgment is going to come again, and it is just being treasured up, or stored up against the day of the wrath of the revelation of the righteous judgment of God.
Who will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, [God will grant to them] eternal life: but unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, [they will receive the] indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that’s doing evil; the Jew first, and also the Gentile; but glory, and honor, and peace, to every man that is working good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: for there is no respect of persons with God ( Rom 2:6-11 ).
It doesn’t matter if you are a Jew or Gentile, God doesn’t respect your person. It is what you are that God acknowledges, and what you are doing.
For as many as have sinned without law will perish without law; and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law ( Rom 2:12 );
Now the Gentiles without the law, they are going to be judged without the law. There is the law that God has written in our own hearts, the conscience, the Jews have the law, God will judge them by that law.
(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. For when the Gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile either accusing or else excusing one another;) ( Rom 2:13-15 )
God has written His law in every man’s heart. There is that consciousness and awareness of good and evil. It is innate–written in my heart by God, and my conscience either excuses or accuses me.
In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel. Behold ( Rom 2:16-17 ),
Now he is addressing himself to the Jews in Rome,
you are called a Jew, and you are resting in the law, and you make your boast of God, that you know his will, you approve the things that are more excellent, because you have been instructed out of the law; and you are confident that you are a guide of the blind, a light to those which are in darkness, you are an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, you have a form of knowledge and of the truth in the law. [How about it, though,] you that are teaching others, do you not teach yourself? You that are preaching that a man should not steal, do you steal? You that say that a man should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You that abhorrest idols, do you commit sacrilege? Thou that makes thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonorest thou God? ( Rom 2:17-23 )
Paul is now talking to the Jews. They had this position of spiritual superiority over other men, “God has revealed His will to the Jews, God has given a law to the Jews. We are a guide to the blind, and we are light to those in darkness. We are an instructor of the foolish.” But Paul said, “Look, in teaching others don’t you listen to yourself, aren’t you learning yourself?”
Now Jesus said to His disciples, “Unless your righteousness exceeds that of the Scribes and Pharisees you’re not going to enter the kingdom of heaven.” As He began to illustrate that statement, He shows that the righteousness of the Scribes and the Pharisees was totally related to outward observances of the law, when inwardly they were violating the law. The law says, thou shalt not kill, but you hate that man so much you would love to kill him. As far as Jesus is concerned, you are guilty of violating the law “thou shall not kill.” Thou shall not commit adultery, and yet you have such great lust and desire for that gal. God says, “Hey, you have committed adultery in your heart. The law is spiritual. So Paul is saying, “Hey, you teach you shouldn’t commit adultery, do you commit adultery? Do you say you shouldn’t have idols, do you commit sacrilege? Is there some idol in your life? Something that you hold up to be more important than God. Some goal or ambition or desire that supercedes your love for God?
For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written. For circumcision verily profiteth, if you keep the law: but if you be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision ( Rom 2:24-25 ).
Now the idea of circumcision. There is a spiritual concept behind it and it is the cutting away of the flesh, which means I am to live after the Spirit and not after the flesh. That was the spiritual symbolism of circumcision, a race of people who would live after the Spirit, who would walk after God, not walking after the flesh. But the people began to take the physical rite and deny the spiritual application. Though physically they were circumcised, spiritually they walked after the flesh. Paul said, “I don’t care if you have been physically circumcised, if you are still walking after the flesh, your physical circumcision is meaningless.”
Because it isn’t the circumcision of the flesh that really counts before God, it is the circumcision of the heart. In the same token as Christians, water baptism symbolizes the death and the end of the old life after the flesh, and coming up out of the water symbolizes the new resurrected life in Jesus Christ. If I have been baptized forward, backwards and three times in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit, and I am still walking after the flesh, that baptism is totally meaningless. For it is the baptism of the heart that counts, the circumcision of the heart that counts. God wants me to be walking after the Spirit, to be desiring in my heart the walk of the Spirit.
Therefore, if the uncircumcision [that is, the Gentile uncircumcised] keeps the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? ( Rom 2:26 )
Now this is also true in baptism. If a person has never gone through the physical rite of baptism, if he is indeed alive unto God in the Spirit and living and walking after the Spirit, his faith in God and walk after the Spirit counts for his not being baptized in water. I disagree with these people who place a tremendous emphasis upon getting them down to the water and baptizing them in order that they might be saved. For the true baptism is of the heart, a clear conscience before God. It isn’t the washing away of the filth of the flesh according to Peter. And Paul the apostle himself said, “I thank God I didn’t baptize any of you but Crispus and Gaius,” as he wrote to the Corinthian church. He said, “God didn’t call me to baptize, but to preach the gospel.”
Therefore, God is looking at the man’s heart. God is looking at your heart. What is it that you desire? “One thing have I desired of the Lord, and that will I seek after.” Am I really seeking after the Lord, to dwell in His presence, to live and fellowship, continual fellowship with Him? Or do I pay Him service on Sunday and then the rest of the week devote my life to my pursuit after my fleshly, worldly desires, goals, and ambitions?
Shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfill the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision are transgressing the law? For he is not a Jew, who is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 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 ( Rom 2:27-29 ).
Not seeking the approval of men, but seeking the approval of God, walking after God in the Spirit. It isn’t the life in the flesh that man sees that is important, it is the life in the Spirit that God sees which is important–my heart and the position of my heart before God.
Now Paul has in the first two chapters successfully made us all guilty. The Gentile world in its degraded state, reprobate mind, guilty before God, because not only are they doing these unspeakable things, but they are taking pleasure in those that do them. But also the Jew who judges the Gentile and says, “Oh, isn’t it terrible that they are doing those things and living that way?” He is also guilty before God, because though he is giving God lip service, perhaps making outward observances of the law within his heart, there is defilement. He judges others for what they are doing, but he is guilty of doing the same himself. So he also is guilty before God. The man who has never heard is guilty because God has written His law in his heart, and he will be judged without the law. God has revealed Himself in nature and that which can be known of God is plainly, clearly displayed in nature but is ignored. The message of God through nature, because he didn’t want to retain God in his heart, and thus, he looked at nature with a presuppositional base that God does not exist. The whole world is now guilty before God.
Terrible place to leave you. When we come back we’ll find God’s solution in chapters 3-4 with a guilty world. We will see God’s provision for sinful man as Paul begins to unfold for us the glorious grace of God revealed through Jesus Christ. Paul loves to paint pictures; he loves to paint pictures of the grace of God, but in order that we might enjoy all of the beauties and the brilliance of the grace of God, the colors, it is important, first of all, to paint a background for the picture. So he takes his canvas and he dips his brush in cold black paint, and he paints the background, in chapters 1 and 2 of Romans. He is giving you this background that he might now splash upon the canvas the brilliance of the glory of the grace of God that He has revealed to us through Jesus Christ. We, the sinning world, deserving that wrath of God, and yet, being offered a glorious place of fellowship and life with God, living and walking after the Spirit, that eternal life of God being offered to man. So we’ll get into the glorious grace of God, God’s solution for sinning man. So you can move ahead. There is no rule against reading chapters 3 and 4 in advance, discovering what God has done, provide for us His glorious grace.
May the Lord be with you and bless you as you walk with Him. May the Lord clean up your T.V. viewing, your magazine reading. God help us not to be caught in that trap of living after the flesh, that is death. Not to enjoy the things of the flesh, taking pleasure in those that do them. May we take pleasure in walking with God, fellowshipping with Him, experiencing His presence, His love, His power in our lives. May you come into a deeper, richer, fuller appreciation of God’s love and grace for you. In Jesus’ name. “
Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary
Rom 2:1. , wherefore). Paul passes from the Gentiles to the Jews, as the whole of the following discourse clearly shows; and yet he does not use the transitive, but the illative particle, of which two the latter, as being the more powerful, absorbs the former. The Gentile does evil; the Jew does evil. Then in the 6th and following verses, he comprehends both, Jews and Gentiles.-, inexcusable.) Man seeks to defend himself.-, O man) In ch. 1 he spoke of the Gentiles in the third person, but he deals with the Jew in the second person singular; even as the law itself deals with the Jew, not in the second, but in the third person singular; because it had no concern with any one but the Jew.-Comp. ch. Rom 3:19. But the apostle, who directs his discourse to Gentiles and Jews, addresses the Jew indeed in the second person singular, but calls him by the name [O man] common to all.-comp. ch. Rom 1:18; nor does he acknowledge the Jew, as such, Rom 2:17; Rom 2:28. The same difference between the third and second persons occurs again, Rom 2:14; Rom 2:17. It is a not dissimilar circumstance, that the Gentiles are put off [as to their condemnation] till the final judgment, Rom 2:16; but the Jews are threatened by the law with a present judgment also [besides the final one Rom 2:2.]- , thou that judgest) being removed [i.e. wherein thou art distinguished] from those that have pleasure in evil-doers, Rom 1:32. Paul uses a weighty expression. The Jew esteems himself superior to the Greek, Rom 2:19, etc. Paul now calls that an act of judging, and by it opens up a way for himself, with a view to show the judgment of God. It is mere self-love in a man, that, in proportion as he thinks others worse than himself, he thinks the better of himself, Gal 6:4. The figure paregmenon[21] occurs here; for follows.-Comp. ch. Rom 14:22-23; 1Co 4:3, etc., Rom 11:29, etc.; Jam 2:4.-, another) who is of no concern to thee; whose more open unrighteousness profits thee nothing; a heathen.
[21] A joining together of conjugate forms, or of simples and compounds, ex. gr. here, , .-ED.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Rom 2:1
Rom 2:1
Wherefore thou art without excuse, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest:-Having shown that the Gentiles were themselves to blame for being without the law of God only because when they had it they would not observe and obey it, he then turns to the Jews and warns them, for they were guilty of rejecting and refusing to obey the law of God.
for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself: for thou that judgest dost practise the same things.-In condemning the Gentiles they condemned themselves. This is not a charge that the Jews had run to the same excesses. It was the plant that bore these bitter fruits. In refusing to believe in and obey God they had chosen the course that led to the same degrading vices. When men cut loose from God, they all go the same course. Disobedience to God is the mother of all vices. Rejecting and refusing to obey God leaves the spirit weak and helpless and subjects man to the sole rule of his fleshly lusts and passions. Lust rules, and man deifies that which gratifies lust. [To condemn another for his sin is to admit that the sin in question leads to and justifies condemnation as to all who commit it, even including the one who condemns. The one who condemns sins in others, yet commits them himself, is absolutely defenseless and without excuse.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
It is evident that the apostle here turned to the Jew, though he did not immediately name him. He charged the Jew with the sin of practicing the very evils he condemned in the Gentiles. He is at least as great a failure as the Gentile in the matter of actual righteousness. Godliness, as privileged relationship, is of no value except as it produces actual righteousness.
In verses Rom 2:21-23 the apostle declared the ethical failure of the Jew. This he did by asking a series of questions, every one inferentially charging these people with actual failure in conduct in the very matters which are regulated by the law for which they stand and which they profess to teach.
On the basis of the previous argument the apostle now charged the Jew with what is his principal and most terrible sin. He had become a blasphemer of the name of God among the Gentiles. If the Gentiles had imperfect light, they ought to have received the more perfect light from the people, who, on their own showing, took the place of guide, and light, and corrector, and teacher. But because in the actualities of their outward conduct they had been committing the same sins that their law condemned, the Gentiles had seen no reason to believe, through their testimony, in the one living God, to whom the Jews professed to be related. His name, therefore, had been blasphemed among them by Jewish failure.
Then follow the apostle’s conclusive declarations concerning Israel. The bestowed privileges are all valueless. Thus again is the doctrine of justification by faith which does not issue in works declared to be false. The principles underlying this passage are of permanent value and of searching power.
Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible
TRANSITION FROM GENTILE TO JEW. BOTH ALIKE GUILTY
2:1-16. This state of things puts out of court the [Jewish] critic who is himself no better than the Gentile. He can claim no exemption, but only aggravates his sin by impenitence (vv. 1-5). Strict justice will be meted out to all – the Jew coming first then the Gentile (vv. 6-11). The Jew, will be judged by the Law of Moses, the Gentile by the Law of Conscience, at the Great Assize which Christ will hold (vv. 12-16).
1The Gentile sinner is without excuse; and his critic-who ever he may be-is equally without excuse, even though [like the Jew] he imagines himself to be on a platform of lofty superiority. No such platform really exists. In fact the critic only passes sentence upon himself, for by the fact of his criticism he shows that he can distinguish accurately between right and wrong, and his own conduct is identical with that which he condemns. 2And we are aware that it is at his conduct that God will look. The standard of His judgement is reality, and not a mans birth or status as either Jew or Gentile. 3Do you suppose-you Jewish critic, who are so ready to sit in judgement on those who copy your own example-do you suppose that a special exemption will be made in your favour, and that you personally ( emphatic) will escape? 4Or are you presuming upon all that abundant goodness, forbearance, and patience with which God delays His punishment of sin? If so, you make a great mistake. The object of that long-suffering is not that you may evade punishment but only to induce you to repent. 5While you with that callous impenitent heart of yours are heaping up arrears of Wrath, which will burst upon you in the Day of Wrath, when God will stand revealed in His character as the Righteous Judge. 6The principle of His judgement is clear and simple. He will render to every man his due, by no fictitious standard (such as birth or status) but strictly according to what he has done. 7To those who by steady persistence in a life-work of good strive for the deathless glories of the Messianic Kingdom, He will give that for which they strive, viz. eternal life. 8But to those mutinous spirits who are disloyal to the right and loyal only to unrighteousness, for such there is in store anger and fury, 9galling, nay crushing, pain: for every human being they are in store, who carries out to the end his course of evil, whether he be Jew or whether he be Gentile-the Jew again having precedence. 10On the other hand the communicated glory of the Divine Presence, the approval of God and the bliss of reconciliation with Him await the man who labours on at that which is good-be he Jew or Gentile; here too the Jew having precedence, but only precedence: 11for God regards no distinctions of race.
12Do not object that the Jew has a position of privilege which will exempt him from this judgement, while the Gentile has no law by which he can be judged. The Gentiles, it is true, have no law; but as they have sinned, so also will they be punished without one [see vv. 14, 15]. The Jews live under a law, and by that law they will be judged. 13For it is not enough to hear it read in the synagogues. That does not make a man righteous before God. His verdict will pronounce righteous only those who have done what the Law commands. 14I say that Gentiles too, although they have no written law, will be judged. For whenever any of them instinctively put in practice the precepts of the Law, their own moral sense supplies them with the law they need. 15Because their actions give visible proof of commandments written not on stone but on the tables of the heart. These actions themselves bear witness to them; and an approving conscience also bears them witness; while in their dealings with one another their inward thoughts take sometimes the side of the prosecution and sometimes (but more rarely) of the defence. 16These hidden workings of the conscience God can see; and therefore He will judge Gentile as well as Jew, at that Great Assize which I teach that He will hold through His Deputy, Jesus Messiah.
1. The transition from Gentile to Jew is conducted with much rhetorical skill, somewhat after the manner of Nathans parable to David. Under cover of a general statement St. Paul sets before himself a typical Jew. Such an one would assent cordially to all that had been said hitherto (p. 49, sup.). It is now turned against himself, though for the moment the Apostle holds in suspense the direct affirmation, Thou art the man.
There is evidence that Marcion kept vv. 2, 12-14, 16, 20 (from )-29; for the rest evidence fails. We might suppose that Marcion would omit vv. 17-20, which record (however ironically) the privileges of the Jew; but the retention of the last clause of ver. 20 is against this.
links this section closely to the last; it is well led up to by 1:32, but . pointing back to 1:20 shows that the Apostle had more than this in his mind.
2. A B D &c., Harcl., Orig.-lat. Tert. Ambrstr. Theodrt. al. WH. text RV. text: C 17 al. pauc. Latt. (exc. g) Boh. Arm., Chrys., Tisch. WH. marg. RV. marg. An even balance of authorities, both sides drawing their evidence from varied quarters. A more positive decision than that of WH. RV. would hardly be justified.
: = to know for a fact, by external testimony; = to know by inner personal experience and appropriation: see Sp. Comm. iii. 299; Additional note on 1Co 8:1.
3. emphatic; thou, of all men. There is abundant illustration of the view current among the Jews that the Israelite was secure simply as such by virtue of his descent from Abraham and of his possession of the Law: cf. Mat 3:8, Mat 3:9 Think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father; Joh 8:33; Gal 2:15; the passages quoted by Gif.; Weber, Altsyn. Theol. p. 69 f.
There may be an element of popular misunderstanding, there is certainly an element of inconsistency, in some of these passages. The story of Abraham sitting at the gate of Paradise and refusing to turn away even the wicked Israelite can hardly be a fair specimen of the teaching of the Rabbis, for we know that they insisted strenuously on the performance of the precepts of the Law, moral as well as ceremonial. But in any case there must have been a strong tendency to rest on supposed religious privileges apart from the attempt to make practice conform to them.
4. : bonitatis Vulg., in Tit 3:4 benignitas: see Lft. on Gal 5:22. = kindly disposition; = patience, opp. to a short or quick temper, irascibility (cf. Jam 1:19); = forbearance, delay of punishment, cf. to hold ones hand.
Comp. Philo, Leg. Allegor. 1:13 (Mang. i. 50) , ;
With comp. a graphic image in Apoc. Baruch. xii. 4 Evigilabit contra te furor qui nunc in longanimitate tanquam in frenis retinetur.
The following is also an impressive statement of this side of the Divine attributes: 4 Ezr. 7:62-68 (132-138) Scio, Domine, quoniam ( = that) nunc vocatus est Altissimus misericors, in eo quod misereatur his qui nondum in saeculo advenerunt; et miserator in eo quod miseretur illis qui conversionem faciunt in lege eius; et longanimis, quoniam longanimitatem praestat his qui peccaverunt quasi suis operibus; et munificus, quoniam quidem donari vult pro exigere; et multae misericordiae, quoniam multiplicat magis misericordias his qui praesentes sunt et qui praeterierunt et qui futuri sunt: si enim non multiplicaverit, non vivificabitur saeculum cum his qui inhabitant in eo; et donator, quoniam si non donaverit de bonitate sua ut alleventur hi qui iniquitatem fecerunt de suis iniquitatibus, non poterit decies millesima pars vivificari hominum.
: cf. Apoc. Baruch. 21:20 Innotescat potentia tua illis qui putant longanimitatem tuam esse infirmitatem.
: its purpose or tendency is to induce you to repent.
The Conative Present is merely a species of the Progressive Present. A verb which of itself suggests effort when used in a tense which implies action in progress, and hence incomplete, naturally suggests the idea of attempt (Burton, 11).
According to R. Levi the words [Joe 2:13] mean: God removes to a distance His Wrath. Like a king who had two fierce legions. If these, thought he, encamp near me in the country they will rise against my subjects when they provoke me to anger. Therefore I will send them far away. Then if my subjects provoke me to anger before I send for them (the legions) they may appease me and I shall be willing to be appeased. So also said God: Anger and Wrath are the messengers of destruction. I will send them far away to a distance, so that when the Israelites provoke Me to anger, they may come, before I send for them, and repent, and I may accept their repentance (cf. Isa 13:5). And not only that, said R. Jizchak, but he locks them up (Anger and Wrath) out of their way; see Jer 50:25, which means: Until He opens His treasure-chamber and shuts it again, man returns to God and He accepts him (Tract. Thaanitk ii. 1 ap. Winter u. Wnsche,Jd. Litt. i.207).
5. : in accordance with, secundum duritiam tuam Vulg.
: see on 1:18 above.
: to be taken closely together, wrath (to be inflicted) in a day of wrath.
The doctrine of a day of the Lord as a day of judgement is taught by the Prophets from Amos onwards (Amo 5:18; Isa 2:12 ff.; Isa 13:6 ff.; Isa 24:21; Jer 46:10; Joe 2:1 ff.; Zep 1:7 ff.; Eze 7:7 ff.; Eze 30:3 ff.; Zec 14:1; Mal 3:2; Mal 4:1. It also enters largely into the pseudepigraphic literature: Enoch xlv. 2 ff. (and the passages collected in Charles Note); Ps. Sol. 15:13 ff.; 4 Ezr 6:18 ff., 77 ff. [7:102ff. ed. Bensly]; 12:34; Apoc. Baruch. Lev_1; Lev_6, &c.
: not quite the same as 2Th 1:5 (cf. justi judicii Vulg.), denoting not so much the character of the judgement as the character of the Judge ( 2 Macc. 12:41; cf. 2Ti 4:8).
The word occurs in the Quinta (the fifth version included in Origens Hexapla) of Hos 6:5; it is also found twice in Test. XII Patriarch. Lev_3 , , . Ibid. 15 .
6. : Pro 24:12 (LXX). The principle here laid down, though in full accord with the teaching of the N. T. generally (Mat 16:27; 2Co 5:10; Gal 6:7; Eph 6:8; Col 3:24, Col 3:25; Rev 2:23; Rev 20:12; Rev 22:12), may seem at first sight to conflict with St. Pauls doctrine of Justification by Faith. But Justification is a past act, resulting in a present state: it belongs properly to the beginning, not to the end, of the Christians career (see on in ver. 13). Observe too that there is no real antithesis between Faith and Works in themselves. Works are the evidence of Faith, and Faith has its necessary outcome in Works. The true antithesis is between earning salvation and receiving it as a gift of Gods bounty. St. Paul himself would have allowed that there might have been a question of earning salvation if the Law were really kept (Rom 10:5; Gal 3:12). But as a matter of fact the Law was not kept, the works were not done.
