Romans 2

Paul’s indictment shifts from the obvious wickedness of a pagan gentile world to the hypocrisy of the religious world, namely self-righteous Judaism. The man noted generally in all likelihood is a generic Jew. The entire context of chapter 2 deals with the prejudice of Jews against gentiles. Paul charges them with being inexcusable. The word so translated (αναπολογητος anapologetos) literally means ‘without any defense’ as in a judicial context. The self-righteous, critical Jew, in reality, had no defense before God when they were critical of gentiles. (The word translated as judgest {κρινω krino}, in this context, has the sense of being critical.) However, in so doing, they condemned themselves. Why? They themselves were guilty of many of the same things enumerated at the end of chapter 1 (albeit secretly).

Paul points out that God’s judgment will indeed fall against anyone who is guilty of the long list of sin detailed at the end of chapter one. He proceeds to pose two rhetorical questions (i.e., questions to which the answer is obvious). The essence is, (1) do you think, O man, criticizing them who do such things, yet doing the same yourself, that you will escape the judgment of God? The answer is obvious. And then, (2) do you despise the riches of his goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering; not knowing that “the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?”

Several comments are in order for the latter question. The word translated as despisest (καταφρονεω kataphroneis) has the sense of ‘looking down on another.’ The idea is how the Jew looked down on the gentile for their presumed wickedness. However, what the self-righteous Jew actually was doing was looking down on the patience of God who was mercifully putting up with sinful gentiles until they could hear the gospel. The truth is, it is “the goodness of God” which leads us to repentance. The idea is simply, it is the very goodness of God which allows us to come to a place of repentance. Overt sovereign grace, irresistibly drawing one to repentance, is not what is in view. Rather, the point simply is that these self-righteous Jews ignored the goodness of God which allows even the vilest of sinners to repent.

To the contrary, such self-righteous condescension, in fact, was generating God’s wrath against their own hard and unrepentant hearts. The word translated as treasurest (θησαυριζω thesauridzo) has the sense to ‘store up’ or to ‘deposit funds in a treasury’ (i.e., a bank). Even as such funds generate interest, these hard-hearted, unrepentant Jews were accruing God’s wrath against themselves. Indeed, the day is coming when the wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God will be revealed.

Paul, now develops how God’s coming judgment will be against both Jew and gentile. It will be impartial, without respect of persons (i.e., not discerning between Jew and gentile). Paul is not herein addressing the meansof salvation. Rather, he is developing the idea that God will impartially judge both Jew and gentile.

The point Paul is establishing is not that eternal life is by “well doing” (i.e., good works). Rather, he is touching generically upon how those pleasing to God will ultimately have eternal life. The means of that salvation will be described in great detail beginning in Ro 3:21 and following.

In contrast, those who are patently unrighteous (“contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, etc.”) will face God’s “indignation and wrath” (i.e., God’s judgment). The two basic New Testament words for God’s wrath are noted. The word translated as indignation (θυμος thumos) has the sense of ‘anger.’ The word translated as wrath (οργη orge) has the greater sense of ‘long term reaction against sin’ (i.e., judgment.)

Continuing in that same vein, those who choose to live in sin will additionally find “tribulation and anguish upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile.” The way of the transgressor is hard. Not only is there judgment waiting ahead, they face a lifetime of trouble and heartache in the meantime. Sin always brings trouble. This is true whether the sinner is a Jew or a gentile. And conversely, there is “glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first and also to the Gentile.” The idea is, those who seek the righteousness of God, doing good before God, will have the blessings of honor, peace, and glory, even in this life. Again, it is regardless whether one is a Jew or a gentile. The greater truth Paul is tackling is breaking down the hard-hearted, self-righteousness of so many Jews of that day. For indeed, “there is no respect of persons with God.” That may have come as a shock for some Jews who assumed God would deal with them preferentially simply because they were Jews.

The self-righteous Jew took the position that his righteousness rested on having the Law of Moses. In other words, they relied upon the Law and their superficial observance of it for their righteousness. But Paul points out, however, “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.” The gentiles which did not have the Law of God would be judged for their sin anyway. Moreover, the Jew which had the Law would additionally be judged by the Law.

Paul touches upon another truism. Just having the Law or hearing it each week at the synagogue does not justify one. It rather is the doing of it which is effectual. (Paul, once again, is not yet establishing the true righteousness of God through faith. Rather, he is merely beginning where his readers were in their thinking, who assumed keeping the Law would justify them.) He proceeds to point out that when gentiles, which had no access to the Law of God, actually observe the righteous principles contained in the Law, though they do not have the Law of God, they nevertheless show God’s Law within them.

