Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 2:26
Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
26. Therefore, &c.] St Paul reasons from his last statement, as from what is self-evident to conscience.
the uncircumcision ] i.e., probably, “the uncircumcised man;” for see below, “ his uncircumcision.” The form of speech is most unusual; such a word as “uncircumcision,” when used personally, almost always referring to a class, not an individual. Perhaps even here it is so used, but then immediately (in the words “his circumcision”) an individual specimen is considered.
keep the righteousness, &c.] See above on Rom 2:25. Here again, practical piety, the will to do God’s revealed will, is in view; not sinless obedience. Cornelius (Act 10:35) is a case exactly in point. He was not sinless; he needed “ saving ” (a significant word there); but he “feared God, and worked righteousness,” and the Divine welcome was his.
the righteousness ] Better, the ordinances; the special precepts, of whatever kind.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Therefore, if the uncircumcision – If those who are not circumcised, that is, the pagan.
Keep the righteousness of the law – Keep what the Law of Moses commands. It could not be supposed that a pagan would understand the requirements of the ceremonial law; but reference is had here to the moral law. The apostle does not expressly affirm that this was ever done; but he supposes the case, to show the true nature and value of the rites of the Jews.
Shall not his uncircumcision – Or, shall the fact that he is uncircumcised stand in the way of the acceptance of his services? Or, shall he not as certainly and as readily be accepted by God as if he were a Jew? Or in other words, the apostle teaches the doctrine that acceptance with God does not depend on a mans external privileges, but on the state of the heart and life.
Be counted for circumcision – Shall he not be treated as if he were circumcised? Shall his being uncircumcised be any barrier in the way of his acceptance with God? The word rendered be counted, is what is commonly rendered to reckon, to impute; and its use here shows that the Scripture use of the word is not to transfer, or to charge with what is not deserved, or not true. It means simply that a man shall be treated as if it were so; that this lack of circumcision shall be no bar to acceptance. There is nothing set over to his account; nothing transferred; nothing reckoned different from what it is. God judges things as they are; and as the man, though uncircumcised, who keeps the Law, ought to be treated as if he had been circumcised, so he who believes in Christ agreeably to the divine promise, and trusts to his merits alone for salvation, ought to be treated as if he were himself righteous, God judges the thing as it is, and treats people as it is proper to treat them, as being pardoned and accepted through his Son.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 26. Therefore if the uncircumcision, &c.] If the Gentile be found to act according to the spirit and design of the law, his acting thus uprightly, according to the light which God has afforded him, will be reckoned to him as if he were circumcised and walked agreeably to the law.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
The uncircumcision; i.e. the uncircumcised; a figurative and frequent way of speaking: see Rom 3:30; 4:9.
Keep the righteousness of the law; which none of them ever did; but admit they could, or else, which some of them have done, in sincerity, though with manifold imperfections; such as the two centurions, one of which is mentioned in the Gospel of Luke, the other in the Acts: if in this sense the uncircumcised keep the righteousness of the law, shall they not be all one in the account of God as if they were circumcised? See Rom 4:10.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
26. Therefore if the uncircumcisionkeep the . . . law, c.Two mistaken interpretations, we think,are given of these words: First, that the case here supposedis an impossible one, and put merely for illustration [HALDANE,CHALMERS, HODGE]second that it is the case of the heathen who may and doplease God when they act, as has been and is done, up to the light ofnature [GROTIUS,OLSHAUSEN, c.]. The firstinterpretation is, in our judgment, unnatural the second, opposed tothe apostle’s own teaching. But the case here put is, we think, suchas that of Cornelius (Ac10:1-48), who, though outside the external pale of God’scovenant, yet having come to the knowledge of the truths contained init, do manifest the grace of the covenant without the seal of it, andexemplify the character and walk of Abraham’s children, though notcalled by the name of Abraham. Thus, this is but another way ofannouncing that God was about to show the insufficiency of the merebadge of the Abrahamic covenant, by calling from among the Gentiles aseed of Abraham that had never received the seal of circumcision (seeon Ga 5:6); and this interpretationis confirmed by all that follows.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Therefore if the uncircumcision keep,…. These words are spoken hypothetically; if any such persons could be found among the Gentiles who keep the whole law of God; and can only be absolutely understood of such, who from a principle of grace act in obedience to the law; as in the hands of Christ, and who look to Christ as the fulfilling end of it, for righteousness; in whom they keep
the righteousness of the law perfectly:
shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? by this question it is suggested, that an uncircumcised Gentile, who keeps the law as in the hands of Christ, and under the influences of his Spirit and grace, and keeps it in Christ, is reckoned a circumcised person in a spiritual sense, and must be preferable to a circumcised Jew that breaks it.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Keep (). Present subjunctive with , condition of third class, mere supposition like that in verse 25, “keep on keeping” perfectly, Paul means.