7. : collective use of , as in ver. 15, a lifework, the sum of a mans actions.
8. : those whose motive is factiousness, opp. to the spirit of single-minded unquestioning obedience, those who use all the arts of unscrupulous faction to contest or evade commands which they ought to obey. From a hired labourer we get to act as a hireling, a political term for hiring paid canvassers and promoting party spirit: hence = the spirit of faction, the spirit which substitutes factious opposition for the willing obedience of loyal subjects of the kingdom of heaven. See Lft. and Ell. on Gal 5:20, but esp. Fri. ad loc.
The ancients were strangely at sea about this word. Hesychius (cent. 5) derived from earth; the Etymologicum Magnum (a compilation perhaps of the eleventh century) goes a step further, and derives it from agricola mercede conductus; Greg. Nyssen. connects it with wool ( was used specially of woolworkers); but most common of all is the connexion with (so Theodrt; on Php 2:3; cf. Vulg. his qui ex contentione [per contentionem Php 2:3; rixae Gal 5:20]). There can be little doubt that the use of was affected by association with , though there is no real connexion between the two words (see notes on 11:7, 11:8).
: see Lft. and Ell. on Gal 5:20; Trench, Syn. p. 125: is the settled feeling, the outward manifestation, outbursts or ebullitions of wrath.
. Orig. (in Cramers Catena).
9. : tribulatio (pressura in the African form of the Old Latin) et angustia Vulg., whence our word anguish: is the stronger word = torturing confinement (cf. 2Co 4:8). But the etymological sense is probably lost in usage: calamitas et angustiae h. e. summa calamitas Fri. p. 106.
For similar combinations (day of tribulation and pain, of tribulation and great shame, of suffering and tribulation, of anguish and affliction, &c.) see Charles note on Enoch xlv. 2.
= carry to the end; either strengthening the force of the simple vb., as per in perficere, or giving it a bad sense, as in perpetrare Fri. p. 107.
11. : peculiar to Biblical and Ecclesiastical Greek (Eph 6:9; Col 3:25; Jam 2:1; cf. Act 10:34; Jam 2:9; 1Pe 1:17): = (i) to give a gracious reception to a suppliant or suitor (Lev 19:15); and hence (ii) to show partiality, give corrupt judgement. In N. T. always with a bad sense.
The idea goes back to Deu 10:17 , which is adopted in Ps. Sol. 2:19 , and explained in Jubilees 5:15 And He is not one who will regard the person (of any) nor receive gifts; when He says that He will execute judgement on each: if one gave him everything that is on the earth, He will not regard the gifts or the person (of any), nor accept anything at his hands, for he is a Righteous Judge; cf. Apoc. Baruch. xiii. 7, Pirq Aboth iv. 31 He is about to judge with whom there is no iniquity, nor forgetfulness, nor respect of persons, nor taking of a bribe.
12., 13. and . The distinction between these two forms did not escape the scholarship of Origen, whose comment on Rom 3:21 reads thus in Rufinus translation (ed. Lommatzsch, vi. 201): Moris est apud Graecos nominibus praeponi, quae apud nos possunt articuli nominari. Si quando igitur Mosis legem nominat, solitum nomini praemittit articulum: si quando vero naturalem vult intelligi, sine articulo nominat legem. This distinction however, though it holds good generally, does not cover all the cases. There are really three main uses: (1) = the Law of Moses; the art. denotes something with which the readers are familiar, their own law, which Christians in some sense inherited from the Jews through the O. T. (2) = law in general (e.g. 2:12, 14; 3:20 f.; 4:15; 5:13, &c.). (3) But there is yet a third usage where without art. really means the Law of Moses, but the absence of the art. calls attention to it not as proceeding from Moses, but in its quality as law; non quia Mosis sed quia lex as Gif. expresses it in his comment on Gal 2:19 (p. 46). St. Paul regards the Pre-Messianic period as essentially a period of Law, both for Jew and for Gentile. Hence when he wishes to bring out this he uses without art, even where he is referring to the Jews; because his main point is that they were under a legal system-who gave it and what name it bore was a secondary consideration. The Law of the Jews was only a typical example of a state of things that was universal. This will explain passages like Rom 5:20, Rom 10:4.
There will remain a few places, which do not come under any of these heads, where the absence of the art. is accounted for by the influence of the context, usually acting through the law of grammatical sympathy by which when one word in a phrase drops the article another also drops it; some of these passages involve rather nice points of scholarship (see the notes on 2:25; 3:31; 13:8). On the whole subject compare esp. Gif. p. 47 ff.; also a monograph by Grafe, Die paulinische Lehre von Gesetz, Freiburg i. B. 1884, ed. 2, 1893. Dr. Grafe goes rather too far in denying the distinction between and , but his paper contains many just remarks and criticisms.
12. . The heathen are represented as deliberately rejecting not only the Law of Moses but even the Noachic ordinances, Thus they have become enemies of God and as such are doomed to destruction (Weber, Altsyn. Theol. p. 65).
. Burton ( 54) calls this a collective Aorist, represented in English by the Perfect. From the point of view from which the Apostle is speaking, the sin of each offender is simply a past fact, and the sin of all a series or aggregate of facts together, constituting a past fact. But inasmuch as this series is not separated from the time of speaking we must as in 3:23 employ an English Perfect in translation. Prof. Burton suggests an alternative possibility that the aor. may be proleptic, as if it were spoken looking backwards from the Last Judgement of the sins which will then be past; but the parallels of 3:23, 5:12 are against this.
13. : cf. ver. 18; also Pereq R. Meir 6 (Sayings of the Jewish Fathers, ed. Taylor, p. 115) Thorah is acquired by learning, by a listening ear, &c. It is interesting to note that among the sayings ascribed to Simeon, very possibly St. Pauls own class-mate and son of Gamaliel his teacher, is this: not learning but doing is the groundwork; and whoso multiplies words occasions sin (Pirq Aboth. i. 18, ed. Taylor; reff. from Delitzsch).
sine artic. bis A B D G. The absence of the art. again (as in the last verse) generalizes the form of statement, the hearers and the doers of law (whatever that law may be); cf. 7:1.
. The word is used here in its universal sense of a judicial verdict, but the fut. tense throws forward that verdict to the Final Judgement. This use must be distinguished from that which has been explained above (p. 30 f.), the special or, so to speak, technical use of the term Justification which is characteristic of St. Paul. It is not that the word has any different sense but that it is referred to the past rather than to the future ( aor. cf. 5:1, 9); the acquittal there dates from the moment at which the man becomes a Christian; it marks the initial step in his career, his right to approach the presence of God as if he were righteous. See on ver. 6 above.
14. : would mean all or most Gentiles, means only some Gentiles; the number is quite indefinite, the prominent point being their character as Gentiles.
Cf. 4 Ezr. 3:36 homines quidem per nomina invenies servasse mandata tua, gentes autem non invenies.
, the force of is who ex hypothesi have not a law, whom we conceive of as not having a law; cf. 1Co 1:28 (quae pro nihilo habentur (Grimm).
: ubi legis impletio, ibi lex P. Ewald.
The doctrine of this verse was liberal doctrine for a Jew. The Talmud recognizes no merit in the good deeds of heathen unless they are accompanied by a definite wish for admission to the privileges of Judaism. Even if a heathen were to keep the whole law it would avail him nothing without circumcision (Debarim Rabba 1). If he prays to Jehovah his prayer is not heard (ibid.). If he commits sin and repents, that too does not help him (Pesikta 156a). Even for his alms he gets no credit (Pesikta 12b). In their books (i.e. in those in which God sets down the actions of the heathen) there is no desert (Shir Rabba 86c). See Weber, Altsyn. Theol. p. 66 f. Christian theologians have expressed themselves much to the same effect. Their opinions are summed up concisely by Mark Pattison, Essays, ii. 61. In accordance with this view they interpreted the passages in St. Paul which speak of the religion of the heathen; e.g. Rom 2:14. Since the time of Augustine (De Spir. et Lit. 27) the orthodox interpretation had applied this verse, either to the Gentile converts, or to the favoured few among the heathen who had extraordinary divine assistance. The Protestant expositors, to whom the words do by nature the things contained in the law could never bear their literal force, sedulously preserved the Augustinian explanation. Even the Pelagian Jeremy Taylor is obliged to gloss the phrase by nature, thus: By fears and secret opinions which the Spirit of God, who is never wanting to men in things necessary, was pleased to put into the hearts of men (Duct. Dubit. Book II. ch. i., 3). The rationalists, however, find the expression by nature, in its literal sense, exactly conformable to their own views (John Wilkins [1614-1672], Of Nat. Rel. II. c. 9), and have no difficulty in supposing the acceptableness of those works, and the salvation of those who do them. Burnet, on Art. XVIII., in his usual confused style of eclecticism, suggests both opinions without seeming to see that they are incompatible relics of divergent schools of doctrine.
15., : see on 1:25.
: implies an appeal to facts; demonstratio rebus gestis facta (P. Ewald, De Vocis , &c., p. 16 n.).
: the work, course of conduct belonging to (i. e. in this context required by or in accordance with) the Law: collective use of as in ver. 7 above.
[Probably not as Ewald op. cit. p. 17 after Grotius, opus legis est id, quod lex in Judaeis efficit, nempe cognitio liciti et illiciti.]
. This phrase is almost exactly repeated in ch. 9:1 . . . In both cases the conscience is separated from the self and personified as a further witness standing over against it. Here the quality of the acts themselves is one witness, and the approving judgement passed upon them by the conscience is another concurrent witness.
. Some such distinction as this is suggested by the original meaning and use of the word , which = co-knowledge, the knowledge or reflective judgement which a man has by the side of or in conjunction with the original consciousness of the act. This second consciousness is easily projected and personified as confronting the first.
The word is quoted twice from Menander (342-291 b.c.), Monost. 597 (cf. 654) (ed. Didot, pp. 101, 103). It is significant that both the word and the idea are completely absent from Aristotle. They rise into philosophical importance in the more introspective moral teaching of the Stoics. The two forms, and appear to be practically convertible. Epictetus (Fragm. 97) compares the conscience to a in a passage which is closely parallel to the comment of Origen on this verse of Ep. Rom. (ed. Lommatzsch, 6:107) spiritus velut paedagogus ei [sc. animae] quidam sociatus et rector ut eam de melioribus moneat vel de culpis castiget et arguat.
In Biblical Greek the word occurs first with its full sense in Wisd. 17:10 [11] [] . In Philo is the form used. In N. T. the word is mainly Pauline (occurring in the speeches of Act 23:1, Act 23:24:16; Rom_1 and 2 Cor., Past. Epp., also in Heb.); elsewhere only in 1 Pet. and the peric. adult. Joh 8:9. It is one of the few technical terms in St. Paul which seem to have Greek rather than Jewish affinities.
The Conscience of St. Paul is a natural faculty which belongs to all men alike (Rom 2:15), and pronounces upon the character of actions, both their own (2Co 1:12) and those of others (2Co 4:2, 2Co 5:11). It can be over-scrupulous (1Co 10:25), but is blunted or seared by neglect of its warnings (1Ti 4:2).
The usage of St. Paul corresponds accurately to that of his Stoic contemporaries, but is somewhat more restricted than that which obtains in modern times. Conscience, with the ancients, was the faculty which passed judgment upon actions after they were done (in technical language the conscientia consequens moralis), not so much the general source of moral obligation. In the passage before us St. Paul speaks of such a source ( ); but the law in question is rather generalized from the dictates of conscience than antecedent to them. See on the whole subject a treatise by Dr. P. Ewald, De Vocis apud script. N. T. vi ac potestate (Lipsiae, 1883).
. This clause is taken in two ways: (i) of the thoughts, as it were, personified, Conscience being in debate with itself, and arguments arising now on the one side, and now on the other (cf. Shakspeares When to the sessions of sweet silent thought, I summon up remembrance of things past); in this case almost = alternately, in mutual debate; (ii) taking the previous part of the verse as referring to the decisions of Conscience when in private it passes in review a mans own acts, and this latter clause as dealing rather with its judgements on the acts of the others; then will = between one another, between man and man, in the intercourse of man with man; and will be the arguments which now take one side and now the other. The principal argument in favour of this view (which is that of Mey. Gif. Lips.) is the emphatic position of , which suggests a contrast between the two clauses, as if they described two different processes and not merely different parts or aspects of the same process.
There is a curious parallel to this description in Assump. Moys. i. 13 Creavit enim orbem terrarum propter plebem suam, et non coepit eam inceptionem creaturae palam facere, ut in ea gentes arguantur et humiliter inter se disputationibus arguant se.
: the are properly thoughts conceived in the mind, not arguments used in external debate. This appears from the usage of the word, which is frequently combined with ( Pro 19:21; cf. Psa 32:11; Pro 6:18): it is used of secret plots (Jer 18:18 , devise devices), and of the Divine intentions (Jer_29 [36], 11 ). In the present passage St. Paul is describing an internal process, though one which is destined to find external expression; it is the process by which are formed the moral judgements of men upon their fellows.
The conscience and the thoughts both belong to the same persons. This is rightly seen by Klpper, who has written at length on the passage before us (Paulinische Studien, Knigsberg, 1887, p. 10); but it does not follow that both the conscience and the thoughts are exercised upon the same objects, or that must be referred to the thoughts in the sense that influences from without are excluded. The parallel quoted in support of this (Mat 18:15 ) derives that part of its meaning from , not from .
: or even, or it may be, implying that . is the exception, . the rule.
16. The best way to punctuate is probably to put (in English) a colon after ver. 13, and a semi-colon at the end of ver. 15: ver. 16 goes back to in ver. 13, or rather forms a conclusion to the whole paragraph, taking up again the of ver. 5. The object of vv. 13-15 is to explain how it comes about that Gentiles who have no law may yet be judged as if they had one: they have a second inferior kind of law, if not any written precepts yet the law of conscience; by this law they will be judged when quick and dead are put upon their trial.
Orig., with his usual acuteness, sees the difficulty of connecting ver. 16 with ver. 15, and gives an answer which is substantially right. The thoughts accusing and condemning are not conceived as rising up at the last day but now. They leave however marks behind, velut in ceris, ita in corde nostro. These marks God can see (ed. Lomm. p. 109).
(et WH. marg.): B, WH. text: A, Pesh. Boh. al., WH. marg.
(et WH. marg.): B, Orig., Tisch. WH. text.
: might be , as RV. marg., fut. regarded as certain.
. The point to which St. Pauls Gospel, or habitual teaching, bears witness is, not that God will judge the world (which was an old doctrine), but that He will judge it through Jesus Christ as His Deputy (which was at least new in its application, though the Jews expected the Messiah to act as Judge, Enoch xlv, xlvi, with Charles notes).
The phrase . occurs Rom 16:25, of the specially Pauline doctrine of free grace; 2Ti 2:8, (i) of the resurrection of Christ from the dead, (ii) of His descent from the seed of David.
We note in passing the not very intelligent tradition (introduced by , Eus. H. E. III. 4:8), that wherever St. Paul spoke of his Gospel he meant the Gospel of St. Luke.
FAILURE OF THE JEWS
2:17-29. The Jew may boast of his possession of a special Revelation and a written Law, but all the time his practice shows that he is really no better than the Gentile (vv. 17-24). And if he takes his stand on Circumcision, that too is of value only so far as it is moral and spiritual. In this moral and spiritual circumcision the Gentile also may share (vv. 25-29).
17Do you tell me that you bear the proud name of Jew, that you repose on a written law as the charter of your salvation? Do you boast that Jehovah is your God, 18that you are fully acquainted with His revealed Will, that you adopt for yourself a high standard and listen to the reading of the Law every Sabbath-day? 19Do you give yourself out with so much assurance as a guide to the poor blind Gentile, a luminary to enlighten his darkness? 20Do you call your pupils dullards and yourself their schoolmaster? Are they mere infants and you their teacher? You, who have all knowledge and all truth visibly embodied for you in the Law? 21Boastful Jew! How does your practice comport with your theory? So ready to teach others, do you need no teaching yourself? The eighth 22and seventh commandments which you hold up to others-do you yourself keep them? You profess to loathe and abhor idols; but do you keep your hands from robbing their temples? 23You vaunt the possession of a law; and by the violation of that law you affront and dishonour God Who gave it. 24As Isaiah wrote that the Gentiles held the Name of God in contempt because they saw His people oppressed and enslaved, so do they now for a different reason-because of the gross inconsistency in practice of those who claim to be His people.
25True it is that behind the Law you have also the privilege of Circumcision, which marks the people of Promise. And Circumcision has its value if you are a law-performer. But if you are a law-breaker you might as well be uncircumcised. 26Does it not follow that if the uncircumcised Gentile keeps the weightier statutes of the Moral Law, he will be treated as if he were circumcised? 27And uncircumcised as he is, owing to his Gentile birth, yet if he fulfils the Law, his example will (by contrast) condemn you who with the formal advantages of a written law and circumcision, only break the law of which you boast. 28For it is not he who has the outward and visible marks of a Jew who is the true Jew; neither is an outward and bodily circumcision the true circumcision. 29But he who is inwardly and secretly a Jew is the true Jew; and the moral and spiritual circumcision is that which really deserves the name. The very word Jew-descendant of Judah-means praise (Gen 29:35). And such a Jew has his praise, not from man but from God.
17. A B D* al., Latt. Pesh. Boh. Arm. Aeth., &c.: Dc L al., Harcl., Chrys. al. The authorities for include all the oldest MSS., all the leading versions, and the oldest Fathers: is an itacism favoured by the fact that it makes the construction slightly easier. Reading the apodosis of the sentence begins at ver. 21.
: here approaches in meaning (as in the mouth of a Jew it would have a tendency to do) to , a member of the Chosen People, opposed to the heathen.
Strictly speaking, , opp. , calls attention to language; , opp. , calls attention to nationality; = a member of the theocracy, in possession of full theocratic privileges (Trench, Syn. xxxix, p. 132 ff.). The word does not occur in LXX (though is found four times in 2 Macc.), but at this date it is the common word; and are terms reserved by the Jews themselves, the one to distinguish between the two main divisions of their race (the Palestinian and Greek-speaking), the other to describe their esoteric status.
For the Jews pride in his privileges comp. 4 Ezra 6:55 f. haec autem omnia dixi coram te, Domine, quoniam dixisti eas (sc. gentes) nil esse, et quoniam salivae assimilatae sunt, et quasi stillicidium de vase similasti habundantiam corum.
: bearest the name: = to impose a name, pass. to have a name imposed.
: have a law to lean upon: so (without art.) A B D*; =; but it is not surprising that the later MSS. should make the statement more definite, lean upon the Law. For . (requiescis Vulg.) cf. Mic 3:11; Eze 29:7: the word implies at once the sense of support and the saving of ill-directed labour which resulted to the Jew from the possession of a law.
: suggested by Jer 9:24 let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth Me, that I am the Lord.
: for , stopping at the first step in the process of contraction (, , ). This is one of the forms which used to be called Alexandrine, but which simply belong to the popular Greek current at the time (Hort, Introd. p. 304). occurs also in 1Co 4:7, Rom 11:18; comp. Luk 16:25, and from uncontracted verbs, Luk 17:8, Mat 5:36 (but Mar 9:22); see Win. Gr. xiii. 2b (p. 90).
18. . Bp. Lightfoot has shown that this phrase was so constantly used for the Divine Will that even without the art. it might have that signification, as in 1Co 16:12 (On Revision, p. 106 Exo_1, p. 118 Exo_2).
: probas utiliora Cod. Clarom. Rufin. Vulg.; non modo prae malis bona sed in bonis optima Beng. on Php 1:10, where the phrase recurs exactly. Both words are ambiguous: = (i) to test, assay, discern; (ii) to approve after testing (see on 1:28); and may be either things which differ, or things which stand out, or excel. Thus arise the two interpretations represented in RV. and RV. marg., with a like division of commentators. The rendering of RV. marg. (provest the things that differ, hast experience of good and bad Tyn.) has the support of Euthym.-Zig. ( , ), Fri. De W. Oltr. Go. Lips. Mou. The rendering of RV. (approvest the things that are excellent) is adopted by Latt. Orig. (ita ut non solum quae sint bona scias, verum etiam quae sint meliora et utiliora discernas), most English Versions, Mey. Lft. Gif. Lid. (Chrys. does not distinguish; Va is undecided). The second rendering is the more pointed.
: cf. Act 15:21.
19. … The common construction after is : acc. and infin. is very rare. It seems better, with Vaughan, to take closely with , and art persuaded as to thyself that thou art, &c.
. It is natural to compare Mat 15:14 …; also 23:16, 24. Lips. thinks that the first saying was present to the mind of the Apostle. It would not of course follow that it was current in writing, though that too is possible. On the other hand the expression may have been more or less proverbial: comp. Wnsche, Erlut. d. Evang. on Mat 23:16. The same epithet was given by a Galilaean to R. Chasda, Baba Kama fol. 52 a. When the Shepherd is angry with the sheep he blinds their leader; i.e. when God determines to punish the Israelites, He gives them unworthy rulers.
20. : a schoolmaster, with the idea of discipline, correction, as well as teaching; cf. Heb 12:9.
: infants, opp. to , adults, as in Heb 5:13, Heb 5:14.