Paul clearly implies that God has written his basic moral and ethical laws in the human heart. It is the intrinsic image of God stamped upon the human heart at creation. It has been marred and corrupted by sin. Nevertheless, it still remains. Furthermore, the human conscience also bears witness within our hearts. It variously accuses (i.e., pricks our hearts, when we are about to do wrong.) Or, on the other hand, it commends us when we do good. The word translated as excusing(απολογεομαι apologeomai) has the sense of defending oneself, for example, against charges. The greater thought here is that (1) God has written upon the human heart His basic moral, ethical law, and (2) He either convicts or commends our actions through our conscience which He has placed within us.

Both Jew and gentile will therefore be judged by God from either the written Law of Moses (for the Jew) or the moral law of God written on the human heart (for the gentile) “in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.” In other words, both Jew and gentile will be judged by God. The immediate criteria of law may differ. But God’s judgment will be righteous for both.

Paul, therefore, drives his case even more forcibly against self-righteous Jews. He notes that the Jew rested in the Law. The idea is that they trusted it for their righteousness. They boasted that they knew God, knew His will, and chose a presumed higher morality in life (“things that are more excellent”) because they were “instructed out of the law” each week at the synagogue. They believed they were morally superior. They presumed themselves to be guides to the morally blind gentile and those living in the darkness of sin. They took pride in how they instructed the foolish and the novice proselyte. The word translated as babes (νηπιος nepios) refers to novitiates to Judaism. These had only a “form of knowledge and of the truth” of the law. The idea is how new converted proselytes had only a framework (a rough sketch) of understanding the truth of God and the law. The full-fledged Jews therefore were proud of their greater knowledge and presumed moral superiority, even over newly converted Jews.

The Apostle now begins to deliver his coup de grâce. He bores in with the piercing question, “thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself?” More specifically, he bores in upon the secret sins of hypocritical self-righteous Jews. They preached against stealing, yet were guilty of dishonesty in their personal affairs. They preached against adultery, but were secretly guilty of immorality themselves. They preached against idolatry, but profited from secret dealings with shrines of idols. The word translated as sacrilege (‘ιεροσυλεω hieroseuleo) literally meant to rob a shrine of an idol. It may be that some Jews were guilty of overt theft of sacrifices left for presumed deities. It may rather have the sense of doing business with the shrines. It was common practice in the pagan Roman world of the first century for the temples or shrines of idols to sell excess meats and other food stuffs at discount prices. What Paul is driving at here may be how Jews piously preached against idolatry and then bought groceries from these idolatrous shrines for cut-rate prices.

Their utter hypocrisy was exposed. They, on the one hand, boasted themselves in the Law of God. Yet, they, privately breaking it, dishonored the God of the law. Therefore, they caused the name of God to be blasphemed among gentiles who were aware of their hypocrisy. Ironically, they, who purported to be the people of the righteous God, blasphemed Him by their private unrighteousness known to those about them.

Paul proceeds therefore to paraphrase the thought contained in Isa 52:5 (or perhaps 2Sa 12:14) that circumcision was truly profitable if a Jew kept the Law. However, in secretly breaking the Law, their circumcision became worthless. It was as uncircumcision. The Jews prided themselves on their circumcision and even used the term as a synonym for Judaism. Similarly, gentiles were often referred to as ‘the uncircumcision’ which to them was a synonym for ungodliness. Paul, however, points out that by hypocritically breaking the Law in their private lives, they, in effect, were no different than a gentile. They had, in effect, become ‘uncircumcision’ (i.e., ungodly like the gentiles upon whom they looked down.)

Paul, therefore, takes the dialogue to its logical next step. If the uncircumcision (i.e., gentiles) keep the moral and ethical principles of the Law (which God has placed in their hearts), should not their uncircumcision (ungodliness or unrighteousness) be counted for circumcision? (The word translated as counted{λογιζομαι logidzomai} is the word which will be so frequently used in coming chapters regarding imputed righteousness. It has the sense to ‘be accounted,’ or ‘imputed,’ or ‘reckoned,’ or ‘thought.’ The essence of the idea is that if gentiles do the righteousness of God’s Law (from the law of God written on their hearts), will they not therefore be considered as a Jew, who is supposed to do so?

Moreover, if that be the case, shall not they (the gentiles who are naturally born uncircumcised) judge the hypocritical Jew, who breaks the letter and the symbol of the Law (i.e., circumcision)? The tables therefore have been turned. The hypocritical self-righteous Jew sat in judgment of presumed ungodly gentiles. However, when the truth was known, those gentiles who were moral and otherwise relatively righteous become the judge of the hypocritical Jew whose private life was full of sin.

Paul finally attacks one of the traditional tenets of self-righteous Judaism. Though there certainly is such a thing as being a Jew ethnically (or nationally), the Apostle is driving at the spiritual sense thereof. That is being the people of God. Physical circumcision has nothing to do with that. Rather, those who are the true people of God (i.e., a Jew) are so spiritually. Their heart has been circumcised. That is, their heart has submitted itself to God. They therefore are the people of God spiritually and not by the minutia of the letter of the law of Moses. Their praise is of God and not of men. In other words, physical circumcision has nothing to do with being God’s people. The latter rather is spiritual and of the heart.