For (). As often in N.T.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) Therefore if the uncircumcision, lean oun he akrobustia) If therefore the uncircumcision, the Gentiles, the races apart from the Jews or National Israel, if those the Jews considered to be heathen
2) Keep the righteousness of the law, (ta dikaiomata tou nomou phulasse) keep or guard the righteous ordinances of the law, or do what is morally and ethically right, as required by the law; practical piety, the will to do Gods will, not perfect obedience, is in view here.
3) Shall not his uncircumcision, (ouch he akrobustia autou) Shall not his uncircumcision State or condition, as was that of Cornelius, though uncircumcised be accepted of God, 1Co 7:18-20.
4) Be counted for righteousness? (eis peritomen logisthesetai) be computed, reckoned, calculated or counted for circumcision? as was that of Cornelius. Though an uncircumcised Roman (Italian) who was not sinless, he feared God, worked righteousness, prayed to God always, gave much alms and desired to be saved, and God responded, took the initiative to instruct him what he should do to be saved, Act 10:2; Act 10:6; Act 10:31; Act 10:34-35; Act 10:43; Act 11:14.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
26. If then the uncircumcision, etc. This is a very strong argument. Every thing is below its end and subordinate to it. Circumcision looks to the law, and must therefore be inferior to it: it is then a greater thing to keep the law than circumcision, which was for its sake instituted. It hence follows, that the uncircumcised, provided he keeps the law, far excels the Jew with his barren and unprofitable circumcision, if he be a transgressor of the law: and though he is by nature polluted, he shall yet be so sanctified by keeping the law, that uncircumcision shall be imputed to him for circumcision. The word uncircumcision, is to be taken in its proper sense in the second clause; but in the first, figuratively, for the Gentiles, the thing for the persons.
It must be added — that no one ought anxiously to inquire what observers of the law are those of which Paul speaks here, inasmuch no such can be found; for he simply intended to lay down a supposed case — that if any Gentile could be found who kept the law, his righteousness would be of more value without circumcision, than the circumcision of the Jew without righteousness. And hence I refer what follows, And what is by nature uncircumcision shall judge thee, etc., not to persons, but to the case that is supposed, according to what is said of the Queen of the south, that she shall come, etc., (Mat 12:42,) and of the men of Nineveh, that they shall rise up in judgment, etc., (Luk 11:32) For the very words of Paul lead us to this view — “The Gentile,” he says, “being a keeper of the law, shall judge thee who art a transgressor, though he is uncircumcised, and thou hast the literal circumcision.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
26. Therefore At this verse the apostle has succeeded in placing the pious Gentile on a level with the pious Jew. In the next verse he is made the superior of the defective Jew.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘If therefore the uncircumcision keep the ordinances of the law, will not his uncircumcision be reckoned for circumcision?’
This then leads on to a more startling claim by Paul, and that is that if the uncircumcision keep the ordinance of the Law, then his uncircumcision will be reckoned as circumcision. This may have had in mind the God-fearers, those Gentiles who had thrown in their lot with Judaism but did not want to be circumcised. Many of them were more dedicated to the covenant than circumcised Jews. Paul may be saying that if their hearts are right, and they are wholly committed to the covenant, it does not matter whether they are circumcised or not.
This would not be to say that they could be saved in that way once they had truly heard the Gospel, only that during the transitional period when men had not heard the Gospel, salvation in that way was a possibility. It would then make Paul’s statement meaningful, and at the same time illustrate the invalidity of circumcision without obedience.