: outline, delineation, embodiment. As a rule = outward form as opp. to inward substance, while = outward form as determined by inward substance; so that is the variable, the permanent, element in things: see Lft. Phil. p. 125 ff.; Sp. Comm. on 1Co 7:31. Nor does the present passage conflict with this distinction. The Law was a real expression of Divine truth, so far as it went. It is more difficult to account for 2Ti 3:5 .
See however Lft. in Journ. of Class. and Sacr. Philol. (1857) iii. 115 They will observe that in two passages where St. Paul does speak of that which is unreal or at least external, and does not employ , he still avoids using as inappropriate, and adopts instead (Rom 2:20; 2Ti 3:5), where the termination, denotes the aiming after or affecting the . Can this quite be made good?
21. : resumptive, introducing the apodosis to the long protasis in vv. 17-20. After the string of points, suspended as it were in the air, by which the Apostle describes the Jews complacency, he now at last comes down with his emphatic accusation. Here is the Thou art the man which we have been expecting since ver. 1.
: infin. because contains the idea of command.
22. : used of the expression of physical disgust, esp. of the Jews horror at idolatry.
Note the piling up of phrases in Deu 7:26 [here of the gold and silver plates with which idols were overlaid] , , , . Comp. also Dan 12:11; Mat 24:15, &c. One of the ignominies of captivity was to be compelled to carry the idols of the heathen: Assump. Moys. viii. 4 cogentur palam baiulare idola corum inquinata.
. The passage just quoted (Deu 7:26 with 25), Joseph. Ant. IV. viii. 10, and Act 19:37 (where the town-clerk asserts that St. Paul and his companions were not ) show that the robbery of temples was a charge to which the Jews were open in spite of their professed horror of idol-worship.
There were provisions in the Talmud which expressly guarded against this: everything which had to do with an idol was a to him unless it had been previously desecrated by Gentiles. But for this the Jew might have thought that in depriving the heathen of their idol he was doing a good work. See the passages in Delitzsch ad loc.; also on , which must not be interpreted too narrowly, Lft., Ess. on Supern. Rel. p. 299 f.; Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire, p. 144 n., where it is noted that was just one of the crimes which a provincial governor could proceed against by his own imperium.
The Eng. Versions of group themselves thus: robbest God of his honour Tyn. Cran. Genev.; doest sacrilege (or equivalent) Wic. Rhem. AV. RV. marg.; dost rob temples RV.
23. It is probably best not to treat this verse as a question. The questions which go before are collected by a summary accusation. Gif., with a delicate sense of Greek composition, sees a hint of this in the change from participles to the relative and indic. ( ).
24. A free adaptation of Isa 52:5 (LXX). Heb. And continually all the day long My Name is blasphemed: LXX adds to this and . St. Paul omits and changes to .
The original meant that the Name of God was reviled by the tyrants and oppressors of Israel: St. Paul, following up a suggestion in the LXX ( ), traces this reviling to the scandal caused by Israels inconsistency. The fact that the formula of quotation is thrown to the end shows that he is conscious of applying the passage freely: it is almost as if it were an after-thought that the language he has just used is a quotation at all. See the longer note on ch. 10, below.
25. . On the absence of the art. see especially the scholarly note in Va.: It is almost as if and were severally like , , &c., , , &c., one compound word: if thou be a law-doer if thou be a law-transgressor, &c., indicating the character of the person, rather than calling attention to the particular form or designation of the law, which claims obedience.
: is by that very fact become. Del. quotes the realistic expression given to this idea in the Jewish fancy that God would send his angel to remove the marks of circumcision on the wicked
26. : = , denoting result, so as to be in place of, reckoned as a substitute or equivalent for (Fri., Grm.-Thay. s. v. 1 a).
Of the synonyms , , ; = to keep an eye upon, to observe carefully (and then do); = to guard as a deposit, to preserve intact against violence from without or within; = to bring (a law) to its proper fulfilment in action; and are both from the point of view of the agent, from that of the law which is obeyed. See Westcott on Job 17:12; 1Jn 2:3.
27. : most probably categorical and not a question as AV. and RV.; = condemn by comparison and contrast, as in Mat 12:41, Mat 12:42 the men of Nineveh shall stand up in the judgement with this generation and shall condemn it, &c. Again we are pointed back to vv. 1-3; the judge of others shall be himself judged.
: uncircumcision which physically remains as it was born. The order of the words seems opposed to Prof. Burtons rendering, the uncircumcision which by nature fulfils the law ( . = 5:14).
of attendant circumstances as in 4:11, 8:25, 14:20; Anglic with, with all your advantages of circumcision and the possession of a written law.
The distinction between the literal Israel which is after the flesh and the true spiritual Israel is a leading idea with St. Paul and is worked out at length in 9:6 ff.; see also Php 2:14 sup. We may compare Php 3:3, where St. Paul claims that Christians represent the true circumcision.
28. . The Greek of this and the next verse is elliptical, and there is some ambiguity as to how much belongs to the subject and how much to the predicate. Even accomplished scholars like Dr. Gifford and Dr. Vaughan differ. The latter has some advantage in symmetry, making the missing words in both clauses belong to the subject (Not he who is [a Jew] outwardly is a Jew but he who is [a Jew] in secret is a Jew); but it is a drawback to this view of the construction that it separates and : Gif., as it seems to us rightly, combines these (he which is inwardly a Jew [is truly a Jew], and circumcision of heart [is true circumcision]). Similarly Lips. Weiss (but not Mey.).
29. . The idea of a spiritual (heart-) circumcision goes back to the age of Deuteronomy; Deu 10:16 : Jer 4:4 , : cf. Jer 9:26; Eze 44:7; Act 7:51. Justin works out elaborately the idea of the Christian circumcision, Dial. c. Tryph 114.
. We believe that Dr. Gifford was the first to point out that there is here an evident play on the name Jew: Judah = Praise (cf. Gen 29:35; Gen 49:8).
A Cod. Alexandrinus
B Cod. Vaticanus
D Cod. Claromontanus
&c. always qualify the word which precedes, not that which follows:
Harcl. Harclean.
Orig.-lat. Latin Version of Origen
Tert. Tertullian.
Ambrstr. Ambrosiaster.
Theodrt. Theodoret.
al. alii, alibi.
WH. Westcott and Hort.
RV. Revised Version.
Cod. Sinaiticus
C Cod. Ephraemi Rescriptus
Latt. Latin.
g Latin version of G
Boh. Bohairic.
Arm. Armenian.
Chrys. Chrysostom.
Tisch. Tischendorf.
Gif. Gifford.
Vulg. Vulgate.
Lft. Lightfoot.
Ell. Ellicott.
Fri. Fritzsche (C. F. A.).
Orig. Origen.
G Cod. Boernerianus
Mey. Meyer.
Lips. Lipsius.
Pesh. Peshitto.
Eus. Eusebius.
Aeth. Ethiopic.
L Cod. Angelicus
Beng. Bengel.
Tyn. Tyndale.
Euthym.-Zig. Euthymius Zigabenus.
De W. De Wette.
Oltr. Oltramare.
Go. Godet.
Lid. Liddon.
Genev. Geneva.
Wic. Wiclif.
Rhem. Rheims (or Douay).
AV. Authorized Version.
Va. Vaughan.
Del. Delitzsch.
Fuente: International Critical Commentary New Testament
Leave Judgment unto God
Rom 2:1-11
In this chapter the Apostle turns to address the Jews. His purpose is to prove that though they may deem themselves superior to the Gentiles and capable of judging them, they may be therefore liable to more severe judgment; because, notwithstanding their superior knowledge, they commit the same sins. God will judge men, not by their professions but by their works. Those who are harshest in condemning others are often guilty of the same sins, though in their own ease they manage to find some excuse which extenuates their shortcomings. Rid yourself of the beam in your own eye, that you may see clearly how to rid your brother of his mote, Mat 7:5.
Gods silence does not mean indifference, but the desire to give opportunity to repent. The Lamb is in the midst of the throne, Rev 5:6. Our redemption is by His precious blood, and that alone; but the rewards of the future, and the enjoyment of what God means by life, are conditioned upon our obedience. Glory, honor, and peace are within your reach, if you will accept the reconciliation offered you in Christ, which will bring you into at-one-ment with God; and if you will live to do your Heavenly Fathers will.
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
In the first sixteen verses of the next chapter another class is brought into view: it is the world of culture and refinement. Surely among the educated, the followers of the various philosophic systems, will be found men who lead such righteous lives that they can come into the presence of God claiming His blessing on the ground of their own goodness! Certainly there were those who professed to look with disgust and abhorrence upon the vile lewdness of the ignorant rabble, but were their private lives any holier or any cleaner than those whom they so loudly condemned?
It is now their turn to be summoned into court, so to speak, where the apostle fearlessly arraigns them before the august tribunal of the righteous Lord, who loveth righteousness. Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest; for wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. Philosophy does not preserve its devotee from the indulgence of the flesh. A recognition of the evil is not necessarily power to overcome the evil. Culture does not cleanse the heart nor education alter the nature; and it is against the doer of evil that the judgment of God according to truth will be rendered. To praise virtue while practising vice may enable one to get by with his fellows, but it will not deceive Him who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity.
Sternly he asks, Thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? Or despisest thou the riches of His goodness and forbearance and long-suffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? Men are inclined to consider that God is condoning their ways, if sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, whereas He waits in long-suffering mercy that men may have opportunity to face their sins and own their guilt, thus finding mercy. Instead of doing this, after the hardness and impenitence of their hearts, men, untouched by divine grace, treasure up unto themselves wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who will render to every man according to his deeds.
What a solemn expression is this-Treasuring up, or storing up, wrath against the day of wrath! How apt was the answer of the poor old colored woman who when taunted with the folly of believing in a lake of fire and brimstone because no such an amount of brimstone could be found in one place, exclaimed solemnly, Ebry-one takes his own brimstone wif him! Ah, that is it! Each rebel against God, each sinner against light, each violator of his own conscience, carries his own brimstone with him! He is making his own destiny.
Properly, I believe, we should consider verses Rom 2:7-15 as parenthetical, not merely Rom 2:13-15, as indicated in the Authorized Version. In these verses great principles of judgment are laid down which should forever silence the caviler who would charge God with unrighteousness because some have light and privileges that others do not enjoy.
Judgment will be according to truth and according to deeds. Men will be judged by the light they have had, not by the light they never knew. Eternal life is offered to all who by patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory, honor and incorruptibility. (Observe it is not immortality, but incorruptibility. The distinction is of great importance, though the two terms are often confounded in the Authorized Version.) If any were so characterized, it would prove that there was a divine work in the soul; but where is the natural man who so lives? Well then, unto them that are contentious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there can but be meted out in the day of judgment indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, whether privileged Jew or ignorant Gentile.
It is not that God will deal in indiscriminate judgment with all men therefore; but light given will be the standard by which they are judged. None can complain, for if one but follow the gleam he will find light enough to guide his steps and ensure his salvation. If, by the light of nature, men realize their responsibility to their Creator, He will make Himself responsible to give them further light unto the salvation of their souls.
With Him there is no respect of persons. The greater the privileges, the greater the responsibility. But where privileges are comparatively few, He regards ignorant men with no less interest and tender compassion than He does those whose outward circumstances are seemingly better.
As many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law. No principle could be sounder. Men are held responsible for what they know, or might know if they would. They are not condemned for ignorance unless that ignorance be the result of the wilful rejection of light. Men love darkness rather than light because their deeds are evil.
The parenthetical verses Rom 2:13-15 emphasize the plain principle already laid down so forcibly. Judgment is according to deeds. To know the law and fail to obey it only increases the condemnation. Doers of the law will be justified, if such there are. But elsewhere we learn that from this standpoint all would be lost, for by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in His sight. The Jew prided himself upon being in possession of the divine oracles and thought this made him superior to the Gentile nations round about. But God has not left Himself without witness; to these nations He has given both the light of conscience and the light of nature. They shew the work of the law written in their hearts. Observe, it is not that the law is written in their hearts. That is new birth, and is the distinctive blessing of the New Covenant. If the law were written there they would fulfil its righteousness. But the work of the law is quite another thing. The law worketh wrath. It is a ministry of condemnation. And Gentile sinners who never heard of the Sinaitic code have a sense of condemnation resting upon them when they live in violation of the dictates of their divinely-implanted conscience which testifies either for or against them-accusing or else excusing one another. This is experimental proof that they are on the ground of responsibility and that God will be righteous in judging them in that solemn day when the Man Christ Jesus will sit upon the august tribunal of the ages and manifest the secret motives and springs of conduct. This, Paul says is according to my gospel. He declares that the Crucified will sit upon the throne at the last great assize. God hath appointed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness by that Man whom He hath ordained; whereof He hath given assurance unto all men in that He hath raised Him from the dead (Act 17:31). With all that the apostle had written concerning the sinfulness and degeneracy of the Gentiles, whether barbarian or highly civilized, the Jew would be in fullest agreement. They were dogs, outside of the Abrahamic covenant, aliens to the commonwealth of Israel. Their judgment was just, for they were the enemies of God and His chosen people. But it was otherwise with the Hebrews. They were the elect of Jehovah, the chosen race to whom God had given His holy law and favored with abundant tokens of His special regard. So they reasoned, forgetting that holding correct doctrine does not avail if practical righteousness be overlooked or disregarded.
The apostle suddenly summons the proud worldly Sadducee and the complacent Pharisee into court, and proceeds to arraign them along with the despised Gentiles. Verses Rom 2:17-29 give us the examination of the chosen people.
Behold, he exclaims, 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 (or, triest things that differ; see margin), 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 (vers. Rom 2:17-20). In these masterly clauses he sums up all their pretensions. And when I say pretensions, I do not mean pretences. These were the things in which they gloried and they were largely true. God had revealed Himself to this people as to no other, but they were wrong in supposing that this exempted them from judgment if they failed to keep His covenant. He had said long before, You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore will I punish you for all your iniquities (Amo 3:3).
Privilege increases responsibility. It does not, as they seemed to think, set it aside. The knowledge of the divine oracles gave to the Jew a standard of judgment that no others had. Therefore, how much holier should be his life! Were the Israelites then a more righteous people than the nations about them? On the contrary, they failed more miserably than those of less light and fewer privileges.
Incisively the Spirit of God drives home the truth as to their actual state, in four questions calculated to expose the inmost secrets of their hearts and to lay bare the hidden sins of their lives. Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? You are so confident that you are fitted to instruct the ignorant, have you heeded the instruction given in the law? No answer!
Thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? Throughout the ancient world the Jew was looked upon as the arch-thief, using every cunning device known to the money-lender and usurer to part his clients from their wealth. True, driven by desperation, the Gentile voluntarily put himself into the hand of the Jewish pawnbroker, but he knew as he did so that he was dealing with one who had no niceties of pity or compassion for an indigent debtor when the debtor was a hated Gentile dog. The Jew is again speechless.
Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? Lechery of the gravest kind was not an uncommon offence in Israel, as the divine records prove and as history bears witness. The evil is in the very nature of man. Out of the heart proceed fornication, lasciviousness, and every unclean thing. In this respect the Jew is as guilty as his Gentile neighbor. He has no reply.
Perhaps the keenest thrust is in the last question of all. Thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? The word translated commit sacrilege really means to traffic in idols. This was an offence of which the Jew was peculiarly guilty. Abhorring images, he nevertheless was often known to act as a go-between in disposing of idols stolen from the temples of a conquered people and those ready to purchase them in other districts. He was even charged with systematically robbing temples and then selling the images. The town-clerk of Ephesus had this in mind when he said, Ye have brought hither these men, which are neither robbers of temples (not, churches), nor yet blasphemers of your goddess (Act 19:37). So this was indeed a home-thrust, exposing at once the hypocritical character of the man who professed detestation of idolatry and all its works, and yet was not above profiting financially at the expense of idolators in a manner so thoroughly dishonest.
So the apostle drives home the tremendous indictment! For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written (ver. Rom 2:24). This their own prophets had declared, and he but insists upon what Scripture and their consciences confirmed.
To trust in circumcision, the sign of the Abrahamic covenant, while walking in so carnal a manner, was but deceiving themselves. Ordinances do not profit if that of which the ordinance speaks is neglected. The uncircumcised Gentile, if he walk before God in righteousness, will be accounted as circumcised, whereas the covenant-mark on the flesh of a Jew will only add to his condemnation if he lives in opposition to the law.
It is reality that counts with God. The true Jew (and Jew is a contraction of Judah, meaning, Praise) is not one who is such by natural birth alone, or by outward conformity to ritual, but one who is circumcised in heart, who has judged his sinfulness in the sight of the Lord, and who now seeks to walk in accordance with the revealed will of God. Whose praise (note the play on the word Jew) is not of man but of God (vers. Rom 2:26-29).
Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets
Rom 2:4
I. The Jews thought that St. Paul, the Apostle of the Gentiles, was tempting them to despise the privileges of their birth and election. He retorts the charge. He asks the Jew how he could dare to despise the riches which God had bestowed upon him. What were those riches? The Law and the Covenant were the pledges and witnesses of their wealth; they could be converted into wealth, but they were not the thing itself. They spoke of a living God near to the Israelite; of a God of goodness, forbearance, longsuffering. These names were given to him in every page of the Divine oracles; the names were illustrated by a series of facts. To boast of the Law and the Covenant and the Scriptures, as if they were not revelations of Him, was to deny and despise them. To accept them as revelations of Him, and not to believe that He was good and longsuffering and forbearing, was to deny and despise both them and Him. To admit that He was good and forbearing and longsuffering at all, and not to believe that He was so at every moment, to themselves and to all men, was to play with words, to despise their sense, their power, their blessing.
II. It is even so with each one of us. Our New Testament, our Baptism, our Communion, testify of a God good and forbearing and longsuffering. Now, if this goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering belong to the very name and character of Him in whom we are living and moving and having our being, they constitute a wealth upon which we may always draw. The more we call them to mind, the more we believe in them, the more truly and actively they become ours. We may become moulded into their likeness, we may show them forth. This is that kingly inheritance which the Scriptures and the Sacraments make known to us. If we enter into the meaning of the festival of Epiphany, we shall believe that Christ’s glory may be manifested in the greatest weakness, because it is the glory of goodness, of forbearance, of longsuffering. We shall ask that that glory may humble us and lead us day by day to repentance. We shall be sure that there will be at last a full revelation of those riches which eye hath not seen nor hath it entered into the heart of man to conceive, but which God hath prepared for them that love Him.
F. D. Maurice, Sermons, vol. iii., p. 97.
References: Rom 2:4.-J. Foster, Lectures, p. 351; Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxix., No. 1714. Rom 2:4, Rom 2:5.-H. W. Beecher, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxix., p. 187. Rom 2:4-6.-Homilist, vol. v., p. 423; new series, vol. iii., p. 522; W. H. Brown, Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. vii., p. 149. Rom 2:5.-G. Calthrop, Words Spoken to My Friends, p. 269; W. Dorling, Christian World Pulpit, vol. vii., p. 200. Rom 2:7. Homilist, 3rd series, vol. iii., p. 327; Homiletic Quarterly, vol. iv., p. 39. Rom 2:8.-Ibid., p. 247. Rom 2:9-11.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iii., p. 18; Homiletic Quarterly, vol. v., p. 373. Rom 2:11.-H. Melvill, Penny Pulpit, No. 3152. Rom 2:12.-Preacher’s Monthly, vol. ii., p. 98.
Rom 2:12-16
I. What does the Apostle mean when he says that certain persons shall perish without law? Is he aggravating their condemnation, and telling us that they shall have judgment without mercy, be dealt with as lawless outcasts for whom no law was ever intended and whose case no law could ever reach? It would seem as if some persons have thought so, but there could not be a greater mistake. What the Apostle means is, as they have not had the written law to live by, so shall it not appear against them in judgment. They shall be dealt with so that no man may accuse the justice of the Judge. They will not be dealt with according to the rigor of a law which they never knew, and therefore never could obey. There was a code of law under which they lived, written not on tables of stone like the covenant of old, but on the “fleshy tables of the heart”-the code of conscience and of reason; and by this law they will be judged, if they have not acted up to the light which they possessed.
II. There is a great day of retribution appointed. It must be, it cannot but be an awful thing to have sinned against the God whom our Scriptures have revealed to us. Jesus Christ will be our Judge. He who was tempted-He who in all things was made like unto His brethren-the man Christ Jesus, will judge His fellow-man. Then we may draw near with full assurance of faith, trusting to the merits of our Saviour, the mercy of our Judge. “Not simply,” writes one of our greatest divines, “because He is a man therefore shall He judge; for then by the same reason every man could judge and none consequently, because no man will be judged if every man were only to judge; but because of the Three Persons which are God, He only is also the Son of man, and therefore, for His affinity with their nature, for His sense of their infirmities, for His appearance to their eyes, most fit to represent the greatest mildness and sweetness of equity in the severity of that just and all-embracing judgment.” Let us see, then, that while life remains to us, we repose our confidence wholly on the death of Christ.
Bishop Atley, Penny Pulpit, No. 334, new series.
References: Rom 2:12-25.-Homilist, vol. vii., p. 424. Rom 2:13.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. i., p. 71. Rom 2:13, Rom 2:14.-A. Jessopp, Norwich School Sermons, p. 21. Rom 2:13-15.-H. W. Beecher, Sermons, 4th series, p. 394.
Rom 2:14
I. The great teachers who have seen in the natural man nothing but an enemy of God and an alien from Him have gathered the material of their systems from the pages of the New Testament. But the larger or wider view of the affinity between the human and the Divine natures, which is more in harmony with the instincts of our own hearts and with the later growths of time, may appeal with at least as much confidence to the same authority. There are indisputable truths underlying the doctrine of human corruption and depravity. But, on the other side, there is truth no less certain, which keeps growing in importance with the growth of human knowledge and aspiration. Our text shows that St. Paul did not overlook the evidences of a relationship between the human will and the Divine Will, as in his address at Athens, where he could not but have been moved by the associations of the spot in which so many seekers after truth had laboured. He recognises that God is not far from any one of us, that in Him we all live and move and have our being. Christian life, moreover, reaches its highest expression in consciousness of the relationship between the human spirit and the Divine. The law of Christ is the law of liberty; human nature enjoys true freedom in the ordered and regulated harmony of duty and affection, of reason and will. The soul may be so crippled as only to feel the wretchedness of perceiving the good which it cannot realise for itself, but the love of Christ restores it and brings it back to its true self. Corruption and sin obscure but do not destroy the higher affinities. The attraction of Christ’s example-the power of His life and death-put an end to its estrangement. It ceases to be an alien from God, and stands again in the relation of a son.
II. We must surrender ourselves to God if we would have Him reveal Himself to us. The more that we submit ourselves in this spirit to the teaching of human life and of the human soul, the less shall we confine our sense of mystery and awe to the future and the unseen-the more profoundly shall we feel that in walking on this firm earth we are treading on holy ground, and that the glory which fills the heavens shines also in the light of common day. The silent influence of this conviction has been felt by all schools of religious thought; each of them practically acknowledges that human nature, rightly interrogated, is the best interpreter of the revelation of God. Human nature reverently studied and rightly understood is the bridge that spans the interval between God and the world. In studying this we are studying the facts that are nearest to us. Here is something definite and tangible, something about which patient truth-lovers may at length agree. Those who fall back on the witness of human nature and look at religion in its human aspect are obeying the irresistible tendency of our own modern habits of thought; but they do not, therefore, surrender the truth or reality of revelation. They are only doing what others have done, who at first have feared entirely to lose sight of old familiar facts if they quitted the point of view which is being abandoned by the age in which they live, but have found that when they have shifted with the times they see the same truth, under a different aspect indeed, but no less clear than before.
W. W. Jackson, Oxford and Cambridge Journal, April 27th, 1882.
References: Rom 2:14.-H. W. Beecher, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xvii., p. 178; G. Brooks, Five Hundred Outlines, p. 68. Rom 2:14, Rom 2:15.-R. W. Dale, The Evangelical Record, p. 41. Rom 2:15.-J. B. Lightfoot, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxxii., p. 102; Homiletic Magazine, vol. ix., p. 94; Archbishop Magee, Sermons at St. Saviour’s, Bath, p. 147; F. W. Farrar, The Silence and Voices of God, p. 27.
Rom 2:16
The Secrets of the Soul.
I. We live in a strange secrecy, even hidden from our most loving and intimate friends. If any one of us were asked to relate his own life, he might relate two lives which would seem all but independent of each other. He might tell when he was born, where he had lived, where he had passed year after year, what persons he had lived with, what he had done by way of study or amusement, what had happened to him that was remarkable, what events had made a great difference in his life. Or, again, he might tell quite a different story. He might tell to what thoughts his mind naturally turned in the moment of leisure, what unfinished pictures were, as it were, hung up all round the chamber of his soul. He might tell of deeds done in darkness, which though actual deeds and not mere thoughts, yet are part of this secret inner life by virtue of their absolute concealment. How different these two lives would be 1
II. The secret will not be kept longer than enough to serve its purpose. And woe betide the soul that uses it ill. This sacred veil cast by the Creator in front of a man’s holy of holies can be used; nay, we must confess it, such is our fallen state, that it is used to hide evil of every kind. It is the special characteristic of Christians that they are not of the night nor of darkness. It is with the unfruitful works of darkness that we are to have no fellowship. Let us then determine to force all our faults outwards. At whatever cost let us keep sacred to God that inner shrine which He has thus hidden with a secrecy of His own making. If we can be fair anywhere, let it be in that which God has reserved for Himself and where Christ is willing to dwell.
Bishop Temple, Rugby Sermons, 1st series, p. 266.
References: Rom 2:16.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xxxi., No. 1849; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iii., p. 18; J. B. Heard, Christian World Pulpit, vol. viii., p. 225. Rom 2:17.-Spurgeon, 1st series, vol. ix., p. 214. Rom 2:28, Rom 2:29.-Homilist, 3rd series, vol. i., p. 41; Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. i., p. 81. Rom 2:29.-J. Edmunds, Sixty Sermons, p. 41.
Rom 2:12
(with Rom 5:20-21)
The Doctrine of Sin.
In these passages we have stated or implied St. Paul’s doctrine concerning sin.
I. Sin is boldly represented to have issued from the action of God, to have come to pass in some sense through Him; He and His operation are assumed to have been in some sense answerable for it. Speaking of Jews and Gentiles as comprehending between them the entire human world, St. Paul says, “God hath concluded them all in disobedience,” or, literally, has shut them all up together into disobedience, the image underlying the word being the collection and enclosure of a multitude in one spot to which they have been driven or conducted. Thus, the idea of the writer would not be, by any means, that God had pronounced them all guilty of disobedience, or proved and convicted them of disobedience; such may be his thought elsewhere, but here his thought is evidently that God had somehow involved them in disobedience, had somehow occasioned their subjection to it.
II. How can the Pauline view of sin be justified? This ugly and miserable thing-how can it be shown and seen, as occurring under the plan, as accompanying and inevitably bound up with the process of the work of God? Sin comes originally from the Divine awakening in man of that spiritual germ, that moral element in which he surmounts and transcends the animal, from the Divine superinducing upon his first lower nature of a second higher nature; and it is a temporary accompaniment of the conflict between these two, an incident in the course of progress towards a proper and happy adjustment of the relations between them. The end of the Lord is a glorious humanity, emerging at length from the confusion and travail, and the history of the ages is the history of the war between that flesh and spirit, that old and new man which He has conjoined in us for the accomplishment of His grand end. He means to have mercy on all, or He would not, could not, have sown in us what has led to the concluding of all in sin.
S. A. Tipple, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxxi., p. 104.
Romans 2
The Practical Outcome of Judaism.
I. The first thing on which St. Paul lays anxious stress in this passage is this: The judgment of God according to men’s works is just, inevitable, and impartial. It is a judgment according to works which the Jew ought, on theory, to challenge. For he seeks to be saved by a “law”-that is, by a thing to be done. If he is to be justified at all, it must be through the coincidence of his life with that rule of living which God gave to his nation and on which he plumes himself. Every one knows, even without any special help from revelation, that the judgment of God against the evil-doer is according to truth; and His judgment is inescapable and universal.
II. So far St. Paul has merely been laying down an abstract theory of the Divine impartiality in retribution. He has not yet spoken of the Hebrew law. He does not at first name Jew or Gentile. He addresses his antagonist simply as a man who presumes to judge others for sins of which he himself is no less guilty. At this point, however, he begins to regard his reader as a Jew, separated from the unclean and ignorant heathen by his privileged standing under the Mosaic law; only, instead of recognising the difference which this creates as telling in the Jew’s favour, he unexpectedly turns it against him. It gives him nothing but a fatal pre-eminence in guilt and judgment. It is a miserable delusion to fancy that the privilege of hearing God tell us our duty lifts us above responsibility in doing it, or sets us beyond the reach of judgment for not doing it. Nay, it only confers on us, if we sin, a shameful pre-eminence in sinfulness, and when we are judged a fatal priority of condemnation.
III. All through the present discussion St. Paul has taken it for granted that the essence of criminality lies in unfaithfulness to known duty. On the same principle he now turns that very knowledge of the law on which his Jewish countrymen relied into a weapon against them: “Wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thyself.”
J. Oswald Dykes, The Gospel according to St. Paul, p. 38.
Reference: 2-Expositor, 1st series, vol. iii., p. 151.
Fuente: The Sermon Bible
CHAPTER 2
1. The Gentile Moralist and Reformer and His Condemnation. (Rom 2:1-6.)
2. The Two Classes. (Rom 2:7-16.)
3. The State of the Jew. (Rom 2:17-29.)
Rom 2:1-6
But in the heathen world there were such who gave witness against the immoral condition, the different vices. There were Moralists, Reformers and Philosophers like Socrates, Seneca and others. They judged and condemned certain evils. But God declares that they were not a whit better than the rest. The very things they condemned they were guilty of themselves. One of their own writers declared, I see the good and approve of it and follow the evil. Thus they practiced evil, because the same evil heart was in them; in spite of their ethical writings, they were corrupt. And this is not confined to heathen moralists in the past, the same is true of others during this age, who judged existing evils and condemned them, while later they were found out to do the very things they condemned. Such is the unregenerated heart of man. They cannot escape the judgment of God. They were impenitent, despising the riches of His goodness and were treasuring up unto themselves wrath against the days of wrath.
Rom 2:7-16
God is righteous and He will render every man according to his deeds. Then two classes are mentioned. The first are those who by patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, and to that class God will give eternal life. (Eternal life is here not, as in Johns Gospel a present possession. but is that to be entered in after death.) How is this to be applied? Does this answer the question how man is to be saved? it does not, but it is the question of Gods moral government. Man in his unconverted state cannot obtain eternal life by patient continuance in well doing, for we read later that Gods Word declares there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Man cannot seek for glory for it is written, there is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God (3:11). On these terms no human being can obtain eternal life. Man is a sinner and all the wages he can earn is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord (6:23). If eternal life is received by faith in Jesus Christ then man is able to do right and live the life that pleases God. Then there is the other class; those who obey not the truth, who live in unrighteousness, who reject His Word. Indignation and wrath is in store for such and this is the condition in which Jews and Gentiles are by nature Among whom also we (Jews) all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath even as others (Gentiles) (Eph 2:3). God states in these verses the principles on which He judges according to mans works, and as man is a sinner and cannot do good works, man is therefore under condemnation.
And likewise there is no respect of persons with God. The Jew may boast of a higher place than the Gentile, but God deals with all alike. The Gentiles had not the law and therefore sinned without law and they cannot escape the righteous judgment of God. They had the witness in Creation, as seen from the first chapter, and besides this there is conscience and that witnesses of what is sin; they have the knowledge of good and evil and are therefore morally responsible. They turned from God and they will be judged apart from the law; but it is more than that they shall perish without the law. That completely answers the teaching that the mercy of God covers in some way the heathen world and that the heathen are not lost. And the Jews had the law and did not keep it. Could the possession of the Law make them just before God? Certainly not, for not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse, for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the law to do them (Gal 3:10). And theirs will be the greater judgment, for they knew His will and did not according to His will and shall be beaten with many stripes (Luk 12:47). The entire passage deals with the judgment of a righteous God and that neither the Gentile without the law nor the Jew with the law is righteous before God, but that both classes must fall under the judgment of God. And there is a day appointed when this righteous judgment will be executed by the Son of Man, our Lord. And that none can be just by doing is seen in Pauls defense of the Gospel.
Rom 2:17-29
Then the case of the Jew is more specially considered. He possessed the Law, the Holy Scriptures. And he rested in the law; the Apostle knew something of that in his own experience for he had declared that touching the righteousness which is in the law he thought himself blameless. (Php 3:6). The Jew still does the same thing. He rests in the law and in the obedience to it for righteousness. But the law was never given for man to obtain righteousness. For by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified (Gal 2:16). The law was given to convict of sin and not as a means to obtain righteousness. All the outward righteousness of which the Jew boasted, especially in the strictest sect of the Pharisees, was but an attempt to cover the inward corruption of a heart which cannot bring forth the fruits of righteousness. The Scribes and Pharisees were like unto white sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead bones, and of all uncleanness (Mat 23:27). Self-righteous, despising others, condemning others-such was the state of the Jew, as he rested in the law, boasted of God and as being instructed out of the law. But the Spirit of God now uncovers his true condition. They violated that law. All the sins forbidden by the law were secretly and publicly committed by them. They dishonored God so much so that the name of God was blasphemed among Gentiles through them. Their whole history bears witness to all which is written in these verses. In Ezekiels message we read that they profaned His name among the heathen (Eze 36:20-23). And this condition is the same among ritualistic, law and ordinance keeping, professing Christians, who are religious, but unsaved. They boast in what they do and what they possess and yet they live in sin, and their conduct belies their profession.
Especially did the Jew boast of his circumcision as a means of having favor with God, as nominal Christians trust in the sacraments as the means of salvation. But circumcision or ordinances cannot save man and make him right before God. And besides this, circumcision had become a reproach among the Gentiles, because the Jews had dishonored God and denied the true meaning of circumcision. (Separation.) 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 Lords 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 (the word Jew means Praise) is found with Him who sees the heart. (Numerical Bible.)
Outward observances have no value; it is the heart which needs circumcision. They boasted in circumcision and all the time denied and broke the law. Rom 2:29 is often misused by certain sects who claim that all the Jewish promises are now fulfilled in those who are Jews inwardly, that is Christians, and that Christians are the spiritual Israel and should keep the seventh day as Sabbath, etc. These arguments reveal ignorance in the scope of this Epistle. It is simply to prove the Jew with his boast in circumcision is lost. There is a circumcision of the heart, in the Spirit. Of this Paul wrote to the Philippians, We are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
Therefore: Rom 1:18-20
O man: Rom 2:3, Rom 9:20, 1Co 7:16, Jam 2:20
whosoever: Rom 2:26, Rom 2:27, 2Sa 12:5-7, Psa 50:16-20, Mat 7:1-5, Mat 23:29-31, Luk 6:37, Luk 19:22, Joh 8:7-9, Jam 4:11
for thou that: Rom 2:3, Rom 2:21-23
Reciprocal: Gen 38:24 – let her Deu 26:10 – I have 1Sa 14:33 – transgressed 2Sa 3:25 – that he came 2Ch 23:13 – Treason Eze 16:52 – which hast Eze 16:63 – and never Luk 6:41 – why Luk 6:42 – cast Luk 10:14 – General Luk 12:14 – Man Luk 15:4 – man Joh 8:15 – judge Joh 15:22 – cloak Rom 1:20 – so that they are Rom 1:32 – knowing Rom 3:9 – proved Rom 3:19 – that Rom 3:22 – for there Rom 3:23 – all have 1Co 4:5 – judge Jam 4:12 – who
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
THE HEATHEN WORLD of nineteen centuries ago had however in its midst a number of peoples who were highly civilized. The apostle Paul knew that he was as regards the Gospel as much a debtor to the Greek who was wise, as to the Barbarian who was unwise. As we open chapter 2, we find him turning from the one to the other. His style becomes very graphic. It is almost as if at this point he saw a highly refined and polished Greek standing by, and quite approving of his denunciation of the enormities of the poor Barbarians. So he wheeled round and boldly charged him with doing in a refined way the very same things as in their grosser forms he condemned in the Barbarian. Thereby he too stands before God without excuse, for in judging others he condemned himself.
Under the term, Greek, the Apostle included all those peoples who at that time had been educated and refined under the influence of Grecian culture. The Roman himself would come under the term. They were fine fellows externally, brainy, intelligent and fond of reasoning. In the first eleven verses of this chapter Paul reasons with them as to righteousness and judgment to come, and where can you match these verses for pungency and brevity and power?
The Greeks had a certain code of outward morality. They loved beauty and strength and cultivated their bodies to these ends. This alone preserved them from the deadly excesses of the barbarians. Yet they knew how to indulge themselves discreetly, how to sin scientifically. The same feature marks our age. A present day slogan in the world might be, Dont sin coarsely and clumsily, sin scientifically. Under such circumstances it is very easy for men to deceive themselves; very easy to imagine that, if only one approves good things in theory, and avoids the grosser manifestations of evil, one is secure oneself from the judgment of God.
Take note of three steps in Pauls argument:-
1. The judgment of God is according to truth. (v. Rom 2:2). Truth means reality. No unreality will stand in the presence of God, but everything be manifested as it is. A poor prospect for the Greek, whose virtues were only skin deep.
2. There is too the revelation of the righteous judgment of God. (v. Rom 2:5). A wretched criminal may have the truth of his crime dragged into the light, yet if the presiding judge be incompetent or unrighteous he may escape. The Divine judgments are righteous as well as according to truth.
3. There is no respect of persons with God. (v. Rom 2:11). In some countries today respect of persons provides the undoubted criminal with an avenue of escape. Favouritism does its work, or other influences behind the scenes, or even bribery is set in motion, and the offender escapes the penalty he deserves. It will never be thus with God.
There is, then, no avenue of escape for the refined sinner or mere moralist. Indeed, it would appear that he will come in for severer condemnation. His very knowledge heightens his guilt, for repentance is the goal to which the goodness of God would lead him, but he despises Gods goodness in the hardness of his heart and so treasures up wrath to himself.
The statements of verses Rom 2:6-11 present a difficulty to some minds inasmuch as in them no mention is made of faith in Christ. Some read verse Rom 2:7, for instance, and say, There! So after all you have only got to keep on doing good and seeking good, and eternal life will be yours at the end. We have only to read on a little further however, and we discover that no one does good or seeks good, except he believes in Christ.
The ground of judgment before God is our works. If anyone does truly believe in the Saviour he experiences salvation, and hence has power to do what is good and to continue in it. Moreover the whole object of his life is changed, and he begins to seek glory and honour and that state of incorruptibility which is to be ours at the coming of the Lord. On the other hand there are all too many who, instead of obeying the truth by believing the Gospel, remain slaves of sin. The works of these will receive well-merited condemnation in the day of judgment.
At this point in the argument someone might wish to say, Well, but all these people had never had the advantage of knowing Gods holy law, as the Jew had. Is it right to condemn them like this? Paul felt this, and so added verses Rom 2:12-16. He stated that those who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law in the day when God judges by Jesus Christ. Whereas those who have sinned without having the light of the law will not be held responsible for that light:-nevertheless they will perish. Verses Rom 2:13-15 are a parenthesis, you notice. To get the sense you read on from verse Rom 2:12 to verse Rom 2:16.
The parenthesis shows us that many things which the law demanded were of such a nature that men knew they were wrong in their hearts without any law being given. And further men had the warning voice of conscience as to these things even when they had no knowledge of the law of Moses. Go where you will you find that men, even the most degraded, have a certain amount of natural light or instinct as to things that are right or wrong. Also they have conscience, and thoughts which either accuse or excuse. Hence there is a ground of judgment against them apart from the law.
When God judges men by Jesus Christ there will be a third ground of judgment. Not only natural conscience, and the law, but also according to my Gospel. Judgment will not be set until the fulness of gospel testimony has gone forth. Those who are judged and condemned as having been in the light of the Gospel will fare far worse than those condemned as in the light of the law or of conscience. And in that day the secrets of men are to be judged, though their condemnation will be on the ground of works.
Oh, what a day will the day of judgment be! May we have a deep sense of its impending terrors. May we earnestly labour to save at least some from ever having to face it.
Having dealt with the Barbarian and the Greek, proving that both alike are without excuse and subject to the judgment of God, the Apostle turns to consider the case of the Jew. The graphic style with which he started chapter 2 continues to the end of the chapter. He seems to see a Jew standing by as well as a Greek, and in verse Rom 2:17 he turns from the one to address the other.
The Jew not only possessed the witness of creation, and of natural conscience, but also of the law. The law brought him a knowledge of God and of His will, which placed him far above all others in religious matters.
He made, however, one great mistake. He treated the law as something in which he could boast, and therefore it ministered to his pride. Says the Apostle, thou… restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God. He did not realize that the law was not given to him as something in which to rest, but as something to act as a test.
The test is applied to him from verse Rom 2:21 to the end of the chapter. He comes out of it with his reputation utterly shattered. True he had the form of knowledge and truth in the law, but it all acted as a two-edged sword. He had been so busy turning its keen edge against other people that he entirely overlooked its application to himself. He viewed it for others as a standard-as a plumb-line or spirit level-but for himself he thought it a personal adornment, a feather to be stuck in his cap.
Do not let us be at all surprised at his doing this, for it is just what we all do naturally. We pride ourselves upon our privileges and forget their corresponding responsibilities.
Each question in verses Rom 2:21, Rom 2:22-23 is like a sword-thrust. To each implied accusation the Jew had to plead guilty. He had the law truly, but by breaking it he dishonoured God, whose law it was. Indeed, their guilt was so flagrant that the Gentiles looked at the Jews and blasphemed God, whose representatives they were.
This being the state of affairs it was useless their falling back upon the fact that they were Gods circumcised people. The argument of verses Rom 2:25-29 is very important. It is not official position, which is an outward thing, that counts before God and puts right what is wrong. It is the inward thing that God values. God would have respect to the one who obeys, even were he an uncircumcised Gentile. He would reject the disobedient, even were he the circumcised Jew.
Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary
The Wrath and Judgments of God
Rom 1:32; Rom 2:1-12
INTRODUCTORY WORDS
As we listen to the pulsings of twentieth century thought, we find that God is not only being denied by many, but his wrath against unrighteousness and His judgments against sin are being generally set aside by the ungodly.
A study of the Word of God reveals that God’s love and goodness in no sense lessens the severity of His judgment against the ungodly.
Grace does not make justice negligible; it rather makes it more severe. Love does not make sin less sinful, nor does it make sin’s punishment less severe. Mercy in no wise lessens wrath.