On the other hand we may well see Paul as postulating a theoretical case as he has before, simply on the basis of logic, in order to illustrate the irrelevance of circumcision unless accompanied by full obedience to the covenant. His point would then be that a theoretical Gentile might observe the whole Law (although in practise that was impossible) and thus be reckoned as circumcised even though he was uncircumcised. He is not really demonstrating how an uncircumcised man can be acceptable to God, but simply demonstrating that circumcision of itself means nothing in such a situation. This would have come as a terrible shock to many Jews who placed great reliance on circumcision.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Rom 2:26. The righteousness of the law Mr. Locke renders the original words the rectitudes of the law, in an appropriated sense of the word rectitude! This rule of their actions, all mankind uncircumcised as well as circumcised had, and it is that which the Apostle, in ch. Rom 1:32 calls , the judgment of God; because it came from God, and was made by him the moral rule to all mankind. And this rule of morality, St. Paul says, the Gentile world did acknowledge: so that , the judgment of God, ch. Rom 1:32 signifies that rule of right taken in general; and , the righteousness of the law, here signifies the particular branches of it, contained in the law of Moses: for no other part of that law could a Heathen be supposed to observe, or be concerned in; and therefore those only can be the , the righteousness of the law, here meant.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Rom 2:26 . Interrogative inference of the corresponding inverse relation, drawn from Rom 2:25 .
] referring to the concrete understood in the previous . See Winer, p. 138 [E. T. 182].
. .] The same as in Rom 2:14 , as also the following . of Rom 2:27 . [708] A “ perfect, deep inner ” fulfilment of the law (Philippi), is a gratuitous suggestion, since there is no modal definition appended. Paul means the observance of the Mosaic legal precepts (respecting comp on Rom 1:32 and Rom 5:16 ), which in point of fact takes place when the Gentile obeys the moral law of nature, Rom 2:14 f.
. ] will be reckoned as circumcision ( in the sense of the result; see Rom 9:8 ; Act 19:27 ; Isa 40:17 ; Wis 9:6 ; Theile, a [710] Jac. p. 138). The future is not that of the logical certainty (Mehring and older expositors), or of the result (Hofmann), which latter sense would be involved in a form of expression corresponding to the ; but the glance of the Apostle extends (see Rom 2:27 ) to the last judgment . To the uncircumcised person, who observes what the law has ordained, i.e. the moral precepts of the law, shall one day be awarded the same salvation that God has destined, subject to the obligation of fulfilment of the law, for those who through circumcision are members of His people. As to the thought comp Mat 8:11 ; Mat 3:9 ; 1Co 7:19 ; Gal 5:6 . The reference to proselytes of the gate (Philippi) is not only arbitrary, but also incorrect, because the text has in view the pure contrast between circumcision and uncircumcision, without any hint of an intermediate stage or anything analogous thereto. The proposition is to be retained in its unlimited expression. The mediation, however, which has to intervene for the circumcised as well as for the uncircumcised, in order to the procuring of salvation through faith , is still left unnoticed here, and is reserved for the subsequent teaching of the Epistle. See especially ch. 4.
[708] means, as in Jas 2:8 , to bring the law into execution . It is only distinguished from and by its representing the same thing on its practical side, so far as the law is accomplished by the action which the law demands. Comp. Plat. Legg. xi. p. 926 A, xii. p. 958 D; Xen. Cyr. viii. 1, 1; Soph. Aj. 528; Lucian. d. Morte Peregr. 33. On the whole, frequently answers to the idea patrare, facere . (Ellendt, Lex. Soph. II. p. 804.)
[710] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
Ver. 26. If the uncircumcision ] Which it can never do. But admit it could, &c.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
26. . ] i.e. .
. ] plainly, the moral requirements, not the ceremonial: for one of the very first of the latter was, to be circumcised . The case is an impossible one : nor does the Apostle put it as possible, only as shewing manifestly, that circumcision, the sign of the covenant of the Law, was subordinate to the keeping of the Law itself. The articles shew how completely hypothetical the case is no less than entire fulfilment of all the moral precepts of the law being contemplated.
] ‘In such a case would not he be counted as a circumcised person?’
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Rom 2:26 f. Here the inference is drawn from the principle laid down in Rom 2:25 . This being so, Paul argues, if the uncircumcision maintain the just requirements of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be accounted circumcision, sc. , because it has really done what circumcision pledged the Jew to do? Cf. Gal 5:3 . at the beginning of the verse is equivalent to the Gentiles ( of Rom 2:14 ), the abstract being put for the concrete: in , the individualises a person who is conceived as keeping the law, though not circumcised. As he has done what circumcision bound the Jew to do, he will be treated as if in the Jew’s position: his uncircumcision will be reckoned as circumcision. may be merely a logical future, but like the other futures in Rom 2:12-16 it is probably more correct to refer it to what will take place at the last judgment. The order of the words in Rom 2:27 indicates that the question is not continued: “and thus the uncircumcision shall judge thee,” etc. is emphatic by position: the Jew, in the case supposed, is so far from being able to assert a superiority to the Gentile that the Gentile himself will be his condemnation. Cf. Mat 12:41 f. should properly convey one idea “those who are by nature uncircumcised”. But why should nature be mentioned at all in this connection? It seems arbitrary to say with Hofmann that it is referred to in order to suggest that uncircumcision is what the Gentile is born in, and therefore involves no guilt. As far as that goes, Jew and Gentile are alike. Hence in spite of the grammatical irregularity, which in any case is not too great for a nervous writer like Paul, I prefer to connect , as Burnes does ( Moods and Tenses , 427), with , and to render: “the uncircumcision which by nature fulfils the law”: cf. Rom 2:14 . . The is that which describes the circumstances under which, or the accompaniment to which, anything is done. The Jew is a law-transgressor, in spite of the facts that he possesses a written revelation of God’s will, and bears the seal of the covenant, obliging him to the performance of the law, upon his body. He has an outward standard, which does not vary with his moral condition, like the law written in the pagan’s heart; he has an outward pledge that he belongs to the people of God, to encourage him when he is tempted to indolence or despair; in both these respects he has an immense advantage over the Gentile, yet both are neutralised by this he is a law-transgressor.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
righteousness = righteous requirements. Greek. dikaioma. App-191.
shall = will.
not. App-105.
counted. Same as “think”, Rom 2:3. i.e. in the day of Rom 2:5.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
26. .] i.e. .
.] plainly, the moral requirements, not the ceremonial: for one of the very first of the latter was, to be circumcised. The case is an impossible one: nor does the Apostle put it as possible, only as shewing manifestly, that circumcision, the sign of the covenant of the Law, was subordinate to the keeping of the Law itself. The articles shew how completely hypothetical the case is-no less than entire fulfilment of all the moral precepts of the law being contemplated.
] In such a case would not he be counted as a circumcised person?
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Rom 2:26. , uncircumcision) that is, a person uncircumcised, for to this the , his, is referred.-) The future; shall be counted, by a righteous judgment. In Rom 2:25, , the preterite, implies, is now made.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Rom 2:26
Rom 2:26
If therefore the uncircumcision keep the ordinances of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be reckoned for circumcision?-If those who are not circumcised, the Gentiles, keep the law, then the righteousness they acquire in keeping the law is counted to them for circumcision-that is, makes them children of Abraham. The keeping of the righteousness set forth in the law was the thing aimed at; and if the Gentiles, who were uncircumcised, kept the law, then the ends of circumcision were accomplished better than with those who were circumcised, but kept not the law. [But there is a difference which must not be overlooked. For a Jew not to be circumcised was not the same as for a Gentile not to be circumcised. In that case the Jew broke Gods covenant (Gen 17:9-14; Lev 12:3), but not so in case of the Gentile. But after the Jew became circumcised, then unless he kept the law his circumcision amounted to nothing.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
righteousness
(See Scofield “Rom 10:3”).
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Isa 56:6, Isa 56:7, Mat 8:11, Mat 8:12, Mat 15:28, Act 10:2-4, Act 10:34, Act 10:35, Act 11:3-18, 1Co 7:18, 1Co 7:19, Phi 3:3, Col 2:11
Reciprocal: Jos 5:5 – they had not Jer 9:25 – that Eze 16:52 – which hast Rom 2:1 – whosoever
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Rom 2:26. If therefore. The unholy Jew virtually becomes a Gentile (Rom 2:25), does not the obedient Gentile virtually become a Jew?
The uncircumcision. The Jewish expression for the uncircumcised; comp. Gal 2:7.
Keep the ordinances of the law. Righteousness is misleading here; the righteous requirements of the law are meant (comp. Rom 1:32); moral, not ceremonial, for the chief ceremonial observance, circumcision, is necessarily excluded. Complete fulfilment of the law is not meant; nor is any hint given as to the way in which a Gentile could keep the ordinances of the law, though, as Godet thinks, the Apostle probably had in mind the fulfilment of the ordinance of the law by Gentile Christians (comp. chap. Rom 8:4), not proselytes of the gate, as Philippi suggests.
Shall not. The form indicates that an affirmative answer is expected.
His uncircumcision. His takes up the concrete idea of uncircumcision in the previous clause.