What grace does, is to make God’s love operative by sustaining every legal demand of the Law for righteousness, by the death of a Substitute. Grace transferred wrath from the sinner to the Saviour. Grace not only sustained the Law, but it fully met the righteous judgments of God against the sinner for his sins, by placing stripes due the ungodly upon the God-sent Son.
He who mocks at the righteousness of God’s wrath, and the honor of God’s judgments, should stop at the Cross and behold the agonies of the Son of God, as He went His weary way around the cycle of His sufferings, the Just dying for the unjust.
He who denies hell, would make Heaven impossible; for Christ’s descent into hades only makes the believer’s ascent into Heaven possible.
When the world believes that there is no judgment for sin; no punishment for the wicked-then sin will run riot on the earth. “Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.”
The wicked have set themselves against faith in any Divine justice ever overtaking them; they have tried to persuade themselves that God doth not know, or that if He does know, He is good and does not punish the guilty; yet these same wicked men have never failed to call down judgment on the heads of those who sin against themselves.
If law, judgment, and punishment is removed from any land, red-handed murder and repine will rule the day.
We will bring out various aspects of God’s wrath and of His judgments against sin, which should help students to understand better some things we may not have considered from God’s viewpoint.
Hasten, sinner, to be blest!
Stay not for the morrow’s sun,
Lest perdition thee arrest,
Ere the morrow is begun.
I. THE FACT OF GOD’S WRATH (Rom 1:18)
The wrath of God against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men is not a matter of conjecture, and of discussion pro and cons for it is a revealed wrath. This is the statement of our text.
The preceding verse says that the “righteousness” of God is also revealed in the Gospel of Christ. In Rom 1:20 God’s eternal power and Godhead is said to be clearly seen, so that also is revealed.
The man who rebels against the revelation of God’s wrath as set forth in Rom 1:18, must of necessity, therefore, rebel against God’s righteousness, and even against God’s eternal power and Godhead.
There is no room for finding fault because God has revealed His wrath. It is fact and not fancy. It is impossible for men to live in ungodliness-that is, a wrong relationship with God: and in unrighteousness-that is, with wrong relationships toward men, without meriting the wrath of God.
All down through the ages God has manifested His wrath against sin, whether it be sin toward God or sin toward man. In the very beginning God’s wrath fell on Adam and he was expelled from the garden. Cain came next under the wrath of God and he cried, “My punishment is greater than I can bear.” Soon the whole world became evil and was corrupted before God and it was overthrown with the flood. The Tower of Babel, the mark of man’s vaulted pride was cast down; the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were overthrown; the Egyptians were drowned in the Red Sea; the seven nations dwelling in the land of Canaan with the cup of their iniquity full were destroyed, and thus the wrath of God swept on and still it sweeps.
Our theme is correct for God’s wrath is a fact and not a fancy. Men cannot live as they list, giving vent to every desire of the flesh, without paying the penalty thereof.
The hand of God is still writing our judgment and condemnation on the wall.
So our deeds are recorded-
There’s a Hand that’s writing now:
Sinner, give your heart to Jesus-
To His royal mandate bow;
For the day is approaching-
It must come to one and all,
When the sinner’s condemnation
Will be written on the wall.
II. THE WORKERS OF INIQUITY ARE INEXCUSABLE (Rom 1:20; Rom 2:1)
The world is full of excuses. Cain was one of the first to excuse his sin by saying, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” There is scarcely a sin toward God or man, be it ever so vile, but what man will seek to excuse himself. Our first verse says that men are without excuse. Our second verse says, “Thou art inexcusable, O man.”
The wicked may proclaim that their wicked deeds cannot be avoided, but God says, “They are without excuse.” One man says that his fiery temper and uncontrollable wrath was inherited from his parents, but God says, “Thou art inexcusable.” Another man says that the lusts of the flesh were dominant in his nature and that he could not but yield to their desire, but God says that he is without excuse. Man says that he did not know any better, that his sins are sins of ignorance, but God says that he cannot thus excuse himself.
No matter what power sin may have in the life of any of the ungodly; no matter what sway of the world; no matter what power of Satan; the sinner is without excuse because God has provided a way of escape from all of these.
Why should man continue in sin, or remain a dupe and slave to sin’s power, when the Gospel of Christ is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth-a Gospel that saves from these very things.
“For the Lion of Judah shall break every chain,
And give us the victory again and again.”
Even the heathen, who have never known of the Gospel are without excuse, because they have not lived according to the light which they possess. When they knew God they glorified Him not as God neither were thankful. The very ignorance in which they now dwell is due to the fact that when they professed themselves to be wise, they became fools. When they changed His glory into an image made like corruptible man, and to birds and four-footed beasts and creeping things. When they had the truth of God, they changed it into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator.
The world cannot plead that it did not know that the wrath of God was revealed against sin, ungodliness and unrighteousness of man, because the wreckage of God’s judgment has covered the world with its debris.
There is no excuse that men can bring in honor because God has dealt fairly and squarely and above board with all sin and iniquity.
Look unto Me, and be ye saved!
Look, men of nations all;
Look, rich and poor; look, old and young;
Look sinners, great and small!
Look unto Him, and be ye saved!
O weary, troubled soul,
Oh, look to Jesus while you may;
One look will make thee whole!
III. THE WICKED ARE WORTHY OF DEATH (Rom 1:32)
We have just been noticing the fact that man is inexcusable for his sin. We are now to consider that man is worthy of the judgment which God places upon him. If man had the least excuse for sinning just to that extent God’s judgment would not be just. The opposite is also true. If the wicked are worthy of death, they are necessarily without excuse in their sins.
The Bible teaches that death is the wages of sin. A man is reaping no more than what he has sown. According to this, the sinner so to speak, is the author of his own destruction. He, himself, gathers the fuel to feed the fire which shall for ever torment his soul. He sows the seed of the maddened brain; he plants the germ that develops the woes and the miseries, the gnashing of teeth and the wailing of hopeless despair.
The wicked are worthy of death. They are receiving no more than their due. They are only being paid for their deeds. God does not have any pleasure in the death of the wicked. He would that all men everywhere should repent. He is not a tyrant who with ruthless rage casts the just to the tormentors. He, even goes so far as to open the door of hope in the valley of Achor. He offers salvation by the way of the Cross to the vilest of the vile.
Man is worthy of death because man has rejected proffers of mercy. He has spurned the opportunity of righteousness. He has given a deaf ear to the call of the Gospel.
Instead of heeding what he hears, he has given himself over to unrighteousness, being filled with fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful. Men who live in these things are worthy of death.
IV. GOD’S JUDGMENTS CANNOT BE ESCAPED (Rom 2:3)
The argument as God has given it to us is steadily mounting up. The net is being more tightly drawn, and the sinner is being more surely entangled in his unrighteousness. Sometimes the sinner will recognize that he is inexcusable, he will even concede that he is worthy of death, and yet he will seek to escape his just punishment.
There are criminals all over the land who have evaded justice. There are men everywhere who are trying to hide their sins. Men need, however, to know that they cannot deceive God.
Where can the sinner go, that God will not find him? God has said, “Though thou exalt thyself as the eagle, and though thou set thy nest among the stars, thence will I bring thee down.” All things which a man doeth, and all things which a man is in his heart, are naked and open unto Him with whom we have to do.
Our Lord looks down from Heaven and all things are before His eye. He knows our downsitting and our uprising. He understands our thoughts afar off. Our God is acquainted with all our ways. There is not a word in our tongue but what He knows it altogether. How can men hide from God? for He has beset them behind and before. Where may men fly from His Spirit? or where may they hide from His presence? Listen to the Word of God, “If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me. If I say, Surely the darkness shall cover me; even the night shall be light about me. Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee: but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to thee. For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb” (Psa 139:8-13).
It is useless to evade the issue. The wicked must stand before the Great White Throne and face the records of their lives. They cannot escape meeting God.
Where will you spend Eternity-
Those years that have no end?
Will it be where you are debarred
Ever to know and see the Lord?
Ever to have His great reward?
V. THERE IS A SET DAY OF WRATH (Rom 2:5; Rom 2:16)
In the fifth verse we read that man is treasuring up wrath against the day of wrath. In the sixteenth verse we read that there is a day when God shall judge the secrets of men.
1. This is the day of grace. We are convinced that God frequently judges unrighteousness now, and sends terrific manifestations of wrath, but these are no more than suggestive of the great sorrow and travail which awaits the wicked.
In this age for the most part, God is allowing men to reap no more than the wreckage which his own sin now involves. God is now calling men to repentance. God is now proffering grace. Heralders of the Gospel are being commanded to go to the ends of the world and to preach to every creature the redemption which is in Christ Jesus. Songs of salvation are being sung. Altar calls are being made, the Holy Spirit is striving with men. We can still say, “Behold, now is the accepted time, behold, now is the day of salvation.”
When Christ entered Nazareth, He said in the Temple, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He hath anointed Me to preach the Gospel to the poor.” He was reading from the Prophet Isaiah and He read on through the most gracious of words until He came to the expression “and the day of vengeance of our God.” Before He read these latter words, He suddenly stopped, and said, of the words which He had just spoken, “This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears.” He did not read the statement concerning the day of vengeance because He knew that that day of vengeance had not yet come.
2. The day of vengeance and of judgment is a set day. The angel of God’s grace who has hastened before giving proffers of mercy and of salvation must soon step aside, that the angel of His wrath may unsheath his sword.
Time is gliding swiftly by,
Death and judgment draweth nigh,
To the arms of Jesus fly:
Be in time!
Oh, I pray you count the cost,
Ere the fatal line be crossed,
And your soul in hell be lost:
Be in time!
Sinner, heed the warning voice,
Make the Lord your final choice,
Then all heaven will rejoice:
Be in time!
Come from darkness into light;
Come, let Jesus make you right;
Come, and start for Heaven tonight,
Be in time!
VI. WRATH IS INCREASED BY KNOWLEDGE (Rom 1:19; Rom 1:21; Rom 1:32)
It was because that, when men knew God, yet glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, that God gave them up. If man had been ignorant and had not known God it would have been different. However, man not only knew God but He also knew the judgment of God.
If no ray of light, revealing God both in grace and in judgment, had ever come to man, sin had not been reckoned against him.
That which makes sin exceedingly sinful is its willfulness; its stubborn refusal to accept the right.
It is because men love darkness rather than light that their darkness is made the darker; it is because men refuse righteousness that God gives them up to iniquity. He who knew not his master’s will and did it not was beaten with few stripes. While he who knew his master’s will and did it not was beaten with many stripes.
In the day of judgment it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon than for Chorazin and Bethsaida for, “if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.”
In the day of judgment it will be more tolerable for Sodom than for Capernaum, not but that Sodom was morally more vile, but that Capernaum had been exalted unto Heaven by the presence, the words, and the miracle working of the Son of God, which Sodom had never known. Christ said to Capernaum, “If the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.”
Sinners who live in this day of grace with the blazing light of the glory of God’s grace bursting full around them should beware lest they by their refusal are treasuring up unto themselves wrath against the day of wrath. In the silent midnight watches,
List-thy bosom’s door!
How it knocketh, knocketh, knocketh,
Knocketh evermore!
Say not ’tis thy pulse is beating-
‘Tis thy heart of sin;
‘Tis thy Saviour knocks, and crieth,
“Rise, and let Me in!”
Death comes down with reckless footsteps
To the hall and hut;
Think you death will tarry knocking
When the door is shut?
Jesus waiteth, waiteth, waiteth;
But the door is fast:
Grieved, away thy Saviour goeth,
Death breaks in at last.
Then ’tis time to stand entreating
Christ to let thee in;
At the gate of Heaven beating,
Wailing for thy sin!
Nay! alas, thou guilty creature.
Hast thou then forgot?
Jesus waited long to know thee,
Now He knows thee not!
VII. THE JUDGMENTS OF GOD ARE RIGHTEOUS ALTOGETHER (Rom 2:2; Rom 2:5)
The day of wrath of which we have just heard will bring forth the revelation of the righteous judgment of God. God’s judgments will be according to truth.
At the Great White Throne no sinner will be able to say that he got more than his dues, nor will he receive less. Those who are contentious and obey not the truth but obey unrighteousness will receive indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish. Mark the word, this will befall every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first and also of the Gentile.
All the wicked, all unbelievers, all the fearful and the abominable and murderers will have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone, and yet all shall receive according to the sins done in the body.
When the dead small and great stand before God, the Books which carry the records of their earth deeds will be opened, and every man will be judged out of those things which were written in the Book according to their works.
When death and hell are cast into the lake of fire, and God’s judgments are completed, there will be no room for disputes and no reasons for an appeal to a higher court. God’s judgments are not only final but they are eternally just.
AN ILLUSTRATION
IN A RING OF FIRE
An ungodly European was once trying to convince a convert in India that his religion was of no use, and that he never would be any the better for it. “What, after all,” said the scoffer, “has your Jesus done for you?”
“He has saved me!” said the native, with great animation: “He has saved me!”
“And what is that?” said the European.
“Step with me to the door,” was the reply, “and I will show you.” So saying, he took him outside of the house, picked up a quantity of dry leaves and straw (of which there were plenty close at hand), and made a large circle of them. He then sought for a worm; and, having found one, he placed it in the center of the ring. Forthwith he applied a lighted match to the material that surrounded it, the scoffer looking on all the time with no little astonishment. As the heat of the fire approached the poor worm, it began to writhe and show symptoms of distress, but could not get out of the burning ring. The man darted his hand through the smoke, plucked the worm out of its dangerous position, and placed it on the green grass, out of reach of all danger.
“There,” said he, “that is what the blessed Jesus has done for me: I was exposed to the flames of hell-there was no possibility of escape; I was condemned and ready to perish, and He rescued me by dying for my sins, thus snatching me as a brand from the burning; and He has given me, a poor dying worm, a place near His heart,”
Can you thus speak of yourself as saved fay the death of Jesus? Are you able to say, like the poor native, “He has saved me”? It not, we entreat you to come now, as a sinner, to Jesus, who is at the right hand of the Majesty on high, and He will give you rest. Take shelter in His blood, and you will be cleansed from sin, and delivered from the wrath to come.
“When we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly” (Rom 5:6).
“Deliver him from going down to the pit: I have found a ransom” (Job 33:24).
“Thou hast in love to my soul delivered it from the pit of corruption: for Thou hast cast all my sins behind Thy back” (Isa 38:17).
Fuente: Neighbour’s Wells of Living Water
2:1
Rom 2:1. Before reading further into this chapter, I shall insist that the reader see the comments on chapter 1:7, then come back to this place. The closing verses of that chapter pertain to the evil practices of the Gentiles. The Jews were free in their condemnation of the Gentiles, yet they were just as guilty, in principle, as were the Gentiles; therefore this chapter will be directed against them. In condemning the Gentiles for their iniquities, they condemned themselves for things as bad in principle.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Rom 2:1. Therefore. This refers to the preceding section (Rom 2:18-29), especially to the inexcusableness of the heathen, the culminating proof of which is found in Rom. 2:32.
Without excuse; as in chap. Rom 1:20.
O man, whosoever thou art, etc. The application to the Jews (Rom 2:17, etc.) shows that they are now in the Apostles mind; moreover this judgment of others was characteristic of the Jews. But what he says is true of every one whosoever he is (see above).
Wherein. In the matter in which.
Another. Lit, the other; as it is rendered in 1Co 10:29. We would use thy neighbor to express the thought, but the Jew would not call a Gentile neighbor.
Condemnest. There is a verbal correspondence in the original between judgest and condemnest.
For thou that judgest, etc. This is the proof of the self-condemnation; for the judgment pronounced upon others applies to the mans own conduct. There is a reproachful emphasis upon thou that judgest.
Practisest. The verb is the same as in chap. Rom 1:32, and in Rom 2:27; both it and the corresponding noun have usually a bad sense.
The same things. Not the same deeds, but of the same moral quality. The censorious spirit is of the same sinful character as vice; the most moral men have sinful natures, and are kept from open transgression only by the grace of God, or by a pride which is no less sinful than vice.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Lest the Jews should swell and be puffed up with pride, by hearing what the apostle said in the former chapter, of the detestable wickedness of the Gentiles, and the heavy displeasure of God against them for the same; St. Paul in this chapter pronounces the Jews to be guilty of the same sins of which he had accused the Gentiles, affirming, that the Jews had offended as much against the law of Moses, as the Gentiles had offended against the law of nature; and consequently, their censuring and judging others, when they did the same things themselves, would render them totally inexcusable at God’s tribunal. Therefore thou ar inexcusable, Oh man, that judgest another, and by doing the same things condemnest thyself.
Learn hence, 1. That it is too usual and common a practice to condemn that sin in another which men practise themselves.
2. That when persons commit themselves the sins which they censure and condemn in others, they are totally inexcusable, and pronounce sentence against themselves.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Rom 2:1. Therefore, &c. The apostle, having shown that the Gentiles could not entertain the least hope of salvation, according to the tenor of the law of nature, which they violated, proceeds next to consider whether the law of Moses gave the Jews any better hope; an inquiry which he manages with great address. For, well knowing that on reading his description of the manners of the Greeks, the Jews would pronounce them worthy of damnation, he suddenly turns his discourse to the Jews, by telling them that they who passed such a judgment on the Gentiles were equally, yea, more guilty themselves, in that, with the advantage of the greater light of divine revelation, they were guilty of crimes as great as those he had charged on the Gentiles; and that therefore, by condemning the Gentiles, they virtually condemned themselves. Thou art inexcusable, O man Seeing that knowledge without practice only increases guilt; whosoever thou art, that judgest That censurest and condemnest; for wherein thou judgest another Greek, , the other Namely, the heathen, and pronouncest them worthy of condemnation and wrath; thou condemnest thyself As deserving the same: for thou that judgest doest the same things. According to Josephus, quoted here by Dr. Whitby, the Jews of that age were notoriously guilty of most of the crimes imputed to the Greeks and Romans in the preceding chapter. There was not, observes he, a nation under heaven more wicked than they were. What have you done, says he, addressing them, of all the good things required by our lawgiver? What have you not done of all those things which he pronounced accursed? So that, adds he, had the Romans delayed to come against these execrable persons, I believe either the earth would have swallowed them up, or a deluge would have swept away their city; or fire from heaven would have consumed it, as it did Sodom, for it brought forth a generation of men far more wicked than they who suffered such things. It was sport to them to force women: and they exercised and required unnatural lusts, and filled the whole city with impurities. They committed all kinds of wickedness, omitting none which ever came into the mind of man; esteeming the worst of evils to be good, and meeting with that reward of their iniquity which was proper, and a judgment worthy of God. The apostle, Mr. Locke thinks, represents the Jews as inexcusable in judging the Gentiles, especially because the latter, with all the darkness that was on their minds, were not guilty of such a folly as to judge those who were not more faulty than themselves, but lived on friendly terms with them, without censure or separation, thinking as well of their condition as of their own. For he considers the judging, which Paul here speaks of, as referring to that aversion which the Jews generally had to the Gentiles, in consequence of which the unconverted Jews could not bear with the thoughts of a Messiah that admitted the heathen equally with themselves into his kingdom; nor could the converted Jews be brought to admit them into their communion, as the people of God, now equally with themselves; so that they generally, both one and the other, judged them unworthy the favour of God, and incapable of becoming his people any other way than by circumcision, and an observance of the ritual law; the inexcusableness and absurdity of which the apostle shows in this chapter.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fifth Passage (2:1-29). The Wrath of God Suspended over the Jewish People.
In the midst of this flood of pollutions and iniquities which Gentile society presents to view, the apostle sees one who like a judge from the height of his tribunal sends a stern look over the corrupt mass, condemning the evil which reigns in it, and applauding the wrath of God which punishes it. It is this new personage whom he apostrophizes in the following words:
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
Wherefore thou art without excuse, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest dost practise the same thing. [The apostle, it will be remembered, is proving the universal insufficiency of human righteousness, that he may show the universal need of a revealed righteousness. Having made good his case against one part of the human race–the Gentiles, he now proceeds to a like proof against the other part–the Jews. He does not name them as Jews at the start, for this would put them on the defensive, and made his task harder. He speaks to them first as individuals, without any reference to race, for the Jew idolized his race, and would readily admit a defect in himself which he would have denied in his race. But Paul, by thus convicting each of sin in his own conscience, makes them all unwittingly concede sin in all, even though Jews. It was the well-known characteristic of the Jews to indulge in pharisaical judgment and condemnation of others (Mat 7:1; Luk 18:14), especially the Gentiles (Act 11:3; Gal 2:15). The apostle knew, therefore, that his Jewish readers would be listening with gloating elation to this his castigation of the Gentiles, and so, even in this their moment of supreme self-complacency, he turns his lash upon them, boldly accusing them of having committed some of the things which they condemned, and, hence, of being in the same general state of unrighteousness, though, perhaps, on a somewhat less degraded plane. To condemn another for his sin is to admit that the sin in question leads to and justifies condemnation as to all who commit it, even including self. The thought of this verse is, as indicated by its opening “Wherefore,” closely connected with the preceding chapter, and seems to form a climax, thus: The simple sinner is bad, the encourager of sin in others is worse, but the one who condemns sins in others, yet commits them himself, is absolutely defenseless and without excuse. Whitby has collected from Josephus the passages which show that Paul’s arraignment of the Jews is amply justifiable.]
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Romans Chapter 2
Two things are presented here with respect to God; His judgment against evil-the evil-doer shall not escape (the real difference of right and wrong would be maintained by judgment); and His mercy, patience, and long-suffering with regard to the evil-doer-His goodness inviting him to repentance. He who continued in evil deceived himself by trying to forget the sure judgment of God and by despising His goodness. The consequences, both of a life opposed to God and to His truth on the one hand, and of the search after that which is pleasing to Him, and thereby for eternal life on the other, were sure-tribulation and anguish in the one case, in the other glory and honour; and that without more respect to the Jews than to the Gentiles.
God judged things according to their true moral character, and according to the advantages which the guilty one had enjoyed. [9] Those who had sinned without law should perish without law, and those who had sinned under the law should be judged according to the law, in the day when God should judge the secrets of the heart according to the gospel which Paul preached. This character of the judgment is very important. It is not the government of the world by an earthly and outward judgment, as the Jew understood it, but that of the individual according to Gods knowledge of the heart.
Also God would have realities. The Gentile who fulfilled the law was better than a Jew who broke it. If he called himself a Jew and acted ill (chap. 2:17), he only dishonoured God, and caused His name to be blasphemed among the Gentiles whilst boasting in his privileges. He then enlarges on the point that God requires moral reality, and that a Gentile who did that which the law demanded was better worth than a Jew who disobeyed it, and that the real Jew was he who had the law in his heart, being circumcised also in the spirit, and not he who had only outward circumcision. This was a condition which God could praise, and not man only.
Footnotes for Romans Chapter 2
9: How strikingly this also brings out what so breaks everywhere through the doctrine of this epistle that everything is according to its reality before God, God being revealed through Christ and the cross. All must take its true character and result according to what He was. Note moreover that the terms suppose gospel knowledge-seek for glory, honour, and incorruptibility. These are known by Christianity.
Fuente: John Darby’s Synopsis of the New Testament
ATTITUDE OF THE CHURCH MEMBERS
1. Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, every one that judgest; for in whatsoever thou judgest another thou condemneth thyself; for thou that judgest art doing the same things. How vividly this verse not only describes the formalistic pew, but the iceberg church member of the present day! The popular preacher stands in the pulpit condemning the outsiders, calling them to repent and join the church; while in the same discourse he confesses that he and his people sin every day in thought, word and deed, and denounces the holiness people as heretics for preaching and professing a religion that saves from all sin, actual and original. Do you not see he is the very man in the text who confesses judgment against himself? True religion in Pauls day was just what it is now, and so is the counterfeit identical with itself in all ages.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Rom 2:1. Therefore thou art inexcusable, oh man, whether Roman or Jew, who judgest another, and doest the same thing thyself, though it may be in some other way. But as the judgment of God is according to truth, for he knows the secrets of the heart, thou canst not escape condemnation. This inference is drawn from the preseding catalogue of crimes.
Rom 2:4. Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness; presuming that because he does not now punish thee, he never will. Pro 29:1. Not knowing, , not acknowledging, or considering that the goodness of God is designed to lead thee to repentance.
Rom 2:5. Treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath, when the full indictment shall be read against thee in presence of the great Judge, with whom is no respect of persons, and when the treasures of wrath shall correspond with the riches of goodness which thou hast despised.
Rom 2:11. There is no respect of persons with God, as stated on Act 10:34. But here the inference is founded on a fair view of providence in the government of the world, that very high visitations do attend lawless and disobedient men, while glory, honour, and peace await on virtuous characters; and without respect to colour or to nation. This was a heavy stroke at Hebrew pride, and a full declaration that every man who sincerely serves God according to the light he has, shall be saved through the great love and mercy of God in Christ Jesus the Lord. See on Rom 2:25.
Rom 2:13. This and the two following verses seem to be a parenthesis. But the doers of the law shall be justified. Great peace have they that love thy law, and nothing shall offend them. The jew under the ancient law was saved by faith, and not by works; yet works at the bar show the fruits of faith. Who then is he that condemneth?
Rom 2:14. The gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law. The apostle had already shown in the preseding chapter that the gentiles were strangers to righteousness, and under a judicial blindness. This was consequent upon their not liking to retain God in their knowledge; and was preseded and accompanied by those demonstrations of his eternal power and godhead which left them without excuse. This was the general state of the gentile world. Nevertheless, God left not himself without witness among them. The excellency which they attained in civil jurisprudence, and the equity of many of their laws, show that they were not left without a moral sense of right and wrong. The dictates of natural conscience, that is, of such conscience as man has without a revelation, and without a written law, ceremonial or moral, show the work of the law written in their hearts; and which enabled them, on many occasions, to act according to justice, mercy, and truth. So I understand the word , by nature. Strictly speaking, the gentiles could not by nature do the things contained in the law; but they were never left in such an absolute state of nature, as to be without some adventitious advantages, derived either from traditional revelation, or from observing the works of creation and providence. They had always a conscience which sat in judgment on all their actions, accusing or else excusing one another. Individuals of the gentiles did actually follow this light, and many became proselytes of the jewish religion. The prayers and the alms of the devout centurion went up for a memorial before God. Act 10:4.
St. Paul is here laying the foundation of an argument which was to convict the unbelieving jews, and to justify the believing gentiles on the principle of faith alone, and without subjection to the ceremonial law. Hence others are of opinion that he alludes not to the gentile world in general, but to the believing gentiles. So PARKHURST. When , gentiles (not , THE gentiles) who have not the law, given by Moses, do, , from a natural disposition or inclination, (bon indole sive natur per Spiritum Sanctum infus) the things of the law, that is, the great duties of religion; these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves, which show the work of the law written in their hearts. This passage probably relates, not to the unconverted, but to the converted gentiles.
(1) Because the being a law unto themselves, and having the law written on their hearts, is the description given by the prophet Jeremiah, and by St. Paul, of the christian state. Jer 31:31. Heb 8:6-13; Heb 10:16. 2Co 3:3.
(2) Because the verbs are in the present tense, and relate to the present, not the past condition of the gentiles; of which the apostle had given such a very different and dreadful description: Rom 1:24.
(3) Because the gentiles who have not the law, and yet do the things of the law, evidently denote the same sort of persons as those who are called, Rom 2:26, the uncircumcision which keepeth the righteousness of the law; and of whom the apostle asks, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
Rom 2:15. The law written in their hearts. If they are injured in character, or defrauded in property, they are all learned in the law, and philosophers in the moral code. If they steal, if they commit fornication, how cautious are they of concealment. If death approach, how dreadful are their fears. All these are dictates of conscience, emanations of the law written in the heart. See on Gen 42:21. Joh 8:8.
Rom 2:17. Thou art called a jew, a priest, a levite, a teacher, whose lives were often very immoral, though they judged and condemned the christians. From their moral character he was bold to repress their pride and insolence by three questions: Dost thou steal? Dost thou commit adultery? Dost thou commit sacrilege? Where then is your boasted circumcision?
Rom 2:25. Circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law, as holy men kept it under the old testament. This he said to the jews, who denied at the same time their obedience to the moral code. But to the Galatians he said, if you are circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. Thus Paul rebuked the boasting pride of the jews. Circumcision, though it availed for salvation to the true children of Abraham, yet to those violators of the law, it was a subject of shame and condemnation. They were men uncircumcised in heart and ear.
Rom 2:29. Circumcision is that of the heart, as Moses had taught. Deu 30:6. Such is the new covenant, as stated by Jeremiah: chap. 31. Thus every battle of the apostle, with the doctors of the legal school, was a victory. How pleasant, how delightful would those words be to the saints of Rome, then exposed to the bitter contentions of the jews. Local circumstances enhanced the value of the holy scriptures.
REFLECTIONS.
The subject is here applied to men who did not obey the light they had, and serve God according to what they really knew to be his will. It is the eloquence of heaven addressed to the conscience of the guilty. We here see the great orator maintaining the rights of God at the supreme bar of equity. If a thief and a robber could not go unpunished from their bar, how should God suffer the guilty world to escape from his tribunal? Tribulation, wrath, anguish, and indignation, must await every class of evil-doers. God as a Father is slow and reluctant to punish offending man. His goodness in the mercies of life, and his forbearance in the administrations of providence, take men by the hand, and lead them to repentance. Terror may awe the wicked, but it is love that melts the heart. He gives us harvests, that we may be grateful; he saves from dangers, that we may own his hand; he recovers from sickness, that we may devote our lives to his glory; he punishes vice, that we may shun it; he opens the gospel in all its glory, that we may fly to his arms, and be converted from our sins. Hence our sermons should be mixed. We must try to gain the mind, and draw the affections. He that has the gift to win souls is wise.
The world shall be judged according to the light of the ages in which men have lived. The heathen, the jew, and the christian, according to his dispensation. What excuse then can sinners have, who presumptuously sin in this age? Let us therefore be awed to repentance by the terrors of divine justice, and let us never pervert privilege as an apology for sin, for with God there is no respect of persons. He has regard on the judgment-seat solely to mens works and moral condition, and he will inflict the most terrible vengeance on enlightened offenders.
From the seventeenth verse we have a very pointed attack on the jews who boasted of privilege, of sacred knowledge, and despised the gentiles; and who nevertheless committed the crimes which were strictly forbidden in the law. The whole train of those arguments applies to the nominal christian with equal force. The uncircumcised gentile who obeyed the law of nature should be saved, while the jew who slighted the law of Moses should be most disgracefully condemned. Hence the inference, that he is a jew, or he is a christian, which is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart. Learn then, oh my soul, sincerely to follow the light thou hast, and the Lord will accept thee in the great day.
Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Rom 2:1-16. Some one interjects: I do not approve, I condemn the sins you describe. Then you condemn yourself, Paul retorts, for you commit them! The Moralist under Condemnation, with the flagitious sinner. Thrice Paul repeats, Thou doest the same (or such-like) things.
Rom 2:1-3; cf. Rom 2:6; Rom 2:9 f., Rom 2:13-15 : not Jews specifically are addressedO man, everyone that judges!
Rom 2:4 f. Whoso thinks to cloak unrighteous doings by his moral creed, is trifling with Gods forbearance and laying up a store of wrath.
Rom 2:6-11. Doom turns on action, not opinion (cf. Jas 2:14-26); good work alone stands either Jew or Greek in stead at the Judgment (1Co 3:14); here lies the proof that one seeks eternal life: the joys and miseries of the future are latent in conduct. Pauls doctrine of judgment by works complements his doctrine of salvation by faith. Faith is the spring of good works; works, the issue and evidence of faith (Eph 2:8-10, 1Th 1:3).
Rom 2:12-16 places Jew and Gentile on equal terms before Gods tribunal, judged by their doings; the law he acknowledges is the criterion for the formerthe mere hearing of which counts for nothing; the latter has a law inscribed in his heart, his conscience along with his action attesting the fact. Evidence from this secret forum will be forthcoming at the Day of Judgment.
Rom 2:16 is continuous with the foregoing; the brackets enclosing Rom 2:13-15 in AV are properly removed.The words according to my good news, through Christ Jesus (Rom 2:16), intimate the perfect discrimination and sympathy which will mark the coming world-judgment; see in illustration Mat 25:14-46, etc.
Rom 2:6 f. The involved clauses are best construed thus: Who will render to each according to his workson the one hand, to the men of perseverance in good work glory and honour and incorruption, since they seek eternal life. The reward is reaffirmed in Rom 2:10 in terms of glory and honour; and the souls quest is eternal life (see Rom 6:22, Mat 19:16, etc.), not glory.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
The Case of the Cultured Greek
But there is a class of Gentiles who are quite keen in seeing these evils in others, and unhesitatingly judging them for them, while never considering that the same judgment rests upon their own heads. Is it so with my reader? Have you a stern measure for denouncing the evils of others, and a lesser one for yourself? Do you plead extenuating circumstances for yourself? Or do you persuade yourself that your refined, respectable methods of self-indulgence, your cultivated ability to cover your guilt with a fine veneer, has the actual effect of annulling or lessening that guilt in the eyes of a holy and discerning God?
God here turns with a solemn accusation to the cultured Greek – the first 16 verses of Rom 2:1-29 exposing the shallowness of a fine exterior, the utter vanity of confidence in intellect, and declaring the stern unwavering, impartial reality of the judgment of God. Man’s judgment of others is his own condemnation; for however cleverly he may conceal his guilt, God tells him pointedly – “Thou that judgest doest the same things” – while the very fact of his ability to judge bears record of a conscience that speaks, but which he chooses to soothe in respect to his own sin.
“But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.” Solemn, straightforward, admirable statement! What folly to attempt to deceive myself! To do so is as much as to hate my own soul, and to hasten that soul to eternal ruin. For God is not deceived. He judges not according to my thoughts and feelings, my excuses and self-righteousness: He judges “according to truth.” What unreasonable foolishness to ignore the truth! Can a man think – a man who is adept at accusing others and excusing himself – that he shall escape the judgment of God? Solemn, wholesome considerations for the souls of men!
But apart from the rather indefinite hope of escape, there is another attitude – a deeply incriminating one – that man dares to assume; and this again is put to him in the form of a searching question, “Or despisest thou the riches of His goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?” In verse 3 his thoughts favor his own immunity from the judgment of God: in verse 4 his thoughts despise the goodness of God. How contemptible the pride of man!
But we may well pause to consider the virtue, the beauty, the wonder of that which man despises – that is, “the riches of God’s goodness and forbearance and longsuffering.” Here is the secret of the allowance of the awful march of evil through the world today, the present allowance of man’s proud will to assert itself. The more deeply the subject inquiring heart considers the enormity and persistency of man’s growth in evil, the more profoundly is the exceeding marvel of God’s patience seen. But man, so thoroughly corrupt, will take every possible advantage of the patience of God, while the greater his abuse of it, the greater his contempt for it.
All this is well known, if men would but weigh it well. A point however, that they know not, nor consider is that “the goodness of God leads to repentance.” Not the justice or wrath of God here, but the goodness of God. How unspeakably blessed, how altogether above the questions and cavillings of men, yes, how deserving of their deepest, most heartfelt respect and admiration! But repentance is far from the natural heart: fear of punishment there may be indeed, but brokenness and contrition for sin is foreign to the proud will of man. Nothing will, or can lead him to it but the goodness of God – goodness that has melted and subdued many an arrogant, wilful heart, and caused the tears of most hardened sinners to flow in profusion. Hence, truly grievous beyond expression is that folly and wickedness that despises “the riches of His goodness and forbearance and longsuffering.”
Choosing to follow his own hardness and impenitent heart rather than trust the goodness of God, man is deliberately laying up a treasure of wrath against himself. Living only and fully for this present world he surely is, but he is multiplying eternal results. He may be most complacent that in this world he is reaping nothing of the wilfulness he sows; but it will only mean the greater reaping of wrath “in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God.” God needs not to be hasty in settling His accounts, but not one will be left unsettled. He will render to every man according to his deeds. Deeds manifest the man. Subjection to a faithful Creator is displayed by patient continuance in welldoing – an attitude of expectant desire for eternal glory, honor, and incorruptibility. It is of course not a matter of absolute holiness or perfection here; but the heart distinctly shows itself. Does the heart set itself upon that which is good?Does it patiently continue to follow what it pure and true?Does it bear the unmistakable impress of eternity – the consideration of everlasting realities? Is it seeking “glory, honor and incorruptibility”? The end of such a path is entrance into eternal life – the full joy and blessedness of the presence of God for eternity. (It may be remarked that Paul here looks at eternal life more in its future aspect, that is, when separated from the very presence of sin, and in its own proper sphere – Heaven itself. But this does not deny, nor is it inconsistent with the truth found in John’s writings, that “he that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life” (Joh 3:36). It is not a matter of hope, simply, but of fact: every believer is a possessor of eternal life at present, but that life is out of its own essential home, in the midst of foreign elements, the world character being altogether contrary to it, so that its full display must await the pure circumstances of Heaven’s glory.)
But on the other hand, is the heart rebellious against the truth? Is there contention rather than subjection? Do you yield yourself to unrighteousness rather than to the truth of God? For there is always yielding of some sort: there must be obedience either to what is true or to what is unrighteous. The very word “obedience” is obnoxious to the hardened heart, but he has nevertheless yielded himself to obey unrighteousness.
Thus he takes his stand. Very well, God, though “slow to anger and plenteous in mercy,” will eventually take His own stand in “indignation and wrath.” Terrible to think of this as the attitude He will then take toward the unrepentant; while, as two words describe His attitude, so two words describe the consequences for every soul of man that has chosen evil – “tribulation and anguish.” But who can realize the awful terror of judgment comprehended in those brief words? As the gospel is “to the Jew first,” so is the judgment to those who refuse the gospel; but it is “to the Gentile” just as surely.
But God takes no delight in the punishment of unbelievers, though it is an absolute necessity. His delight is unspeakably deep, however, in those who bow to Him, as verses 7 to 10 bear witness. For the declaration of His awful judgment is both preceded and followed by the assurance of unmingled blessing to those who have chosen the good – “glory, honor, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile.” Incomparable contrast to the eternal destiny and condition of those who in this world had no less opportunity of forgiveness, but “found no place for repentance”!
“For there is no respect of persons with God.” How worthy indeed this truth of our deep earnest consideration! Who shall influence God on his behalf? Who shall plead his personal prominence, importance, earthly position or advantage before the only true God? Whatsoever they are is no matter to Him: “God accepteth no man’s person.” Personalities may mean a great deal in the proud, vain estimate of man; but let no man think to pass God’s scrutiny wearing such a cloak: let him rather look well to his credentials, that they are in order – in such order as to meet the demands of perfect righteousness and truth. But neither the Jew’s boast in the law, nor the Gentile’s confidence in his learning and cultivation will avail at such a time. “For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law.” Sin cannot escape the judgment of God, no matter where it is, whether in circumstances of greatest austerity and dignity, or whether in the lowest, most ignorant classes of humanity. No excuses, no exemptions will have the least shadow of consideration. This is justice, pure and perfect; this is righteous, holy judgment – which things we are told “are the habitation of God’s throne” (Psa 89:14). Verses 13 to 15, it will be noted, form a parenthesis, while verse 16 in few words tells us the time, the discernment, the measure, and the executor of God’s judgment. The parenthesis meets the natural selfish protests both of the learned and unlearned. Learning does not justify (v. 13); and lack of education does not excuse (vv. 14 & 15). For in the latter case the Gentiles (“who have not the law” – a demarcation ever distinctly drawn in Scripture) manifest in their very nature a recognition of right and wrong such as the law declares. Not that they are by this means correct in every detail: such is not the point. But they naturally conceive some standard of moral regulations, so that “these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves.”
“Which show the work of the law written in their hearts.” It is certainly not the law itself written in their hearts, but the law’s work. And there is surely little difficulty in seeing that the law’s work – its very purpose – is to bring sin to remembrance, to convict the heart and conscience of sin. See Rom 3:20. Even those without law have a conscience that bear witness to their sin, while their ability to judge others and their attempts to cover their own sin by excuses, only more fully exposes them. It is a true exposure of man’s natural reasoning as regards sin, in whatever state or circumstance he may be; their thoughts accuse or else excuse one another. Either they assume a hard, legal spirit on account of the sins of others, or else a lightness that glosses it over with excuses. But accusation will not atone for sin, nor will excuses put it away. Is there no other attitude toward one who has sinned? Ah yes, indeed, the only one of true value and of pure motives. Do we pray for such as this? – pray from a heart touched and compassionate toward the one who has so dishonored God? Surely this will leave a spirit neither accusing nor light and flippant at the thought of the sins of others. It will lead me more thoroughly and honorably to judge myself and to seek with deepest meekness that the other may also judge his own sin. For God can put sin away, while all my accusing or excusing is shallow, wretched vanity.
All of these things shall however be brought to light, “for there is nothing covered that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known.” Not only the glaring manifest sins of men will be brought to account “in that day”; but “God will judge the
secrets of men by Jesus Christ,” who is Himself “the true Light,” – the light by which everything is fully manifested in its true character. Nothing can escape its searching, brilliant rays. Nor will the judgment be according to men’s estimates of right and wrong, but as Paul says, “according to my gospel.” Paul’s gospel is essentially “the gospel of the glory of Christ” (2Co 4:4) – the gospel of the once humbled, despised and rejected Son of Man now exalted at the right hand of God, given a Name above every name, at which “every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” Man has once dared to judge this lowly, sinless One: then the tables will be turned, and by perfect right He will sit in the seat of judgment.
Could the indictment of the Gentiles be any more complete or conclusive? Who can again lift his head in pride and haughtiness in the face of a record so devastating – a thorough, unadulterated, unalterable record in the Book of God? The summary of the guilt, both of Jews and Gentiles, awaits Rom 3:1-31, but Rom 2:16 ends the specific treatment of the Gentiles.
THE CASE OF THE JEW
Verse 17 summons the Jew to the bar of God to hear the special accusation against him. This will be more quickly noticed in the New Translation (JND), “But if thou art named a Jew” – etc. For in previous verses where Jews were spoken of, it was for the sake of Gentiles who would fain excuse themselves on the ground that they did not have the same opportunity as the Jews did.
The apostle immediately strikes at the complacency of the Jew in the mere fact of his outward position of nearness to God – resting in the law, making his boast of God, knowing God’s will, approving things that are more excellent – on account of the instruction of the law – confident that he is a guide of the blind, a light for those who are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes – and all of this because he has the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.