Be reckoned for circumcision. The phrase is precisely the same as in the well-known one: reckoned for righteousness (chap. Rom 4:3; Rom 4:9; Rom 4:22; Gal 3:6), except that here the future is used, probably pointing to the day of judgment. At that time the uncircumcised Gentile, who has kept the ordinances of the law, shall be regarded precisely as though he were circumcised, i.e., as a member of Gods covenant people.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Vv. 26, 27 describe the opposite case: the transformation of the obedient Gentile into a Jew, according to the judgment of God. This transformation, being the logical consequence of the preceding, is connected by , then, with Rom 2:25.
The apostle is not now speaking, as in Rom 2:14-15, of a simple sporadic observance of legal duties. The phrase is more solemn: keeping the just ordinances of the law (, all that the law declares righteous). In Rom 8:4, the apostle uses a similar expression to denote the observance of the law by the Christian filled with the Holy Spirit. How can he here ascribe such an obedience to a Gentile? Philippi thinks he has in view those many proselytes whom Judaism was making at this time among the Gentiles. Meyer and others seek to reduce the meaning of the phrase to that of Rom 2:14. This second explanation is impossible, as we have just seen; and that of Philippi falls to the ground before the preceding expressions of the apostle, which certainly contain more than can be expected of a proselyte (keep, fulfil the law, , , Rom 2:26-27). The comparison of Rom 8:4 shows the apostle’s meaning. He refers to those many Gentiles converted to the gospel who, all uncircumcised as they are, nevertheless fulfil the law in virtue of the spirit of Christ, and thus become the true Israel, the Israel of God, Gal 6:16. Paul expresses himself in abstract terms, because here he has to do only with the principle, and not with the means by which it is realized; compare what we have said on Rom 2:7; Rom 2:10. The future , will be counted, transports us to the hour of judgment, when God, in order to declare a man righteous, will demand that he be so in reality.
We might begin Rom 2:27 as an affirmative proposition: and so He will judge thee. But perhaps it is more in keeping with the lively tone of the piece to continue in Rom 2:27 the interrogation of Rom 2:26, as we have done in our translation: And so (in virtue of this imputation) will not He judge thee…? The thought is analogous to Luk 11:31-32, and Mat 12:41-42, though the case is different. For there it is Gentiles who condemn the Jews by the example of their repentance and their love of truth; here, it is the case of Christians of Gentile origin condemning the Jews by their fulfilment of the law.
Ostervald and Oltramare substitute for judge, used by the apostle, the term condemn. This is wrong; for the claim of the Jews is to escape, not only from condemnation, but from judgment; and it is bitter for them to hear, not only that they shall be judged like the Gentiles, but that they shall be judged by them. , to fulfil the law, is a phrase expressing real and persevering fulfilment. The love which the gospel puts into the believer’s heart is in fact the fulfilment of the law, Rom 13:10.
The preposition , strictly (across the length of): through, here denotes, as it often does, the state, the circumstances in which an act is accomplished; comp. 2Co 2:4; 1Ti 2:15; Heb 2:15. So: in full possession of the letter and circumcision.
This double transformation of the disobedient Jew into a Gentile, and of the obedient Gentile into a Jew, in the judgment of God, is explained and justified by Rom 2:28-29.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
If therefore the uncircumcision keep the ordinances of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be reckoned for circumcision? [In verse 25 the apostle takes up the case of the Jew; in verse 26 that of the Gentile. By circumcision the former entered into a covenant with God, and part of the terms of his covenant was an agreement to obey the law. Thus the law was superior to circumcision, so much so that it, as it were, disfranchised or expatriated an Israelite for disobedience, despite his circumcision. On the contrary, if an uncircumcised Gentile obeyed the law, then the law naturalized and received him into the spiritual theocracy, notwithstanding his lack of circumcision. The verses are not an argument, but a plain statement of the great truth that circumcision, though beneficial to the law-abiding, has no power to withstand the law when condemning the lawless. In short, the Jew and Gentile stood on equal footing, for, though the Jew had a better covenant (circumcision) and a better law, yet neither attained to salvation, for neither kept the law.]
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
26. Therefore, if the uncircumcision may keep the commandments of the law, will not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? Man looks upon the outside, but God looketh on the heart, and sees our intrinsical character and estimates us accordingly. He can not be deceived.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
2:26 Therefore if the {q} uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his {r} uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
(q) This is the figure of speech metonymy, and means “uncircumcised”.
(r) The state and condition of the uncircumcised.