How exceedingly presumptuous man can be in turning his advantages and privileges (given him by the kindness of God) into occasions of self-exaltation and of belittling others – as those “who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others” (Luk 18:9). Solemn indeed that God is compelled to speak thus to the Jew, the one so signally blessed of Him in every conceivable way, as regards earthly advantage. Yet, nearly two thousand years later, at the present time, although the Jews have been cast out of their land and scattered to the ends of the earth, there is still in many of them the pride of assumed superiority on account of their having originally received a revelation from God – some even claiming that their scattering throughout the world was in order that they should the more fully teach the blind, those in darkness, the foolish, and the babes! And this signal mark of God’s displeasure and discipline becomes to them an occasion for increased boasting of superior light and position.
But let everyone who has the Word of God take warning from this. For if we (Gentiles) have the further revelation and advantage of the New Testament, are not the same perverting evils becoming more glaring amongst ourselves? Who is he who boasts of an open Bible, yet calmly ignores and disobeys its plain injunctions? Can we dare to flatter ourselves that the sin of Christendom is less atrocious than that of Israel under law? Indeed not; for the abuse of the doctrines and privileges of the manifested grace of God is greater evil than disobedience of the law of God. But our consideration in Rom 2:1-29 is not the perversion of Christianity, but man in need of the Gospel, and simply the introduction of Christianity. The Jew had been already proven under law, and verses 21 to 24 give us the law’s righteous exposure of him.
He not only (as the Gentiles) had a conscience that condemned evil in others, but having the Word of God, he taught others in regard to good and evil, but he did not keep what he gloried in teaching. This is the most plainly manifested guilt of all. For to teach the truth is more than to know it; so that the responsibility of the teacher is a grave one indeed. Not without good reason does James tell us – “Be not many teachers, my brethren, knowing that we shall receive greater judgment” (Jam 3:1, JND).
But despite his teaching abilities, the Jew is here accused before God of 1. evil work (v. 21); 2. evil walk (or associations); and 3. evil worship (v. 22) – concerning all of which he gives the most exemplary teaching. In this, however, the most serious issue is brought decidedly to the fore; that is, that of all people, it was the Jew who had brought direct dishonor upon the Name of God. For his high pretensions which amounted to nothing more nor less than hypocrisy, were the occasion of the ridicule and contempt of Gentiles toward the God that such people professed to worship. The Gentiles took their impression of the God of Israel from the conduct of Israel.
To the Jew circumcision (the sign of his identification with the system of Judaism) was a distinct advantage, but its profit was entirely lost if he broke the law, for the law was the very basis of Judaism; and for a man to boast in that which in practice he casts aside is the most contemptible form of vanity. But disobedience of the law was an outward denial of circumcision, for circumcision (the cutting-off of the flesh) was the distinct sign of self-renunciation for the sake of subjection to the law. Nevertheless, circumcision had brought the Jew into a place of real privilege, for it involved the profession of God’s Name – although, of course, unfaithfulness to such a profession called for a stern measure of judgment. Yet, if even an uncircumcised man kept the requirements of the law, would God refuse him merely because of uncircumcision? – indeed would not God rather count his uncircumcision for circumcision?
Notice here that this argument is one that strictly concerns Judaism. But we may easily transfer the principle to Christendom today, where baptism, the outward sign or badge of Christianity is often boasted in and trusted in, while the soul is far from God. And shall not the godly faith of an unbaptized person be counted for baptism – and the baptism of the perverter be counted as no baptism? Not that we would belittle baptism, any more than circumcision is belittled in verses 25-26 in connection with Judaism; but let it be known that baptism is no substitute for, and no supplement to, the reality of faith. Therefore the uncircumcised man, if he keeps the law, is the very judge of the Jew who, having the letter and circumcision, is a transgressor of the law. For the outward claims and pretensions of a man do not make the man. The Jew whose inward motives are not subject to God cannot have a place in “the Israel of God,” no matter how rigid and meticulous his formal observance of the rites of Judaism.
The Jew in the eyes of God is that one whose inward faith and hope are in God, and true circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter. The letter here speaks not of the actual words of the law – for these are truly inspired by God – but of a man’s outwardly exact adherence to the law’s forms. And such a thing without a purified heart – even in Judaism where ceremonialism was in order – is nothing but barren desolation. How much more as is in Christianity, which leaves no room for the elaborate ritual of Judaism! For Christ Himself is given as the altogether absorbing Object of the heart and eyes – the fullness that displaces Old Testament shadows – the Living Son of God by whom all mere religious formalism and machinery is exposed in its cold, heartless haughtiness. “Whose praise is not of men, but of God.” The true Jew is not that one who lives and acts for the eyes of men, but for God’s eye – who lives not “in the presence of his brethren,” but in the presence of God. Jewish parentage rightly requires such character. If it is lacking, a claim based on Jewish relationship is valueless.
Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible
Verse 1
The Jews would readily admit these charges against the pagan nations; and though they themselves incurred the same guilt, more or less openly, yet they considered themselves as protected from the divine displeasure by their strict adherence to the Mosaic ceremonial. Thus, while open iniquity characterized the pagan, secret corruption, coupled with a malignant censoriousness, was the type of Jewish sin. The object of the apostle, therefore, now, after having exhibited the wretched condition of the pagan world, is to show the Jews, without, however, at first distinctly naming them, that, notwithstanding their self-satisfaction and censoriousness, they were involved substantially in the same guilt and danger, and that their ceremonial observances would have no efficacy in saving them, since God will judge men by their inward character, and not by the outward rites which they perform. This, the general meaning and design of the chapter, is clear. The logical connection of it with what precedes, as indicated by the first word, Therefore, is obscure; for what is said in this chapter does not appear to be at all of the nature of an inference from the statements of the former one. The word Moreover would seem to express the kind of connection which actually exists between the two sections of the discourse.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
SECTION 5 GODS ANGER AGAINST SIN IS WITHOUT RESPECT OF PERSONS
CH. 2:1-11
For which cause thou art without excuse, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest the other thou condemnest thyself: for thou that judgest dost practise the same things. And we know that the judgment of God is, according to truth, upon them that practise such things. But reckonest thou this, O man, that judgest them that practise such things and dost them, that thou wilt escape the judgment of God? Or, the riches of His kindness and the forbearance and the longsuffering, dost thou despise, not knowing that the kindness of God is leading thee towards repentance? But according to thy hardness and a heart without repentance thou art treasuring for thyself anger in a day of anger and of revelation of Gods righteous judgment, Who will give back to each one according to his works. To them who by way of perseverance in good work seek glory and honour and incorruptibility, He will give eternal life: but to them of mercenary spirit and disobedient to the truth but obedient to unrighteousness shall there be anger and fury, affliction and helplessness, upon every soul of man that works out evil, of Jew first and of Greek; but glory and honour and peace to everyone that works good, to Jew first and to Greek. For there is no respect of persons with God.
In 4, Paul proved that God is angry with the heathen, by pointing to the cause of His anger, viz. the contempt shown in turning from Him to idols, and by pointing to a terrible result of it, viz. their shameful immorality. From this he now draws ( 5) an unexpected and universal inference, viz. that God is angry not only with the Gentiles but with all men. This universal inference he defends against supposed exceptions on the ground of Gods kindness, by asserting in Rom 2:3-10 that Gods judgment is impartial. And he will show that neither ( 6) the gift of the Law nor ( 7) circumcision affords any ground for hope that God will deviate in the case of the Jews from this universal principle.
Rom 2:1. For which cause etc.: an unexpected result of 4, and another link in the chain of moral cause and effect.
Without excuse: recalling Rom 1:20. God manifested Himself in Nature to leave man without excuse for ungodliness: and now Paul asserts that, by giving up the heathen to shame and thus revealing His anger against ungodliness, He has left without excuse all who estimate moral conduct.
Judge: to distinguish right and wrong, to pronounce sentence, but not necessarily an adverse sentence. We cannot avoid setting up ourselves as judges and pronouncing judgment, by our lips or in our hearts, on the actions of others. Consequently, the words whoever thou art that judgest include all men. From this universal judging, we shall learn in Rom 2:15 that all men have a moral law. In 4, by referring to idolatry and to the revelation of God in Nature, Paul limited his remarks to the Gentiles. But now he infers, from Gods manifested anger against the Gentiles, that all men are without excuse, thus including the Jews: and, by excluding them in 4 and including them in 5, he compels us to think about them. From Rom 2:9-10 we learn that the distinction of Jew and Gentile was in his mind. In 4, he gained the verdict of the Jews against the Gentiles; and he now declares that by this verdict both Jews and Gentiles are left without excuse.
For wherein etc.: proof of the foregoing words. And this proof rests upon the words following: for thou dost practise the same things. Paul looks every man in the face and charges him with committing the sins described above. This implies that apart from the Gospel all men are sinning. He does not say expressly that all men commit the unnatural sins described in Rom 1:26-27 : for these are followed by a long list of other sins. But he asserts plainly that all men do what they know that God forbids and may justly punish. We have however proof that the special sins just referred to, which were in Pauls day so prevalent among the Gentiles, were also prevalent among those who called themselves the people of God. The best of the Jews would be the least likely to absolve themselves from this charge of universal sinfulness: for their efforts to do right would teach them the deep corruption of their own hearts. The general moral debasement of the nation is depicted in dark colours on the pages of Josephus.
If Pauls accusation be true, it is also true that all who pass sentence on others, by doing so, pass an adverse sentence on themselves. A judge who takes his seat to try a man for forgery, and is himself a forger, by opening the trial condemns himself: for he admits that forgery is a crime, and therefore that he himself deserves punishment. In 4, Paul compelled the Jews to join in his sentence against the Gentiles. But the conduct which he compelled them to condemn as a mark of Gods anger is, he now tells them, their own conduct. Therefore, every man who has the moral sense to concur in this condemnation leaves himself without excuse.
Rom 2:2. The R.V. reads in the text, following the A.V., and we know; putting in the margin, as read by Many ancient authorities, for we know: a variation in one word. This latter reading would make Rom 2:2 confirm Rom 2:1, whereas the former would make it an additional assertion. The latter reading is given by Tischendorf; the former by the other editors, (see Introd. iii. 7,) who put the latter in their margin, thus expressing doubt. The external evidence seems to me slightly to favour the reading and we know; and the internal evidence somewhat more so. But the practical difference is slight.
To their own self-condemnation, Paul now adds the sentence of a more tremendous judge.
The judgment of God: in this case evidently a sentence of condemnation.
We know etc.: an appeal to their own conscience. Men may call in question the grounds of their belief that God will punish sin: but with a voice which they cannot contradict their own hearts tell them that He does so. In Xenophons Anabasis bk. ii. 5. 7, a Greek general reminds a Persian that to break oaths is to incur the anger of the gods, and that from their anger none can escape. Here we have one heathen appealing to another, to a stranger in race and religion, on the ground of a moral truth admitted by all.
According to truth: corresponding with the reality of the case, with mans actual conduct. All judges aim at this: God attains it.
Upon: as in Rom 1:18.
We now see the justice of the universal inference in Rom 2:1. God made His name known to the Gentiles, in order to take from them all excuse for ungodliness. They treated with contempt His revelation of Himself: and in proof of His anger He gave them up to gross sin. In a more definite manner God made Himself known to the Jews: and their own hearts tell them that they are guilty of the darkest ingratitude and the most shameful sin. Therefore, if the gross sin of the Gentiles is a mark of Gods anger against them for disregarding the revelation in Nature, and if Gods judgment corresponds with mans real conduct, the gross sin of the Jews is a mark of Gods anger against them for neglecting a more glorious revelation. Possibly even 4 was designed chiefly for the Jews. It is a darker repetition of Nathans parable. After securing their verdict against the character described, Paul turns round in a moment and says, Thou art the man.
Notice in Rom 2:2 a repetition, after complete proof, of the assertion in Rom 1:18.
Rom 2:3. A pointed question bringing out in its worthlessness and absurdity a secret hope of escape cherished by some who are guilty of the sins which they condemn in others. While valid for all men, Pauls appeal refers probably to the Jews.
Dost thou reckon this? is this the result of thy reasoning? Paul singles out an objector and speaks to him as though he had the man standing before him. For to him every thought assumes living form and breathes and speaks.
Judgest and dost: solemn restatement of the mans inconsistency. He condemns himself by condemning others, and knows that his own self-condemnation is confirmed by God who judges every man according to his actual conduct: and yet he expects in some way to evade the sentence of God. The words according to truth in Rom 2:2 and the judgment of God in Rom 2:3 expose the folly of this expectation. From mans judgment escape is possible: but who shall escape the sentence of God?
Rom 2:4. Another question, bringing out the secret ground of this fallacious hope. God is merciful; and has shown special kindness to Israel by forbearance and longsuffering of long-continued sin. Therefore, though the man lives in sin, he expects to escape punishment. Paul declares that this hope is to despise His kindness in ignorance of its purpose.
The riches of His kindness: His abundant gentleness towards men: cp. Rom 9:23. Paul frequently heaps word on word, because he feels how poor the best words are to express the great things of God. His forbearance is shown in His holding back for a time His anger against sin: in the duration of His forbearance we see His longsuffering: and in the forbearance and longsuffering we see His abundant kindness.
Repentance: a change of purpose, arising from change of circumstances or from dissatisfaction with a former purpose, and prompting a change of action. This original use of the word is seen in 1Sa 15:11, where God is said to repent, and in 1Sa 15:29, where we read that He cannot repent: cp. Jer 4:28; Jer 18:7-10. In a technical religious sense, viz. to denote a sinners purpose to forsake sin and serve God, the word is found, without further specification, in Mat 3:2; Mat 3:8; Mat 3:11; Mat 4:17; Luk 24:47; Act 17:30; Act 26:20. See also Act 20:21.
Leading thee towards repentance: God is bringing to bear on this man influences tending towards a change of purpose and a resolve henceforth to do right. But evidently these divine influences are altogether without result. For in spite of them the mans heart is without repentance: Rom 2:5. In English we should say, seeks to lead thee to repentance. But the Greek idiom here used is equally correct and more graphic. For the hand of God is actually upon the man, drawing him towards something better. Paul asserts that God in His kindness exerts influences which, if yielded to, would change his life purpose.
Towards: an aim or tendency: see under Rom 1:1. God delays punishment because His kindness moves Him to use influence to lead the man to a new purpose in life, viz. to serve God. But the sinner, not knowing this, supposes that Gods kindness arises from indulgence towards sin. Now a rulers indulgence towards sin is an evil; whereas Gods kindness is infinitely good. This man misunderstands it to be a disposition which he would himself despise in any judge, and shows his contempt of it by refusing to be moved by it. He thus despises the kindness of God. Yet upon this kindness, which he both misunderstands and resists, he leans for escape from the just judgment of God.
Notice that Paul singles out of the promiscuous mass of his opponents a man who is heaping up for himself future punishment, and tells him without hesitation that God is leading him towards repentance; and charges him with ignorance for not knowing this. From this we infer with certainty that upon all men God is bringing these influences to bear. For, if there were one exception, Paul could not use the language of this verse. Cp. 1Ti 2:4; Joh 12:32. Without these influences, repentance is impossible: Joh 6:44; Joh 6:65.
Rom 2:5. A plain statement of what the man is actually doing, the man who while continuing in sin cherishes a secret hope of escape.
Hardness: moral obstinacy which will not bend to divine influences: Rom 9:18; Rom 11:7; Mat 19:8; Act 19:9; Heb 3:8.
A heart without-repentance: result and proof of his hardness.
According to his character and heart, he acts.
Treasuring: adding day by day to his sins, and therefore to the anger of God, hidden now as in a treasure-house, but in safe keeping, till the day of anger and of revelation (or unveiling, see Rom 1:18) of Gods righteous judgment. Notice here a definite day of judgment, as in Rom 2:16; Act 17:31; this last an important coincidence. The increasing treasure of wrath, hidden now, will then be visible to all. Contrast Mat 6:19. This implies gradation in punishment: Otherwise there could be no increase of it.
Rom 2:6. An assertion supporting the foregoing. It commends itself to the moral sense of all men. And, as a word-for-word quotation of Psa 62:12 (LXX.) and as giving the sense of innumerable statements in the O.T., it would appeal to the Jew with divine authority. The Psalmists enemies, while secretly plotting against him, professed to be his friends. He appeals to God, who, he declares, will recompense each according to his works. The passage refers evidently to Jewish enemies, and therefore implies that God will treat even Jews according to their deeds. The quotation does not expressly refer to the day of judgment. But the incompleteness of retribution on earth, taken in connection with the unfailing truth of these words, implies a recompense beyond the grave. These quoted words, if their truth be admitted, prove that the judgment of the great day will be just, that therefore all who live in sin are day by day increasing the punishment which in that day will fall upon them, and that the delay of punishment arises, not from Gods indifference to sin, but from His desire that men may turn and live.
Rom 2:7-10. Development of the great principle just asserted in O.T. language, in reference to its two sides of reward and punishment. In Rom 2:7 we have reward; in Rom 2:8-9, punishment; and in Rom 2:10 reward again.
Rom 2:7. Glory: see under Rom 1:23. It denotes here, as in Rom 5:2; Rom 8:18; Rom 8:21, the splendour with which God will cover His servants, and which will evoke the admiration of all.
Honour: a mark of the value we put upon an object: rendered price in 1Co 6:20; 1Co 7:23. Same word in Rom 12:10; Rom 13:7, 1Co 12:23-24; 1Ti 5:17; 1Ti 6:1. It denotes here a recognition by God of the faithfulness of His servants.
Incorruptibility: absence of injury or decay of any kind. Same word in 1Co 15:42; 1Co 15:50; 1Co 15:53-54; 2Ti 1:10; Wis 2:23; Wis 6:19-20 : a cognate word in Rom 1:23; 1Co 9:25; 1Co 15:52; 1Ti 1:17; 1Pe 1:4; 1Pe 1:23. Those who do right, God will cover (see Rom 2:10) with a splendour which will make them objects of universal admiration, will attest the value He puts upon then, and will abide undimmed for ever. For this reward, they now seek: it is the deliberate aim of their life, and the hope of it (see Rom 5:2) is to them a joy.
Perseverance, or endurance, literally continuance under: a brave holding up under burdens which would cast us down, a pressing forward in face of foes who would drive us back. Same word in Rom 5:3-4; Rom 8:25; Rom 12:12; Rom 15:4-5. It is one of the great words descriptive of the Christian life, representing it as a toil and conflict.
According to good work: along a path of doing good, under difficulties and in face of enemies, they seek glory and honour.
Eternal life: reward awaiting the class of persons here referred to. So Rom 5:21; Rom 6:22-23; Gal 6:8; 1Ti 1:16; 1Ti 6:12; Tit 1:2; Tit 3:7; also Act 13:46; Act 13:48 in a speech of Paul; Jud 1:21; Mat 19:16; Mat 19:29; Mat 25:46; Mar 10:17; Mar 10:30; Luk 10:25; Luk 18:18; Luk 18:30; and with conspicuous frequency Joh 3:15-16; Joh 3:36; Joh 4:14; Joh 4:36; Joh 5:24; Joh 5:39; Joh 6:27; Joh 6:40; Joh 6:47; Joh 6:54; Joh 6:68; Joh 10:28; Joh 12:25; Joh 12:50; Joh 17:2-3; 1Jn 1:2; 1Jn 2:25; 1Jn 3:15; 1Jn 5:11; 1Jn 5:13; 1Jn 5:20. This use of the phrase by various N.T. writers leaves no room to doubt that it, or its Aramaic equivalent, was actually used by Christ. Same words in Dan 12:2, LXX.; also Enoch chs. xxxvii. 4, xl. 9, lviii. 3: important parallels. These passages prove that Christ adopted an eschatological phrase prevalent among the Jews. His new and distinctive teaching was that eternal life will be the reward of all who put faith in Him.
Life beyond the grave is in the N.T. always a reward of well-doing, never the common lot of all men. This implies that it is a state of blessing: and this is confirmed, here and elsewhere, by the other terms used to describe this future life. The future state of the wicked is not life, but death and destruction: so Rom 5:12; Rom 6:21; Gal 6:8; Php 3:19.
Eternal or agelasting: duration continuing throughout some lifetime or age which the writer has in view. That the age in view here is absolutely endless, is implied by the word incorruptibility here and in 1Co 9:25; 1Co 15:42-54; 2Ti 1:10; 1Pe 1:4, by the purpose expressed in may not perish in Joh 3:16, etc.; and is made absolutely certain by the endless life and infinite love of our Father in heaven. See under Rom 16:25.
Rom 2:8-9. Another class of conduct and retribution.
Those of a mercenary spirit: men actuated by low and selfish motives; a character always more or less assumed by sin, and in all forms and degrees essentially opposed to the Christian life.
Disobedient to the truth: equivalent to hold down the truth with unrighteousness in Rom 1:18. In Nature and in the Law of Moses, God manifested unseen realities. These were designed to rule the life and thought of men. But some men refuse to submit to this divine rule. Yet, as creatures, they are compelled to obey a power stronger than themselves; their only choice being a choice of masters. Refusing to obey the truth, i.e. to live in harmony with reality, they actually obey unrighteousness: this last word is used here as in Rom 1:18, which this verse recalls. Cp. Rom 6:16.
Now follows the retribution awaiting the persons just described.
Anger: as in Rom 1:18, Gods determination to punish.
Fury: a passionate outbursting of anger. Both are forbidden in Eph 4:31; Col 3:8 : but anger is permitted in Eph 4:26. Human passions are here attributed to God, because only thus can Gods indignation against sin and the tremendous punishment awaiting sinners be set forth. Same word in Rev 14:10; Rev 14:19; Rev 15:1; Rev 15:7; Rev 16:1, and both words together in Rev 16:19; Rev 19:15. But not elsewhere in N.T. is fury attributed to God.
Affliction: any kind of hardship, e.g. poverty, sickness, persecution, or punishment.
Helplessness: literally, narrowness of space, affording no way of escape; translated twice straitened (A.V. and RV.) in 2Co 6:12.
Rom 8:35 suggests, and 2Co 4:8 proves, that it is stronger than affliction. The four words are a chain of cause and effect. God is angry, determined to punish sin. His anger bursts forth in divine fury: this falls upon man in the form of affliction; and puts him, with no way of escape, in a position of absolute helplessness. These last words imply conscious suffering: so Mat 13:42; Mat 13:50.
Upon every soul etc.: further description of those upon whom will fall this awful punishment. It will strike the soul, the seat of life; and will fall upon (as in Rom 2:2; Rom 1:18) every soul of man that works out evil. These last words are a short summary of the conduct described in Rom 2:8.
Jew first and Greek: as in Rom 1:16. In the day of judgment, distinctions are recognised; but they avail not. We may conceive the Jew standing nearer to, and the Greek farther from, the throne; as in Pauls day they stood (see Eph 2:13; Eph 2:17) nearer to and farther from the sound of the Gospel. To the Jew, the Gospel came first, and on him the retribution will first fall: but the Greek will not escape.
Rom 2:10. Restatement of the reward awaiting the righteous, in contrast to the fate of the lost, just described; and therefore parallel to Rom 2:7. The glory and honour for which they seek will be given to them; and peace, as in Rom 1:7. It is an exact opposite of affliction and helplessness, the one resulting from the favour, the other from the anger, of God. The repetition of Jew first and Greek shows how prominent in Pauls thought was this distinction. To assert, while recognising it, the impartial judgment of God, is the chief purpose of this chapter.
Rom 2:11. A great principle underlying the O.T. declaration in Rom 2:6, asserted here in order to confirm the statement in Rom 2:9-10 that God will punish and reward both Jew and Greek.
Respect-of-persons: literally, face-reception: to look at a mans face and exterior, instead of at his heart and life; to take into consideration his gold ring or fine clothing, and treat him accordingly. Same word in Eph 6:9; Col 3:25; Jas 2:1 : cp. Jas 2:9; Act 10:34; also Luk 20:21; Gal 2:6. The statement that God does not look at mere externals commends itself to the moral sense of every man. It is clearly implied in the O.T. declaration of Rom 2:6; and it implies that the sentence of the great day will not be determined by the accident of birth. Yet some such accident is the only ground of trust of the man addressed in Rom 2:3. The remainder of Romans 2, is an exposition of this great principle in its bearing on the distinction of Jew and Gentile.
REVIEW. In Rom 2:1-2, Paul reasserts, as valid for all men, the assertion in Rom 1:18. That it admits of no exception whatever, he proves in Rom 2:3-11 by words taken from the O.T., and by expounding the principles which underlie them. He also correctly infers from these words that all who continue in sin are daily increasing the punishment which awaits them; and that, if they expect to escape because of Gods kindness, they thereby show their ignorance of the purpose of that kindness and their contempt for it.
In 5, Paul has taught us that, apart from the Gospel, all men not only have committed but are committing sin; that God is bringing to bear on all men influences tending towards repentance; and that the judgment of the great day will be, both in its broad distinction of reward and punishment, and in the measure of punishment, according to works. This implies that the glad tidings of salvation announced in Rom 1:16 are not inconsistent with, and do not set aside, a final retribution according to works.
Fuente: Beet’s Commentary on Selected Books of the New Testament
2:1 Therefore {1} thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
(1) He convicts those who would seem to be exempt from the rest of men (because they reprehend other men’s faults), and says that they are least of all to be excused, for if they were searched well and carefully (as God surely does) they themselves would be found guilty in those things which they reprehend and punish in others: so that in condemning others, they pronounce sentence against themselves.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
1. God’s principles of judgment 2:1-16
Before showing the guilt of moral and religious people before God (Rom 2:17-29), Paul set forth the principles by which God will judge everyone (Rom 2:1-16). By so doing, he warned the self-righteous.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
B. The need of good people 2:1-3:8
In the previous section (Rom 1:18-32), Paul showed mankind condemned for its refusal to respond appropriately to natural (general) revelation. In this one (Rom 2:1 to Rom 3:8), his subject is more man’s failure to respond to special revelation. Since the Jews had more knowledge of this revelation than the Gentiles, they are primarily in view. As in the previous section, specific accusations follow general terms for sin (cf. Rom 1:18 with Rom 1:23; Rom 1:26-32; and Rom 2:1-16 with Rom 2:17-29).
Paul addressed those people who considered themselves exceptions to humankind’s general sinfulness in this section of the epistle. Obviously many people could say in his day, and still more say in ours, that they are not as bad as the people Paul described in chapter 1. The writer dealt with this objection more generally in Rom 2:1-16 and more specifically about Jewish objectors in Rom 2:17-29.
"Paul has still his statement in view, that the Gospel is the only power of God for salvation, and nothing to be ashamed of. If Judaism can save men, the Gospel is an impertinence; hence the radical failure of the Jew must be shown." [Note: Stifler, p. 36.]
"In chap. 2 . . . it is the second person singular, ’you,’ that Paul uses in making his accusation (Rom 2:1-5; Rom 2:17-29). This does not mean that Paul is now accusing his readers of these things; were he to do that, the second person plural would have been needed. Rather, Paul utilizes here, and sporadically throughout the letter, a literary style called diatribe. Diatribe style, which is attested in several ancient authors as well as elsewhere in the NT (e.g., James), uses the literary device of an imaginary dialogue with a student or opponent. Elements of this style include frequent questions, posed by the author to his conversation partner or by the conversation partner, emphatic rejections of possible objections to a line of argument using me genoito (’May it never be!’), and the direct address of one’s conversation partner or opponent." [Note: Moo, p. 125.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
"Therefore" seems more logically to relate back to Rom 1:18-19 than to Rom 1:21-32. Paul addressed those people who might think they were free from God’s wrath because they had not "practiced" the things to which Paul had just referred (Rom 1:29-32). The apostle now warned them that they had indeed "practiced" the same things (Rom 2:1). He seems to have been thinking as Jesus did when our Lord corrected His hearers’ superficial view of sin (e.g., Matthew 5-7). Evil desires constitute sin as well as evil actions.
The first principle by which God judges is that He judges righteously (Rom 2:2). He judges on the basis of what really exists, not what merely appears to be. For example, one might think that since his immoral thoughts are not observable he is free of guilt. But God looks at the heart. Consequently those who have practiced the same sins as those listed previously, though perhaps not in the same way, should not think they will escape judgment (Rom 2:3). Rather than acting like judges of the outwardly immoral these people should view themselves as sinners subject to God’s judgment. They should not misinterpret God’s failure to judge them quickly as an indication that they are blameless. They should realize that God is simply giving them time to repent (Rom 2:4; cf. Jer 18:6-11; 2Pe 3:9).
"Repentance plays a surprisingly small part in Paul’s teaching, considering its importance in contemporary Judaism. Probably this is because the coming of Christ had revealed to Paul that acceptance with God requires a stronger action than the word ’repentance’ often connoted at the time." [Note: Ibid., p. 134.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 6
HUMAN GUILT UNIVERSAL: HE APPROACHES THE CONSCIENCE OF THE JEW
Rom 2:1-17
WE have appealed, for affirmation of St. Pauls tremendous exposure of human sin, to a solemn and deliberate self-scrutiny, asking the man who doubts the justice of the picture to give up for the present any instinctive wish to vindicate other men, while he thinks a little while solely of himself. But another and opposite class of mistake has to be reckoned with, and precluded; the tendency of man to a facile condemnation of others, in favour of himself; “God, I thank Thee that I am not as other men are.” {Luk 18:11} It is now, as it was of old, only too possible to read, or to hear, the most searching and also the most sweeping condemnation of human sin, and to feel a sort of fallacious moral sympathy with the sentence, a phantom as it were of righteous indignation against the wrong and the doers of it, and yet wholly to mistake the matter by thinking that the hearer is righteous though the world is wicked. The man listens as if he were allowed a seat beside the Judges chair, as if he were an esteemed assessor of the Court, and could listen with a grave yet untroubled approbation to the discourse preliminary to the sentence. Ah, he is an assessor of the accused; he is an accomplice of his fallen fellows; he is a poor guilty man himself. Let him awake to himself, and to his sin, in time.
With such a reader or hearer in view St. Paul proceeds. We need not suppose that he writes as if such states of mind were to be expected in the Roman mission; though it was quite possible that this might be the attitude of some who bore the Christian name at Rome. More probably be speaks as it were in the presence of the Christians to persons whom at any moment any of them might meet, and particularly to that large element in religious life at Rome, the unconverted Jews. True, they would not read the Epistle; but he could arm those who would read it against their cavils and refusals, and show them how to reach the conscience even of the Pharisee of the Dispersion. He could show them how to seek his soul, by shaking him from his dream of sympathy with the Judge who all the while was about to sentence him.
It is plain throughout the passage now before us the Apostle has the Jew in view. He does not name him for a long while. He says many things which are as much for the Gentile sinner as for him. He dwells upon the universality of guilt as indicated by the universality of conscience; a passage of awful import for every human soul, quite apart from its place in the argument here. But all the while he keeps in view the case of the self-constituted judge of other men, the man who affects to be essentially better than they, to be, at least by comparison with them, good friends with the law of God. And the undertone of the whole passage is a warning to this man that his brighter light will prove his greater ruin if he does not use it; nay, that he has not used it, and that so it is his ruin already, the ruin of his claim to judge, to stand exempt, to have nothing to do with the criminal crowd at the bar.
All this points straight at the Jewish conscience, though the arrow is levelled from a covert. If that conscience might but be reached! He longs to reach it, first for the unbelievers own sake, that he might be led through the narrow pass of self-condemnation into the glorious freedom of faith and love. But also it was of first importance that the spiritual pride of the Jews should be conquered, or at least exposed, for the sake of the mission converts already won. The first Christians, newly brought from paganism, must have regarded Jewish opinion with great attention and deference. Not only were their apostolic teachers Jews, and the Scriptures of the Prophets, to which those teachers always pointed, Jewish, but the weary Roman world of late years had been disposed to own with more and more distinctness that, if there were such a thing as a true voice from heaven to man, it was to be heard among that unattractive yet impressive race which was seen everywhere, and yet refused to be “reckoned among the nations.” The Gospels and the Acts show us instances enough of educated Romans drawn towards Israel and the covenant; and abundant parallels are given us by the secular historians and satirists. The Jews, in the words of Professor Gwatkin, were “the recognised non-conformists” of the Roman world. At this very time the Emperor was the enamoured slave of a brilliant woman who was known to be proselyted to the Jewish creed. It was no slight trial to converts in their spiritual infancy to meet everywhere the question why the sages of Jerusalem had slain this Jewish Prophet, Jesus, and why everywhere the synagogues denounced His name and His disciples. The true answer would be better understood if the bigot himself could be brought to say, “God, be merciful to me the sinner.”
Wherefore you are without excuse, O man, every man who judges; when you judge the other party you pass judgment on yourself; for you practise the same things, you who judge. For we know-this is a granted point between us-that Gods judgment is truth wise, is a reality, in awful earnest, upon those who practise such things. Now is this your calculation, O man, you who judge those who practise such things, and do them yourself, that you will escape Gods judgment? Do you surmise that some by-way of privilege and indulgence will be kept open for you? Or do you despise the wealth of His kindness, and of His forbearance and longsuffering-despise it, by mistaking it for mere indulgence, or indifference-knowing not that Gods kind ways lead you to repentance? No, true to your own hardness, your own unrepentant heart, you are hoarding for yourself a wrath which will be felt in the day of wrath, the day of disclosure of the righteous judgment of God, who will requite each individual according to his works. What will be that requital, and its law? To those who, on the line of perseverance in good work, seek, as their point of gravitation, glory, and honour, and immortality, He will requite life eternal. But for those who side with strife, who take part with man, with self, with sin, against the claims and grace of God, and, while they disobey the truth of conscience, obey unrighteousness, yielding the will to wrong, there shall be wrath and fierce anger, trouble and bewilderment, inflicted on every soul of man, man working out what is evil, alike Jew-Jew first-and Greek. But glory, and honour, and peace shall be for everyone who works what is good, alike for Jew-Jew first-and Greek. For there is no favouritism in Gods court.
Here he actually touches the Jew. He has named him twice, and in both places recognises that primacy which in the history of Redemption is really his. It is the primacy of the race chosen to be the organ of revelation and the birth place of Incarnate God. It was given sovereignly, “not according to the works,” or to the numbers, of the nation, but according to unknown conditions in the mind of God. It carried with it genuine and splendid advantages. It even gave the individual righteous Jew (so surely the language of ver. 10 [Rom 2:10] implies) a certain special welcome to his Masters “Well done, good and faithful”; not to the disadvantage, in the least degree, of the individual righteous “Greek,” but just such as may be illustrated in a circle of ardent and impartial friendship, where, in one instance or another, kinship added to friendship makes attachment not more intimate, but more interesting. Yes, the Jew has indeed his priority, his primacy, limited and qualified in many directions, but real and permanent in its place; this Epistle (see chap. 11) is the great Charter of it in the Christian Scriptures. But whatever the place of it is, it has no place whatever in the question of the sinfulness of sin, unless indeed to make guilt deeper where light has been greater. The Jew has a great historical position in the plan of God. He has been accorded as it were an official nearness to God in the working out of the worlds redemption. But he is not one whit the less for this a poor sinner, fallen and guilty. He is not one moment for this to excuse, but all the more to condemn, himself. He is the last person in the world to judge others. Wherever God has placed him in history, he is to place himself, in repentance and faith, least and lowest at the foot of Messiahs Cross.
What was and is true of the chosen Nation is now and forever true, by a deep moral parity, of all communities and of all persons who are in any sense privileged, advantaged by circumstance. It is true, solemnly and formidably true, of the Christian Church, and of the Christian family, and of the Christian man. Later in this second chapter we shall be led to some reflections on Church privilege. Let us reflect here, if but in passing, on the fact that privilege of other kinds must stand utterly aside when it is a question of mans sin. Have we no temptation to forget this? Probably we are not of the mind of the Frenchman of the old regime who thought that “the Almighty would hesitate before He condemned forever a man of a marquis condition.” But are we quite clear on the point that the Eternal Judge will admit no influences from other sides? The member of so excellent, so useful, a family, with many traces of the family character about him! The relative of saints, the companion of the good! A mind so full of practical energy, of literary grace and skill; so capable of deep and subtle thought, of generous words, and even of deeds; so charming, so entertaining, so informing; the man of culture, the man of genius; -shall none of these things weigh in the balance, and mingle some benignant favouritism with the question, Has he done the will of God? Nay, “there is no favouritism in Gods court!” No one is acquitted there for his reputable connections, or for his possession of personal “talents” (awful word in the light of its first use!), given him only that he might the better “occupy” for his Lord. These things have nothing to do with that dread thing, the Law, which has everything to do with the accusation and the award.
Before we pass to another section of the passage, let us not forget the grave fact that here, in these opening pages of this great Treatise on gratuitous Salvation, this Epistle which is about to unfold to us the divine paradox of the Justification of the Ungodly, we find this overwhelming emphasis laid upon “perseverance in good work.” True, we are not to allow even it to confuse the grand simplicity of the Gospel, which is to be soon explained. We are not to let ourselves think, for example, that ver. 7 (Rom 2:7) depicts a man deliberately aiming through a life of merit at a quid pro quo at length in heaven; so much glory, honour, and immortality for so living as it would be sin not to live. St. Paul does not write to contradict the Parable of the Unprofitable Servant, {Luk 17:1-37} any more than to negative beforehand his own reasoning in the fourth chapter below. The case he contemplates is one only to be realised where man has cast himself, without one plea of merit, at the feet of mercy, and then rises up to a walk and work of willing loyalty, covetous of the “Well done, good and faithful,” at its close, not because he is ambitious for himself, but because he is devoted to his God, and to His will. And St. Paul knows, and in due time will tell us, that for the loyalty that serves, as well as for the repentance that first submits, the man has to thank mercy, and mercy only, first, midst, and last:
“It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that pitieth”. {Rom 9:16} But then, none the less, he does lay this emphasis, this indescribable stress, upon the “perseverance in good work,” as the actual march of the pilgrim who travels heavenward. True to the genius of Scripture, that is to the mind of its Inspirer in His utterances to man, he isolates a main truth for the time, and leaves us alone with it. Justification will come in order. But, that it may do precisely this, that it may come in order and not out of it, he bids us first consider right, wrong, judgment, and retribution, as if there were nothing else in the moral universe. He leads us to the fact of the permanence of the results of the souls actions. He warns us that God is eternally in earnest when He promises and when He threatens; that He will see to it that time leaves its retributive impress forever on eternity.
The whole passage, read by a soul awake to itself, and to the holiness of the Judge of men, will contribute from its every sentence something to our conviction, our repentance, our dread of self, our persuasion that somehow from the judgment we must fly to the Judge. But this is not to be unfolded yet.
It was, I believe, a precept of John Wesleys to his evangelists, in unfolding their message, to speak first in general of the love of God to man; then, with all possible energy, and so as to search conscience to its depths, to preach the law of holiness; and then, and not till then, to uplift the glories of the Gospel of pardon, and of life. Intentionally or not, his directions follow the lines of the Epistle to the Romans.
But the Apostle has by no means done with the Jew, and his hopes of heaven by pedigree and by creed. He recurs to the impartiality of “that day,” the coming final crisis of human history, ever present to his soul. He dwells now almost wholly on the impartiality of its severity, still bearing on the Pharisees dream that somehow the Law will be his friend, for Abrahams and Moses sake.
For all who sinned (or, in English idiom, all who have sinned, all who shall have sinned) not law wise-even so, not law wise-shall perish, shall lose the soul; and all who in (or let us paraphrase, under) law have sinned, by law shall be judged, that is to say, practically, condemned, found guilty. For not laws hearers are just in Gods court: nay, laws doers shall be justified; for “law” is never for a moment satisfied with applause, with approbation; it demands always and inexorably obedience. For whenever (the) Nations, Nations not having law, by nature-as distinct from express precept-do the things of the Law, when they act on the principles of it, observing in any measure the eternal difference of right and wrong, these men, though not having law, are to themselves law; showing as they do-to one another, in moral intercourse-the work of the Law, that which is, as a fact, its result where it is heard, a sense of the dread claims of right, written in their hearts, present to the intuitions of their nature; while their conscience, their sense of violated right, bears concurrent witness, each conscience “concurring” with all; and while, between each other, in the interchanges of thought and discourse, their reasonings accuse, or it may be defend, their actions; now in conversation, now in treatise or philosophic dialogue. And all this makes one vast phenomenon, pregnant with lessons of accountability, and ominous of a judgment coming; in the day when God shall judge the secret things of men, even the secrets hid beneath the solemn robe of the formalist, according to my Gospel, by means of Jesus Christ, to whom the Father “hath committed all judgment, as He is the Son of Man”. {Joh 5:27} So he closes another solemn cadence with the blessed Name. It has its special weight and fitness here; it was the name trampled by the Pharisee, yet the name of Him who was to judge him in the great day.
The main import of the paragraph is plain. It is, to enforce the fact of the accountability of the Jew and the Greek alike, from the point of view of Law. The Jew, who is primarily in the Apostles thought, is reminded that his possession of the Law, that is to say of the one specially revealed code not only of ritual but far more of morals, is no recommendatory privilege, but a sacred responsibility. The Gentile meanwhile is shown, in passing, but with gravest purpose, to be by no means exempted from accountability simply for his lack of a revealed perceptive code. He possesses, as man, that moral consciousness without which the revealed code itself would be futile, for it would correspond to nothing. Made in the image of God, he has the mysterious sense which sees, feels, handles moral obligation. He is aware of the fact of duty. Not living up to what he is thus aware of, he is guilty.
Implicitly, all through the passage, human failure is taught side by side with human responsibility. Such a clause as that of ver. 14 (Rom 2:14), “when they do by nature the things of the law,” is certainly not to be pressed, in such a context as this, to be an assertion that pagan morality ever actually satisfied the holy tests of the eternal Judge. Read in the whole connection, it only asserts that the pagan acts as a moral being; that he knows what it is to obey, and to resist, the sense of duty. That is not to say, what we shall soon hear St. Paul so solemnly deny, that there exists anywhere a man whose correspondence of life to moral law is such that his “mouth” needs not to “be stopped,” and that he is not to take his place as one of a “world guilty before God.”
Stern, solemn, merciful argument! Now from this side, now from that, it approaches the conscience of man, made for God and fallen from God. It strips the veil from his gross iniquities; it lets in the sun of holiness upon his iniquities of the more religious type; it speaks in his dull ears the words judgment day, tribulation, wrath, bewilderment, perishing. But it does all this that man, convicted, may ask in earnest what he shall do with conscience and his Judge, and may discover with joy that his Judge Himself has “found a ransom,” and stands Himself in act to set him free.